2 Corinthians, 11:16-22

Praise the Lord for Jim, really, I think, doing a great job teaching the last few weeks. Thanks, Jim, for your leadership there and the spirit working through you. What has done, Hal, I don't know if you realize this, has put us, I mean, this is a statement of fact. This is indicative mood, Jim. It's put us a week behind. So, Hal, I'm going to be covering today, 16 through 22, and then next week, 23 through 27. So, Jim is going to take the last part of 2 Corinthians 11 the following week.

And that's because Margaret and I are going to be in Shreveport for her high school reunion that weekend. She graduated high school. She did. By the way, today is Margaret's birthday. Happy birthday to you. Happy birthday, dear Margaret. Happy birthday to you. That's not sneaky, it's your birthday.

Okay, so let's recall that 2 Corinthians 11 is a text that is dealing with his life and ministry. Glory is only in the Lord, not in the flesh, and we actually see kind of Paul taking on an air about him that's a little different for Paul, and it's kind of refreshing because it makes us kind of identify with the way Paul's dealing with the circumstances around him, and there's nothing ungodly about this. It's really an opportunity for him to appeal to the church at Corinth in a very special way, and this is very much needed, and I think it's very godly.

I mean, we always think if we walk in the Lord Jesus Christ, our behavior always has to be kind of structured and kind of identical. I think there's a lot of room as believers to allow the Spirit to work through us in a godly manner that's not always straight and narrow. And I'm not saying not straight and narrow in terms of sin.

I'm talking about let's not be plastic. I mean, we have personalities, we have an opportunity to interact with the world around us, and I think we're going to see here today, as Jim has set the stage for it, how Paul really is dealing with the circumstances in a godly manner that's not really something that many people would necessarily be comfortable with. So let's look at the verses today and read those through. So Jim, could I ask you to read 16 through 22, please?

Again I say, let no one think me foolish. But if you do, who sees me even as foolish, that I also may boast a little. That which I am speaking, I am not speaking and his confidence of boasting. Since many boast according to the flesh, I will boast also. For you being so wise, bear with the foolish gladly. For you bear with anyone if he enslaves you, if he devours you, if he takes advantage of To my shame, I must say that we have been weak by comparison. But in whatever respect anyone else is told, I speak in foolishness. I am just as bold myself. Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I. Thanks, Jim.

How would you describe Paul's attitude here? How about a little confrontational? Is that acceptable as one description? Other thoughts? Absolutely. Yeah, and I didn't ask her to say that either. There's no question that there's an atmosphere of sarcasm here, and that'll come out clearly as we go through the verses this morning. Any other thoughts? How would you describe Paul's attitude here? Is he concerned? Or is he just kind of flipping off? Very concerned. And what does that reflect about Paul, Jim? I think that's very, very true. So let's look at the text before us now.

2 Corinthians 11.16. I've given you the Darby translation. You're going to see about six different versions of the Bible here this morning, as I kind of select the ones that I think best represent the verse.

Again, I say, let not anyone think me to be a fool. But if otherwise, receive me then, even as a fool, that I also may boast myself some little. And literally this is kind of, but if not at least or otherwise, that is, if you do think me foolish, yet as foolish, even if as foolish.

So literally, I mean, he's playing out on the word foolish in terms of the interpretation of the way he's carrying himself. Now, the fool is graphically demonstrated at the right. Sorry about that. You know, really means mindless. in terms of its most literal one-word definition. But there are a number of definitions you could use for fool. By implication, it's ignorance. If you think of someone being selfish and being foolish, that's very egotistical. From a practical perspective, it's being rash or brash. Morally, it's unbelieving. And it also could be interpreted as unwise. And so all of these really reflect mindlessness, something that's unrelated to reality.

What do you think fits best here? How's Paul describing himself as being foolish here? Remember, he's dealing with how they're perceiving his behavior, right? Not so much his behavior, but the perception of it. What do you think? Is Paul acting ignorant, egotistic? I would say unwise. perceiving him. Everybody okay with that? Okay, again, we kind of commented on this a moment ago. Why is Paul doing this? What's the intent here of him being bullied? This is for instruction. Even sarcasm, I think, would be to make a point with them, to get their attention for instruction.

That's right, Margaret, and I think Jim touched on the second one, his love for them. So this is both so that they can see their error in responding potentially to false apostles, and then the second point is his love for them. He's getting their attention through his foolish behavior to demonstrate his great love for them. If he, in fact, were not concerned, he'd just flip it off and go right on trying to reach them in some other mode, but he's getting their attention. because he's concerned about their error and also concerned in a loving manner about where they are finding themselves.

So let's turn back to verses one through four of this chapter. I think that that can help us here a little bit. Steve, could you read that for us, please? First four verses of chapter 11. I hope you will put up with a little of my foolishness, but you are already doing that.

I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preach, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you receive, or a different gospel from the one you accepted you put up with it easily enough. Okay, we could read on to get more detail there, but boy, that really sets the stage for where we're at now, doesn't it? I mean, he's concerned about another Jesus, if you will, and them receiving preaching of another Jesus.

So, to boast is to vaunt, to glory, to joy, to rejoice. What kind of boasting is Paul talking about when he says, may boast of myself? Again, if we go back to the verse, it says, that I may boast myself a little. Well, he's setting up to boast for the suffering he's done for the gospel, whereas it's not real clear what the underboasting that these influences in the church are doing, but it seems like they're boasting more in their authority and power and things like that. Do you sense anyway, Steve, that Paul is exalting himself through this activity? Does anybody have a sense of that? We'll see that more as we get into the next few verses. Okay, good. Verse 17, New American Standard.

What I am saying, I am not saying as the Lord would, but as in foolishness, in this confidence of boasting. Present tense. This is what's going on right now, as Paul is revealing. himself and his relationship to the Corinthian church. Notice that it says, not after the example of the Lord. Interesting. Flip back a chapter to 10.1. I think everybody remembers when we were in this section of 2 Corinthians. Now I, Paul, myself, beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, who in presence am base among you. being absent and bold towards you." So is this in contrast to 10.1 then? Why would Paul say not after the example of the Lord?

Remember what I said at the beginning of the class, we think of walking in Christ as kind of an expected kind of behavior that relates to gentleness and meekness. Was the Lord Jesus Christ, do you perceive him always as gentle and meek? I mean, he described himself as that. But I can think of times when the Lord Jesus Christ was very confrontational, was he not?

So how are we interpreting this here? Is Paul saying, I'm going to act out in the flesh? This is not the Lord Jesus Christ that's in me. What if you go down to verse 17 in chapter 10, boasting of glory? It's got to be in the Lord, isn't that so? That's right. So is Paul saying that what he's doing now, that which I speak, I speak not after the Lord? How do we interpret that, Hal? What do you think? that the boasting that he's going to be doing is not according to the Lord. Meaning that boasting is never of the Lord?

Because what he's going to do, it looks like he's going to imitate the false teachers. He's going to imitate just like the false teachers. I think we're talking about stylistics here, are we not? The way he's communicating information is not the way the Lord would, because the sarcasm, in a sense, was the Lord Jesus Christ ever sarcastic? No. He was very straightforward. He was the opposite of sarcastic.

So what Paul's doing here is using the ways of the world to communicate in a way that is not the example of the way the Lord would, but I think he's perfectly godly in doing so because of his love for the brethren and to point out their error. So we don't, I think, need to dwell on this so much, but I can't believe that Paul is putting on the flesh to exemplify God's love and truth and grace in the life of the Corinthian church.

And kuros here for Lord is frequently used in terms of the supremacy. So we're talking about God, Lord, Master. This is not some other Lord. This is, in fact, the Lord himself and could be the Lord Jesus Christ. So foolishness, as Paul speaks about in verse 17, is really the same foolishness that we just tried to define in verse 16. There's nothing new here. Same Greek term, same interpretation.

And when we think of Paul's boasting, we can reflect very easily back in Romans 3.27, where is boasting then?

It's excluded. By what law? Of works? Nay, but by the law of faith. So this boasting of himself, again, is not really an exemplification of what the Lord would have him do, but he's using this opportunity to reach them in a very special way. Any other thoughts on those two verses, because we're going to go now and look at this in a little bit more detail. Yeah, I think so. And you know, we're not going to be dealing with this today, and I'll be getting into this next week, and then Jim will in two weeks.

But look what follows here after this section. Boy, talk about utmost inhumility, right? Paul talks about his shipwrecks and all the trials and tribulations he's gone through. And, you know, that's boasting because of the fact that he's a minister of the Lord Jesus Christ. So we'll return to that next week in more detail.

Verse 18, New King James Version, seeing that many boast according to the flesh, I also will boast. Now, seeing can relate to time or can relate to cause, and I think we could interpret that either way here. Seeing that many boast, meaning right now people are boasting, and so therefore I'm going to boast just like they are. Or alternatively, since they're boasting or seeing that they're boasting, or because they're boasting, I'm also going to respond similarly to make a point. So which this is, whether it's a temporal issue or whether it's a qualitative issue in terms of the context in which Paul's using seeing, you can interpret that either way. So the many likely refers to the false teachers. And the flesh.

What do you think of when we look at the Greek term sarx? And by the way, The next page really reflects, we can just turn there, but sarx is a term that is used very frequently in scripture. I can't recall right now how many times it occurs, but this is a term that can be interpreted so many different ways. So let's look at these potential definitions and see what you think here that fits this best. One definition for sarx is flesh. the soft substance of the living body which covers the bones and is permeated with blood of both man and beast, i.e. flesh.

Okay, so what you're wearing today and what you wore yesterday and tomorrow, right, as long as your pulse is still present. The second is a broader term, simply meaning the body. And interestingly enough, as I tried to sort through this, it could be the body of each one of us, but it could be used of natural or physical origin. So we think of our body as a physical or of a physical source, but yet this could also be applicable to a natural origin.

I mean, something that exists in the absence of its physical state, which is a little bit difficult to interpret. And then the third under the body translation is the sensuous nature of men, and not necessarily sinful, because we're going to come to that. But the sensuous nature of man is the animal nature that relates to each one of us. In other words, no suggestion of depravity, but the fact that we all have cravings, animals have cravings. You put out some food for your dog and haven't eaten for three days, you kind of see that craving play out. Maybe you can identify with that yourself. And then the physical nature of man and or beast, by the way, is subject to suffering.

I mean, this deals with a very physical universe that surrounds us in terms of the sensuous nature. Now, sensuous you can interpret, I think, on a moral basis. And by the way, that's perfectly relevant here. But underneath the body, that doesn't necessarily have to relate to the moral aspects of sensuality.

The third is simply a living creature. which kind of ties into the second body, but Strong's list of this is a separate definition. It wasn't entirely clear how Strong's distinguished those two. And then the fourth is the flesh, denoting the human nature we all know so well, and that's the earthly nature of man apart from divine influence, and therefore prone to sin and opposed to God.

So what do you think here? What's Paul talking about here when he's talking about the flesh? Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I will glory also. Gene, what are your thoughts? That's all right. I was interpreting that as thoughtful behavior, actually. Correct.

And in many circumstances, that's the way flesh is used. particularly for the church. Is this the fleshly nature, the sin nature that Paul's talking about, seeing that many glory after the flesh? I will glory also. Is that depravity? Is that separation from God? Is that the flesh that the scripture is talking about here?

I don't think Paul would say that. I don't think Paul would Somehow, I just can't see Paul saying they're glorying after their sin nature or the flesh in his sin nature, and so I'm going to do that too. I mean, I just don't see him doing that. I think more he's talking about maybe in the use of the animal nature, i.e., things that maybe the the flesh is interested in, I don't know, maybe clothing...

Well, I mean, again, this may not be sinful. This is simply being a physical being living in the world. It could be neutral behavior. I mean, when you're hungry, you want food. Is that sinful? No, it's a craving for something that's part of the earthly existence.

I honestly don't think that this is the depravity that Paul's speaking of here. My interpretation is that these Corinthians who are being misled by the Apostles are not appealing to their depravity. I mean, it's just the natural setting in which they're finding themselves. Yes, Paul is convicting them of being overly subjected to lack of truth, but they're not focusing in on their depravity as listening to these false Apostles.

Other thoughts? Yes, Steve? rather than cravings, in our sense, like appetites, because people have desires for respect and different things like that, that are more of the flesh. For the church, flesh and the spirit are juxtaposed, but we know that Paul's writing on your inspiration and spirit, so it's hard to completely separate those concepts.

Well, you know, what this word here in context represents to me is the depth of the Greek language. I mean, if you really think about this, in the English we're so simple, aren't we? We say flesh. But what is the Spirit really revealing to us about the interpretation? And you can get bogged down on things like this, but we do want to interpret the Greek appropriately for the context in which it lies.

So I would tend to want to interpret this not as the mere human nature opposed to God. I think you could go there, but I would tend to interpret this more in the setting of the bodily existence, in terms of, if you will, something presented to them that ultimately is allowing them to glory in the flesh, meaning the human spirit, the human nature.

I like that very much. Now Paul's glory, boasting by the way, is glory. It can be rejoicing or being joyful. All that is a reasonable interpretation of the Greek term. This is future tense. Seeing that many glory after the flesh, present tense, will glory also."

Okay, so Paul's looking to what's going to be happening subsequently here, and the Greek term is kalkaomahi, or to glory, to glory on account of a thing, to glory in a thing. Is Paul going to be glorying with reason or without, or is he going to be glorying on account of something, or what's he glorying in? What's Paul going to be glorying in here?

The listener's earthly qualities are strictly history, so it's on account of that. And what specifically do you think, Bill? The things he goes on to list. They're all earthly qualities that are of no importance against being accepted by God. They're all things he's told that are meaningless. He's said in other letters, they're worthless. And here he's going to talk about those things just because the false teachers are putting themselves higher than him on that scale. He's going to go back to that scale, which he's already said, this is a worthless way to measure anything. But we're going to go back to this scale because you're paying attention to these people talking about using this scale of measuring.

That's great. And you know, that is worthy of glory, is it not? I mean, think about that. The intent that Paul has in dealing with these false apostles in the Corinthians church interpretation, that's worthy of glory in terms of pointing out that error, for sure. So this is the folly for which he apologizes. I mean, why is he apologizing? Remember up in the first several verses, 16 and 17.

I don't think he's comfortable boasting in anything that has to do with himself. I just don't think that's his... I think he is so focused on the Lord that that's just very uncomfortable for him. And I think that's why he makes it very clear, you know, I'm going to boast about this. I'm going to glory about this. But I just don't think that's where he is. I think he's... As you pointed out before, he's just going in that direction because that's how they're being approached by the false teachers, and he wants to make a point.

All right, let's look at something that Paul is not relating to here specifically, but I think is worthy of glory, and how you've already mentioned 2 Corinthians 10-17, so we don't need to look at that again. Remember what that said, but he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. But Doris, maybe you could look at Jeremiah 9, 23 and 24. And Sue, could you pull 1 Peter 1, 24, please? Let's look at those extra verses there just relating to the glory that is worthy of consideration. I think where Paul's heart really is at is he's thinking about where glory belongs. Yeah.

And thinking about your question, which is a great one, in terms of glory, Paul glory, my thought was, the question is this, what is the source of the boasting or the glory of these false teachers? What is that source? And is it the sin nature? On behalf of the church?

Paul has an equal list of things that is being done through him, but that's through the righteousness of God in the Spirit. So the sources are different. And the key is, Paul is not glorying in the flesh they're glorying in the sin nature. Paul is glorying in the new nature that's producing the same things that, you see what I mean? teachers, which is really self-righteousness, that there's righteousness of God that's being produced through Paul. So the source is different.

We kind of have three classes of citizens here. We've got the false apostles, then we have the believing church who's being misled, and then we have Paul. they're all taking on different positions in relationship to this false teaching. And you're right, I think the false apostles are clearly motivated by the depravity that is the flesh nature, whereas the perception of the Corinthian Church maybe is that it's more the human existence, in fact, the way that they're responding. Steve, did you have a point? I was thinking, too, that those things are more a product of a works religion than of Great. Great. Good point. Alright, Doris, could you read Jeremiah, please, 9, 23 and 24?

Thus saith the Lord, let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might. Let not the rich man glory in his riches, but let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the Lord, which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness in the earth. For in these things I delight, saith the Lord. Amen. Boy, isn't that special. Sue, how about the first Peter passage? For all flesh is like grass. and all its glory like the glorious grass, and the grass withers and the flowers fall off, but the word of the Lord endures forever." Okay. All right.

So Paul is going to show that he's not behind those who've been claiming so much credit at Corinth. And again, that relates to the stylistics by which Paul is now reaching them through this folly, if you will. Verse 19. New American standards. for you being, parenthetically, so wise, tolerate the foolish gladly." Now here's, I think, really a taste of Paul's sarcasm here, right?

So if we look at 1 Corinthians 4.10, this is an interesting comparison, and really I think is a very dividing kind of text in terms of the contrast that exists between the wisdom of God and the wisdom of the world.

We are fools for Christ's sake. And notice, that relates that we are weak and we are despised. But ye, ye are wise in Christ, strong and honorable. How's that for a verse that really so appropriately relates to what we're dealing with right here? But we are fools for Christ's sake. which means we're weak and we're despised. That's the earthly perception of the believer. And so I think in that verse Paul is just trying to say that the foolish are foolish when they're tied into their own impotency or weakness and their own being despised of the world and by the world system. And the alternative is the strength and uplifting nature of the life in Christ. We're wise in Him and strong and honorable. The contrast between the believer's view from the right hand and the view of the world of the believer on the earth.

And boy, you know, talk about glorying in something. I mean, the problem in the flesh, we have trouble becoming despised and weak. And I think each and every one of us relates to that. Boy, you don't like to feel like a piece of dirt in terms of the way the world looks at you, but the humility that's really represented in our earthly existence to make us strong in Christ is really the contrast that I think is so much before each and every one of us on a day-to-day basis.

Now, it was in part their superior wisdom to allow them to tolerate fools. And tolerate means to kind of suffer with or put up with, bear, forbear, endure. And notice Paul says gladly or very willingly. So he's concerned about the fact that the Corinthians are really tolerating this kind of teaching so willingly.

And again, here's the sarcasm coming out here. What's the matter with you? Anyway, why are you in fact tolerating the foolish so gladly, so willingly? And that's really where the love for Paul is really clearly demonstrated in this text. If the Corinthian church puts up with so many fools, surely they can listen to Paul for a while. It's kind of what he's saying here. Look, if you can be listening to this and kind of taking this in and really tolerating this, then how about listening to me? And I'm going to come across in this foolish manner to try to get your attention.

And as I said at the beginning of the class, the question I might ask each one of us, is this attitude ever appropriate for us? Is it spirit-led? And I think we already answered that. It can be spirit-led, I think. And that only the spirit in each one of us, for the circumstances that we have to deal with, can give us that peace and rest that this is the way we should carry ourselves. Yeah, that's good. That's very nice. Actually fits us very well.

I mean, remember, we all deal with unbelievers on a daily basis. We work in an unsaved world for the most part. And I can honestly say when I've dealt with a scientific community at various occasions that the Lord's made available, the way I go about sharing the Lord Jesus Christ is different. And occasionally it may even be a little sarcastic with the right person under the right circumstances and feeling total peace before God about that. It all depends on a relationship we have. with people. I don't know what you've learned in your walk through this world, but the privilege we have to share the Lord Jesus Christ is a time-honored process.

It's not until you know somebody really well that doors are often opened where you can really have a serious conversation. And so therefore, an atmosphere of sarcasm occasionally, not to antagonize, but just because that's the way your relationship has existed. They may say something that's very sarcastic to you, and you respond in the spirit, not defensively, in kind of a similar atmosphere. I think that's perfectly acceptable. At least the spirit has given me peace occasionally in that circumstance.

Other comments or thoughts about that? You have to remember he's spent a lot of time with these people and he knows they're going to read beyond this sentence. If you're dealing with somebody, you're talking to somebody, if they're going to turn you off because they hardly know you and you say something like this, they're just going to stop listening.

Absolutely. Good point, Bill. I mean, these are people that Paul knows well. He has room, doesn't he, to go there. And to remember the two outstanding principles of why Paul is acting foolishly before them. Number one, to point out their error, and then number two, because of his great love for them.

All right, verse 20, New American Standard, for you tolerate it if anyone enslaves you, anyone devours you, anyone takes advantage of you, anyone exalts himself, anyone hits you in the face. And I just bolded the anyone just in one section of that, just indicating that it can be anyone. Here we're talking about the false apostles specifically, but in our own lives we can be devoured, enslaved, taken advantage of, put in a position where someone else is exalting himself or herself. And the final one, probably the most insulting of them all, is being smit by someone.

So let's look at these. Continuing sarcasm that cuts through the bone. Paul's begun this sarcastic attitude best reflected in the verse that preceded this, but now is even more exemplified. Note that the verses with each of the five conditional clauses is in the present tense and the indicative mood. So this is ongoing activity.

And by the way, this is true. And the indicative mood reflects the factual nature of what's actually happening in the circumstance in which Paul is describing. So before he comes to the matter, he talks directly to the Corinthians who, persuading themselves to be very wise men, did not mark that those false apostles, meaning anyone, had abused their simplicity for their advantage.

So if you think about people who are just coming to the Lord Jesus Christ, just been saved and are living on milk, not meat, they're very much in an influential or a position to be influenced by what others are sharing with them. You know, I think, just let me go tangential here a second.

I mean, most of us, at least I went this path, when you got saved, then you kind of realize what a great thing God had done for you, and you get to work for the Lord, right? And I got worn out working for God, and I never sensed I was paying Him back, right? And I mean, that's an error of the way, if you will, and that's kind of not exactly what the issue was here, because these new believers were being taught by people who had flesh motivating their behavior. Think about it, and Jim brought this up last week, think about Galatians, maybe I brought it up in response to your lesson, Jim, the whole Galatians 1 error, right? What do you think about that? The other gospel? What's the other gospel in Galatians 1? Do we need to look at it? It's a legal system of Christian behavior, is it not? And that could even potentially fit here, because Christ is grace. That's what saves and sustains, right? It's not law any longer.

Because that would enslave them. It would. It would eventually devour them. It would take advantage of them. Law exalts itself, does it not? I mean, the law is perfectly holy, but it's something that we don't have an opportunity to sustain in our lives. Taking advantage too might be, you come back a little bit to the money issue, Paul was refusing to take money from them, and possibly these other guys were wanting money from the Corinthians. So maybe some of their motives were to get money out of these guys so they could take some financial advantage of them. That's a great point, Jim, because the middle of this chapter really dealt with that issue, didn't it? Let's take a quick look at some of these enslaving. A couple of verses in Galatians deal nicely with this Greek term.

Galatians 2.4, and that's because false brethren were brought in by stealth. Think of stealth.

The way we think of stealth today, it's kind of interesting to look back at that term being used in Galatians 2.4. Who came in privily to spy out our liberty, which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage. Okay, so there's Galatians 1 truth, quote-unquote, being ultimately made to be the focus, and that's bondage unto law, right?

Galatians 4.9, but now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements unto which ye desire again to be in bondage? So this could have been part of the message of the false apostles. There could have been a lot of other things going on here, too. We don't really get the details so much as to what the false apostles were teaching.

But you've got to believe that if you think about all the religions of today, they're all works-based, aren't they? Ultimately, they are. Even the Benny Hinn television is like, send us your money. That's the worst. Back to what Jim was just indicating.

So whether or not this is Islam faith or Mormonism or whether this is Jehovah's Witnesses kind of faith, we're dealing with a believing church. And you've got to believe that part of the wrong message was a works-related behavior, at least part of it. And we're reading between the lines a little there, but I think the scripture is absolutely clear that a legal basis for the Christian life is an error that took place frequently. So at least we're going to consider that.

The verb devours means to squander, to forcibly appropriate, to strip one of his goods, to ruin. It can relate to the consuming nature of a fire in terms of the destruction that occurs, or it could be the consumption of the strength of the body and mind by strong emotions. So devouring is a very rich term, and you can relate this to any way you want to in terms of how they were being devoured. I think all of those definitions really fit very nicely. And I won't be in a position to tell you which exactly was being referred to there.

Taking advantage of, or taking away, Romans 16, 17, and 18. Now I beseech you, brethren, mark those who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them. Okay? Seems appropriate here, doesn't it? For such as they serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."

And back to what Hal was saying earlier, this is the depravity of Sarx in terms of best interpretation. Exalting himself under the pretext of apostolic dignity. Can't you think of these new believers or the milk-fed church at Corinth having people come to them as if they're dignified and more knowledgeable. And people can be so easily influenced by someone who claims to have the facts and know the truth. And smiting, oh, wow. The climax of insult is smiting.

Just parenthetically, according to rabbinical tradition, it was the right of the teacher to strike the student who didn't listen to him or agree with him. And I got that from a commentary by John Courson. So apparently that was acceptable behavior. I'm sure everybody in this room remembers being spanked in school, not necessarily them, but somebody else they knew. I got a few over the years for sure. And it was perfectly acceptable to go down to the principal's office and get swatted for poor behavior. Boy, today.

So you can envision kind of the acceptance of being smit on the face. And I could share some other stories there. But all that aside, that was at least somewhat of an acceptable behavior. But yet, if you think about it in terms of its best meaning, this is the climax of insult, being smit on the face.

So, you know, Luke has something to say about this. And he says, and unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek, offer also the other and him that takes away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also." Yeah, that's Beatitudes, and maybe that's not for today, but I think it does represent the Lord Jesus Christ living out in a believer. We're not under law to do this, but what I'm saying is the contrast between how the believer in Christ might respond to the way we would respond in the flesh.

We need to move quickly to finish up. To my shame, I must say, we were too weak for that. But whatsoever anyone dares to boast of, I'm speaking as a fool, I also dare to boast. And again, we're going to move quickly. Reproach is the shame. It's kind of an atmosphere of dishonor. Weak is feeble, diseased, sickly, weathered, impotent. You know, most often the term weak is best translated as impotent, which means no strength.

We're not talking about we're a little tired today and if we got a shot of energy, we'd be better. Paul often uses this term to indicate no strength, nothing. I think it's best interpreted here since it's described as too weak. It's a modified term, too weak, T-O-O, weak. I think that maybe it doesn't mean no weakness. I mean, no strength. I think it may be just a relative aspect of weakness.

And they more than tolerate those who tramp on them while they criticize as weak the one who shows them great consideration, meaning Paul. And Paul's called weak and he seems to be, to the Corinthians, a vile and abject man, a beggarly craftsman, a most wretched and miserable idiot. whereas in reality God's mighty power was made manifest in him, and that's because he really was weak. Remember, God's strength is made perfect in our weakness. Bold.

I think we're going to just kind of cut through this very quickly. 2 Corinthians 10, 1-2, Now I, Paul, myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, we looked at that earlier, I am lowly among you, I need not be bold with that confidence with which I have in mind to be bold against some who think of us as though we walked according to the flesh." So that, I think, is ingraining Paul in terms of the perception of his folly.

Now, the last verse for today is verse 22, and I think this is a nice, rich verse, and it's worth kind of getting into in a little bit more detail. But in closing, are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelite? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I. So I think there's a little bit of distinction in these three ways Paul describes himself. Hebrews relates to language and nationality.

So of the Hebrew stock, Paul indicates in Philippians 3.5, circumcised the eighth day of the stock of Israel, the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews, according to the law, a Pharisee. So not a Hellistic or Greek-speaking Jew, but a Hebrew in tongue and sprung from the Hebrews. Israelites refers to theocracy and descent. And that term means that Paul was a seed of Jacob.

Romans 9.4, who are the Israelites and to whom pertaineth the adoption and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the law and the service of God and the promises?

Romans 9.4. And finally, and most importantly, the seed of Abraham. This is the fleshly seed, meaning descent. It may relate to the Israelite and how to define that, but ultimately relates to the spiritual seed, most importantly. And here it's a claim to the Messiah.

And so we have verses in Romans 11, 1, Romans 9-7. Let me just encourage you, go after Sunday School today, sometime this week, look at John 8, 33-39 in Romans 4, 13-18. Those are just really rich sections on the Hebrew Jew Israelite ultimately being part of the spiritual seed of Abraham. Those are special chapters.

Okay, let's close in prayer. We do thank you for your word that it's so ultimately revealing as we allow the Spirit to bring that truth to our behalf. And I'm thankful for the fellowship we've shared here today and that we might walk worthy as the Lord Jesus Christ is worthy by faith and truth. In His name we pray. Amen.