Verse 17
Both rhetorical questions in this verse expect a negative answer, as the Greek text makes clear.
"Paul finds it incredible that any at Corinth could really have thought that a change in plan pointed to a change in character." [Note: Hughes, p. 34.]
In making his plans Paul claimed not to have vacillated or to have followed his flesh (his sinful human nature) rather than the Holy Spirit.
"Ancient literature regularly condemns fickleness and unreliability while praising those who keep their word even under duress." [Note: Craig S. Keener, 1-2 Corinthians, p. 159.]
"The charge that he is rebutting is probably that of blowing hot and cold with the same breath, and always having a retraction of what he says in reserve. . . . St. Paul contends that, though his plans changed, yet his principles did not; he was always loyal to the Gospel and to his converts." [Note: Plummer, p. 34.]
"There is a strong likelihood that Paul was actually quoting some of the phrases used against him. The articles with ’lightness’ ["vacillating" in NASB], ’yes, yes,’ and ’no, no’ can be understood as ’the lightness of which I am accused,’ and ’the contradictory yesses and nos which you fault me for.’" [Note: Kent, p. 41.]
"Preaching is always ’truth through personality.’ And if a man cannot trust the preacher he is not likely to trust the preacher’s message. Amongst the Jewish regulations regarding the conduct and character of a teacher, it is laid down that a teacher must never promise anything to a class which he cannot or will not do. To do so is to accustom the class to falsehood." [Note: Barclay, p. 197.]
Be the first to react on this!
