What does this verse mean? Was Paul a liar?

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Gal 4:20
I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you.

Fogive me...

 

[rockytopva]

And the church of St Paul still stands in Corinth, Greece!

 

[Radagast]

Our English versions use "deceit", but the Greek "δόλος", can also mean "using a bait", without any notion of "deceit".

The word in the New Testament is always negative, meaning "guile" or "deceit."

But, like I said, pretty much everybody agrees that Paul is quoting an accusation made against him.

 

[RDKirk]

This actually means the opposite, it is like a rhetorical question, of course he didn't.

Here is Matthew Henry's commentary

16-18. If it should be objected by any that though he did not himself burden them, yet, being crafty, he caught them with guile, that is, he sent those among them who pillaged them, and afterwards he shared with them in the profit: "This was not so,' says the apostle; "I did not make a gain of you myself, nor by any of those whom I sent; nor did Titus, nor any others-We walked by the same spirit and in the same steps.' They all agreed in this matter to do them all the good they could, without being burdensome to them, to promote the gospel among them and make it as easy to them as possible. Or, this may be read with an interrogation, as utterly disclaiming any guile in himself and others towards them.

People also make this same mistake with other verses ironically enough when it comes to 1 Corinthians 9.

Irony has as much difficulty piercing the veil of time and cultural differences in scripture as it does getting through internet posts. Koine Greek clearly needed emoticons.

 

[Saved.By.Grace]

The word in the New Testament is always negative, meaning "guile" or "deceit."

But, like I said, pretty much everybody agrees that Paul is quoting an accusation made against him.

Not so. You cannot conclude that just because the majority use of a word is used in a certain way, that all its uses are the same. Paul could be "crafty" (which is how this Greek word has been used) here, but my point is that he would not use "deceit".

 

[Radagast]

Koine Greek clearly needed emoticons.

And punctuation. And spaces between words.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Forgive me...

 

[Saved.By.Grace]

I wasn't doing that, actually:

1) Every use of the word δόλος in the New Testament is negative, not just the majority of uses (look up the verses here). Balz's Exegetical Dictionary defines the word as meaning "deceit, cunning, perfidy." In Homer, the word also meant "bait," but that was 800 years earlier. Just as with the more famous word ὑποκριτής, we can't judge New Testament words by their origins centuries before.

2) Pretty much everybody agrees that Paul is not describing himself, but is quoting an accusation made by other people against him. That accusation was, of course, expressed in negative terms.

And who is to say that Paul did not use the sense of Homer, even though it was the meaning 800 years earlier? Homer also used the word for "crafty, stratagem", which suits the context. There is no evidence from the passage that Paul is not speaking of himself. My point being that he was never "deceitful" in anything that he said or did, regardless what commentators might say!

 

[kw5kw]

Do not judge the apostle Paul by only one verse that could be taken out of context. Look at the verse in total context of what he was trying to tell the church in Cornith. Don't "cherry pick" something and make doctrine without taking in the whole picture. If indeed, that is what the whole context of a passage is then you can worry, quote or whatever just one verse.



For instance here:



For in IICo XII:13 Paul is telling the church in Cornith that they were inferior to other churches.



He gives a large account of his behaviour and kind intentions towards them, in which we may observe the character of a faithful minister of the gospel.



He was not willing to be burdensome to them, nor did he seek their posessions, but them. He says in v.13 that he had not been burdensome to them in the past, and tells them in v. 14 that he would not be burdensome to them in the future. He spared their purses; He did not covet their money: I seek not yours but you. He sought not to enrich himself, but to save their souls, v14.



Paul did not desire what they had for himself, but to gain them over to Christ.



He would gladly spend and be spent for them, v.15; that is, he was willing to take pains and to suffer loss for their good. He would spend his time, strength, and interest to work for them. He would exhaust himself; to be like a candle, which consumes itself to give light to others.



He did not diminish in his love to them, notwithstanding their unkindness and ingratitude to him. Therefore he was contented and glad to take pains with them, though the more abundantly he loved them the less he was loved, v.15.



He was careful not only that he himself should not be burdensome, but that none he employed should. This seems to be the meaning of what we read, vs. 16-18. If it should be objected by any that though he did not himself burden them, yet, being crafty, he caught them with guile, that is, he sent those among them who pillaged them.



Afterwards he shared with them in the profit v17. "This was not so," says the apostle; "I did not make a gain of you myself, nor by any of those whom I sent; nor did Titus, nor any others - We walked by the same spirit and in the same steps."

Titus did not make personal gain for himself or Paul.




Paul was a man who did all things for edifying, v. 19. This was his great aim and design, to do good, to lay the foundation well, and then with care and diligence to build the superstructure.

Think ye that we excuse ourselves - That we make an apology for our conduct. We speak before God in Christ - I have not done so; I speak the truth before God; he is judge whether I was actuated in this way by any sinister or unworthy motive.

For your edifying - Whatever I have done in this or any other way, I have done for your edifying; not for any emolument to myself or friends.



He would not shrink from his duty for fear of displeasing them, though he was so careful to make himself easy to them. Therefore he was resolved to be faithful in reproving sin, though he was therein found to be such as they would not. v. 20.



The apostle here mentions several sins that are too commonly found among professors of religion, and are very reprovable: debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults.



He was grieved at the apprehension that he should find scandalous sins among them not duly repented of. This, he tells them, would be the cause of great humiliation and lamentation; but, feeling towards them the heart of a tender father, he was unwilling to punish them.




In summary: Take the passage as a whole first, not just one verse. Once you understand the passage you can defend the usage of one or two verses.

 

[Radagast]

And who is to say that Paul did not use the sense of Homer, even though it was the meaning 800 years earlier?

Do you speak in English from even 600 years ago?

Whan that aprill with his shoures soote
The droghte of march hath perced to the roote,
And bathed every veyne in swich licour
Of which vertu engendred is the flour;
Whan zephirus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
Tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the ram his halve cours yronne,
And smale foweles maken melodye,
That slepen al the nyght with open ye
(so priketh hem nature in hir corages);
Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages,
And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes,
To ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes;
And specially from every shires ende
Of engelond to caunterbury they wende,
The hooly blisful martir for to seke,
That hem hath holpen whan that they were seeke.

There is no evidence from the passage that Paul is not speaking of himself.

Pretty much every commentator (ancient or modern, Catholic or Protestant) disagrees with you.

My point being that he was never "deceitful" in anything that he said or did

Agreed.

 

[Saved.By.Grace]

Do you speak in English from even 600 years ago?

Whan that aprill with his shoures soote
The droghte of march hath perced to the roote,
And bathed every veyne in swich licour
Of which vertu engendred is the flour;
Whan zephirus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
Tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the ram his halve cours yronne,
And smale foweles maken melodye,
That slepen al the nyght with open ye
(so priketh hem nature in hir corages);
Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages,
And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes,
To ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes;
And specially from every shires ende
Of engelond to caunterbury they wende,
The hooly blisful martir for to seke,
That hem hath holpen whan that they were seeke.



Pretty much every commentator (ancient or modern, Catholic or Protestant) disagrees with you.



Agreed.

You speak of things to know little of! take for example the Greek word "μορφή", rendered in most English versions as "form" (Philippians 2:6-8), where the base meaning has been from the time of Homer, "the external appearance", which is also used in the Bible. However, the use here in Philippians and Mark 16:12, is not this meaning, but follows a later use of the word, as denoting the "nature", so the NIV Bible has it. My point being that meanings from 100's of years ago do not die out just because in modern times they may change. Here the same Greek word is used with different meanings, which includes the original meaning of the word, which dates from 800 B.C!

You speak of "commentators", can you please show me from the context of 2 Corinthians 12, where someone other than Paul is meant? What said here makes any person suppose that Paul does not mean himself?

 

[YESLORDIWILL]

Paul a liar really, hmmm?

 

[timewerx]

I dont know.

Well, I also do not know if sarcasm existed during the time and place of Paul. However, I'm pretty sure, Jesus never used sarcasm even if there are many times he could have used one.

 

[W2L]

Well, I also do not know if sarcasm existed during the time and place of Paul. However, I'm pretty sure, Jesus never used sarcasm even if there are many times he could have used one.

Perhaps Paul wasnt using sarcasm. Perhaps he was just echoing his critics. I dont know.

 

[timewerx]

Perhaps Paul wasnt using sarcasm. Perhaps he was just echoing his critics. I dont know.

That would be sarcasm by our modern standards.

Anyway, I wouldn't pay too much attention about that verse. There are verses to consider that are more substantial. And I'm not sure myself if sarcasm is a bad thing.

 

[W2L]

That would be sarcasm by our modern standards.

Anyway, I wouldn't pay too much attention about that verse. There are verses to consider that are more substantial. And I'm not sure myself if sarcasm is a bad thing.

Me either.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

2 Corinthians 12:16
But be that as it may, I did not burden you myself; nevertheless, crafty fellow that I am, I took you in by deceit.

I find this very distressing. Surely Paul wasn't a liar, was he?

That would be sarcasm by our modern standards.

Anyway, I wouldn't pay too much attention about that verse. There are verses to consider that are more substantial. And I'm not sure myself if sarcasm is a bad thing.

But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile. - 2 Corinthians 12:16

Guile - Dolos in the Greek - dólos, dol'-os; from an obsolete primary verb, δέλλω déllō (probably meaning to decoy; compare G1185); a trick (bait), i.e. (figuratively) wile:—craft, deceit, guile, subtilty.

20 For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:
21 And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed. - 2 Corinthians 12:20-21

The Corinthean church was one that easily fell into sin. Therefore Paul had to show craftiness in dealing with them. He had to plan out his moves to expose the sin. He had to be crafty in his approach. He had to sit down and think and strategize, otherwise it would end up doing more harm than good.

Whenever a church is in deceit, it takes a strategy in dealing with them. Example is when people are politicking to church, it takes an approach to deal with them over the evil they are doing.

Good posts!

Here is lexicon study on the greek words used:

2 Corinthians 12:16
But be that as it may, I did not burden you myself; nevertheless, crafty #3835 fellow that I am, I took you in by deceit. #1388

Strong's Greek: 3835. πανοῦργος (panourgos) -- ready to do anything, crafty, skillful

Strong's Greek 3835
1 Occurrence

3835. panougos pan-oor'-gos from 3956 and 2041; all-working, i.e. adroit (shrewd):--crafty.

Short Definition: cunning, crafty
Definition: cunning, crafty, skilful, clever.

2 Corinthians 12:16 N-NMS
GRK: ἀλλὰ ὑπάρχων πανοῦργος δόλῳ ὑμᾶς
NAS: nevertheless, crafty fellow that I am, I took
KJV: being crafty, I caught
INT: but being crafty with trickery you

The greek word #1388 has a variety of meanings, and used 11 [12] times
Perhaps it is best to see how it is used in those other verses in the NT, looking at the different Bible translations?

https:Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon
Genesis 1:1 (NKJV)
Strong's Number G1388 matches the Greek δόλος (dolos),
which occurs 12 times in 12 verses in the Greek concordance

1388 dólos – properly, bait; (figuratively) deceit (trickery) using bait to alure ("hook") people, especially those already festering in excessive, emotional pain (brought on by themselves).

Strong's Greek: 1388. δόλος (dolos) -- a bait, fig. craft, deceit

Short Definition: deceit, guile, treachery
Definition: deceit, guile, treachery.
craft, deceit, guile, subtilty.
From an obsolete primary verb, dello (probably meaning to decoy; compare deleazo); a trick (bait), i.e. (figuratively) wile -- craft, deceit, guile, subtilty.

 

[RDKirk]

Well, I also do not know if sarcasm existed during the time and place of Paul. However, I'm pretty sure, Jesus never used sarcasm even if there are many times he could have used one.

Oh, my, yes, sarcasm was a high art in 1st century Graeco-Roman culture.

There is some sarcasm from God also represented in the OT, and that is through the unincarnated Christ.

Was Jesus ever sarcastic? Maybe here:

"Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

That would be sarcasm by our modern standards.

Anyway, I wouldn't pay too much attention about that verse. There are verses to consider that are more substantial. And I'm not sure myself if sarcasm is a bad thing.

Oh, my, yes, sarcasm was a high art in 1st century Graeco-Roman culture.

There is some sarcasm from God also represented in the OT, and that is through the unincarnated Christ.

Was Jesus ever sarcastic? Maybe here:

"Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them.

The Jewish religious rulers were always trying to trap the Lord Jesus:

Mat 22:
15 Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words.
18 They were unable to trap Him in what he had said there in public. And astonished by his answer, they became silent.
Jhn 8:6
They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing Him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger.

Reve 12:10
And I hear great voice saying in the Heaven: "Now! became the salvation and the power and the Kingdom of the God of us, and the authority of His Christ, that was cast the Accuser of the brothers of us, the one accusing them in sight of the God of us day and night.

Rom 11:9 [Psalm 69:22]
And David says:
“Let their table become a snare and a trap,
A stumbling block and a recompense to them.

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

LUKE 16:
20 "But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate,
21 desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores."

This Scripture is also a fitting representation of the position of the nations before the Messiah's sacrifice for the world's sins. They were certainly "excluded from the commonwealth of Israel," "strangers to the covenants of promise," and "without hope and without God in the world."
The Gentiles were beggars, located outside Judah and longing to be fed spiritual crumbs from the table of the divinely blessed Jews.

 

[W2L]

The Jewish religious rulers were always trying to trap the Lord Jesus:

Mat 22:
15 Then the Pharisees went out and laid plans to trap him in his words.
18 They were unable to trap Him in what he had said there in public. And astonished by his answer, they became silent.
Jhn 8:6
They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing Him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger.

Reve 12:10
And I hear great voice saying in the Heaven: "Now! became the salvation and the power and the Kingdom of the God of us, and the authority of His Christ, that was cast the Accuser of the brothers of us, the one accusing them in sight of the God of us day and night.

Rom 11:9 [Psalm 69:22]
And David says:
“Let their table become a snare and a trap,
A stumbling block and a recompense to them.

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

LUKE 16:
20 "But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate,
21 desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores."

This Scripture is also a fitting representation of the position of the nations before the Messiah's sacrifice for the world's sins. They were certainly "excluded from the commonwealth of Israel," "strangers to the covenants of promise," and "without hope and without God in the world."
The Gentiles were beggars, located outside Judah and longing to be fed spiritual crumbs from the table of the divinely blessed Jews.

Matthew 15:24-28