2 Corinthians 1:18

My Notes

What Does 2 Corinthians 1:18 Mean?

"But as God is true, our word toward you was not yea and nay." Paul stakes his RELIABILITY on GOD'S TRUTHFULNESS: as God is true (pistos — faithful, reliable, trustworthy), our word toward you was not yes-and-no. The defense of Paul's consistency is grounded in GOD'S consistency. The apostle's word is reliable because the God behind the apostle's word is reliable. The human reliability derives from the divine reliability.

The phrase "as God is true" (pistos ho theos — faithful/trustworthy is God) is an OATH-LIKE statement: Paul appeals to God's FAITHFULNESS as the guarantee of his own truthfulness. The sentence structure is: 'as certainly as God is faithful, our word was not double.' The certainty of God's character becomes the certainty of Paul's message. If God can be trusted, Paul's word can be trusted — because Paul's word comes FROM the trustworthy God.

The "our word toward you was not yea and nay" (ho logos hēmōn ho pros hymas ouk estin nai kai ou — our word/message which was toward you is not yes and no) applies specifically to the GOSPEL Paul preached: the 'word toward you' isn't just Paul's travel plans. It's the MESSAGE — the gospel itself. Paul's preaching wasn't double-tongued. The gospel Paul delivered wasn't inconsistent. The message was clear, stable, and trustworthy — as trustworthy as the God it came from.

Reflection Questions

• 1.Is your word reliable — and is the reliability grounded in God's faithfulness or yours?
• 2.What does grounding human reliability in DIVINE faithfulness teach about the source of trustworthiness?
• 3.How does the gospel being 'not yes-and-no' address concerns about the messenger's consistency?
• 4.What would it look like to defend your reliability by pointing to GOD'S character rather than your own?

Devotional

As God is true — our word to you was not yes-and-no. Paul grounds his reliability in GOD'S reliability: if God is faithful (and He is), then the word that comes from God through Paul is faithful too. The human truthfulness derives from the divine truthfulness. The messenger's consistency comes from the Message-giver's consistency.

The 'as God is true' is the FOUNDATION of the defense: Paul doesn't defend his reliability by citing his TRACK RECORD. He cites GOD'S CHARACTER. The argument isn't 'I've always kept my word.' The argument is 'God is faithful — and my word carries God's faithfulness.' The defense goes THROUGH God. The trustworthiness is derivative — borrowed from the trustworthy One, not generated by the trustworthy person.

The 'our word was not yea and nay' applies to the GOSPEL, not just the travel plans: the deeper accusation behind the travel-plan complaint is that Paul's MESSAGE might be inconsistent. If his travel plans are unreliable, maybe his THEOLOGY is unreliable too. Paul addresses the deeper concern: the MESSAGE I preached to you was not double. The gospel wasn't yes-and-no. Christ is YES (verse 19-20). The message is as stable as the Christ it proclaims.

The CONNECTION between God's truthfulness and Paul's message means the gospel has DIVINE RELIABILITY: the message isn't reliable because PAUL is reliable. The message is reliable because GOD is reliable — and the message comes from God. The authority of the gospel isn't in the messenger's character. It's in the Message-giver's character. Paul could fail. The gospel can't — because God can't.

Is your word reliable — and is the reliability grounded in God's faithfulness or in your own track record?

Commentary

Trusted original commentary from respected historical Bible scholars and theologians.

Cross References

Related passages throughout Scripture