2 Corinthians Chapter 2

The Strategy of Satan and the Victory of Jesus

A. Paul’s Change of Plans: Why the Corinthians Misinterpreted His Absence

1. (2 Corinthians 2:1–2) Paul remembers his sorrowful visit to the Corinthians.

“But I determined this within myself, that I would not come again to you in sorrow. For if I make you sorrowful, then who is he who makes me glad but the one who is made sorrowful by me?”

Paul begins by explaining his personal resolution regarding his travel plans. His critics in Corinth had charged him with unreliability, accusing him of being inconsistent or fearful because he had changed his itinerary. But Paul makes clear that his decision was not grounded in self-interest or fear of confrontation. Rather, as he had already said in 2 Corinthians 1:23, he refrained from visiting them “to spare” them. His delay was an act of pastoral sensitivity, not evasiveness.

When Paul says, “But I determined this within myself”, he emphasizes the careful, deliberate nature of his choice. The verb suggests a decisive, settled resolution rather than an emotional reaction. Paul, guided by the Spirit, knew that another immediate visit would only bring grief instead of progress. His previous visit had already been one of sorrow, marked by conflict and disciplinary confrontation. To repeat such an experience would have been spiritually unprofitable for both him and the church.

Paul continues, “For if I make you sorrowful, then who is he who makes me glad but the one who is made sorrowful by me?” The rhetorical question underscores the reciprocal relationship between pastor and congregation. If Paul’s words only crushed them with grief, then the very ones who should have been his joy in the Lord would instead become the source of his pain. This shows Paul’s shepherd heart—his aim was not to dominate or humiliate but to build up and restore. As Clarke observed, Paul could not visit them “comfortably” while scandals and sins were unchecked, and thus he delayed until repentance and correction could take place.

Paul wisely discerned that continual confrontation would damage his relationship with them. His goal was not constant rebuke but genuine reconciliation. By giving them space, he allowed room for the Spirit of God to convict their hearts. In this, Paul demonstrates the pastoral balance of truth and love. He did not avoid discipline, but he also did not desire an endless cycle of sorrowful meetings.

2. (2 Corinthians 2:3–4) Instead of a second visit, Paul wrote a letter.

“And I wrote this very thing to you, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow over those from whom I ought to have joy, having confidence in you all that my joy is the joy of you all. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you, with many tears, not that you should be grieved, but that you might know the love which I have so abundantly for you.”

Paul explains that instead of making another painful visit, he chose to write. His letter, sometimes referred to as the “severe letter,” was meant to deal with sin and rebellion in the church before he saw them again in person. By doing so, he sought to avoid a repeat of sorrow upon his arrival.

The phrase “lest, when I came, I should have sorrow over those from whom I ought to have joy” reveals Paul’s high expectations of the Corinthians. They were his spiritual children, and he had every right to anticipate joy from them, not grief. Their rebellion and divisions not only grieved him but also violated the very nature of their relationship as pastor and flock. Trapp insightfully comments that sin and disobedience are especially grievous when found in those who ought to be a source of comfort—just as injustice in a judge or rebellion in a child stings more deeply because of its place.

Paul further explains his heart: “For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you, with many tears.” His correction was not cold or harsh. It was written with profound inner turmoil, out of love. He wanted them to understand that his motive was not to cause grief but to reveal the depth of his pastoral affection. His tears are evidence of the sincerity and tenderness of his heart. This aligns with the biblical pattern: true correction in the church must flow from love, not pride or harshness.

Notice also the phrase “that you might know the love which I have so abundantly for you.” The goal of Paul’s severe letter was never destruction but restoration. His love was not theoretical but abundant, overflowing, and deeply sacrificial. Mature believers would recognize this; immature ones might misinterpret it as hostility. Even so, Paul persisted in speaking the truth in love, willing to risk misunderstanding in order to pursue their spiritual good.

Charles Spurgeon once observed that when opposition arises, the best path is not to recognize it with retaliation but to overwhelm it with kindness and courtesy. Paul embodies this principle. Though accused and maligned, he continued to act with love, knowing that his joy was bound up with theirs. His tears, more than ink, were the true ink of his epistles, as Trapp memorably put it: “St. Paul’s Epistles were written rather with tears than with ink.”

B. Paul’s Appeal to Forgive the Brother Who Had Sinned

1. (2 Corinthians 2:5–7) Paul recommends forgiveness and restoration of the repentant brother.

“But if anyone has caused grief, he has not grieved me, but all of you to some extent—not to be too severe. This punishment which was inflicted by the majority is sufficient for such a man, so that, on the contrary, you ought rather to forgive and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with too much sorrow.”

Paul shifts his focus from explaining his absence to addressing a matter of church discipline. He demonstrates remarkable pastoral sensitivity by not naming the offender, writing simply, “if anyone has caused grief.” By doing so, Paul preserves the man’s dignity, even though his sin had been public. The offender’s failure did not primarily grieve Paul personally, but rather the entire congregation. Paul clarifies: “he has not grieved me, but all of you to some extent.” His statement shows that sin in the church always has corporate consequences—it wounds the fellowship of believers, not just individuals.

The identity of the offender has been debated. Many interpreters see him as the incestuous man of 1 Corinthians 5:1–5, the one who had taken his stepmother in immorality. In that earlier case, Paul commanded the church to take action: “In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Corinthians 5:4–5). The phrase “such a man” appears in both letters, supporting the link. Some argue instead that the offender was someone who personally insulted Paul during his “painful visit.” Yet Paul says here, “he has not grieved me,” which strongly suggests the sin was not primarily against Paul but against the community and the holiness of the church.

Paul acknowledges that the church had obeyed his earlier instructions, saying, “This punishment which was inflicted by the majority is sufficient for such a man.” The phrase “inflicted by the majority” indicates a corporate act of discipline, probably exclusion from fellowship. Importantly, Paul now insists that the discipline had achieved its purpose. The man had repented, and further severity would be harmful rather than helpful.

Paul then exhorts the Corinthians to move from discipline to restoration: “you ought rather to forgive and comfort him.” The balance is essential. The church had erred once by tolerating the man’s sin without discipline (1 Corinthians 5), and now they were in danger of erring on the opposite extreme by withholding forgiveness after repentance. True biblical discipline is never vindictive but always restorative. God Himself both disciplines and restores His children: “For whom the Lord loves He chastens, and scourges every son whom He receives” (Hebrews 12:6).

Morgan comments that forgiveness must be accompanied by comfort, for there is a danger of a cold, judicial form of forgiveness that leaves the repentant still burdened by shame. True forgiveness, modeled after God’s own forgiveness in Christ, both pardons and restores fellowship.

Paul warns of the consequences of failing to forgive: “lest perhaps such a one be swallowed up with too much sorrow.” Excessive grief without hope can destroy a person spiritually. Godly sorrow is meant to lead to repentance and life, not despair and ruin (compare 2 Corinthians 7:10). As Trapp observed, if sorrow over sin grows so great that it paralyzes a believer, disabling him from walking in restored fellowship, then it becomes a sinful sorrow. Restoration is therefore just as vital as rebuke.

The historical church provides tragic examples of neglecting this balance. Trapp notes that the Roman Catholic inquisitors burned some who had recanted at the stake, reasoning they would “send them out of the world while they were in a good mind.” Paul’s counsel stands in sharp contrast—discipline must give way to comfort when repentance is evident.

2. (2 Corinthians 2:8–11) Understanding Satan’s Strategy in the Matter

“Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love to him. For to this end I also wrote, that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things. Now whom you forgive anything, I also forgive. For if indeed I have forgiven anything, I have forgiven that one for your sakes in the presence of Christ, lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices.”

Paul now presses the Corinthians beyond discipline and repentance to the crucial act of restoration. He exhorts them: “Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love to him.” The verb “reaffirm” (Greek: κυρόω, kyroo) implies an official confirmation, almost like sealing a matter with a public declaration. Forgiveness and comfort must not remain private feelings; they must be expressed openly by the church to assure the repentant brother of his acceptance. As Hodge observed, when the sinner realizes his sin is condemned but he himself is loved, he is far more likely to remain steadfast in repentance.

Paul reminds them of the larger purpose behind his severe letter: “For to this end I also wrote, that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things.” Their obedience had been tested once when they exercised church discipline (1 Corinthians 5:4–5), and now it was tested again in the matter of forgiveness. Would they prove obedient when asked to show mercy as well as when asked to act firmly? It is often easier for churches to act with severity than to extend restoration. Yet both are required if obedience is to be complete.

Paul continues, “Now whom you forgive anything, I also forgive.” Though the offense indirectly touched Paul, he defers to the authority of the congregation. He expects them to lead in forgiveness, and he joins them, extending his pardon in fellowship with Christ: “I have forgiven that one for your sakes in the presence of Christ.” Forgiveness, then, is not merely horizontal but vertical—it is granted before the watching Christ, the ultimate Judge and Mediator.

The apostle closes this section with a sobering warning: “lest Satan should take advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices.” Satan’s schemes (noemata, meaning “plots, purposes, mind-games”) are always aimed at division and destruction within the church. Just as Satan had sought to corrupt the congregation by tempting them to tolerate sin, so he could now exploit their hardness in refusing forgiveness. Both extremes—careless leniency and merciless severity—serve the devil’s purpose. The church must walk in the Spirit, exercising both discipline and mercy, truth and love.

Paul’s words echo Christ’s teaching: “Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him” (Luke 17:3). Discipline without forgiveness distorts the gospel; forgiveness without discipline cheapens grace. Satan thrives on both distortions, using them as devices to undermine unity and hinder the witness of the church

Further Explanation of Paul’s Warning about Satan’s Strategy

d. Lest Satan should take advantage of us: Paul recognized that the spiritual battle was not only with human weakness but also with the schemes of Satan. The danger of failing to forgive was not merely relational but spiritual. If the Corinthians refused restoration, Satan would use their harshness to bring further damage. The term “take advantage” translates the Greek word pleonekteo, which literally means “to defraud” or “to exploit.” It carries the sense of being cheated out of what rightfully belongs to us in Christ.

As Paul warns, Satan seeks to rob believers of their spiritual inheritance—peace, joy, unity, and the assurance of forgiveness. He accomplishes this by exploiting our failures in both directions: tolerating sin without correction or showing mercilessness without forgiveness. Richard Trapp vividly describes Satan as “that wily merchant, that greedy blood-sucker, that devoureth not widows’ houses, but most men’s souls.” In other words, Satan thrives on manipulating circumstances in the church so that believers forfeit blessings already secured in Christ.

Paul’s use of pleonekteo elsewhere in the New Testament strengthens this point. In 2 Corinthians 7:2 he appeals to the Corinthians, saying, “Open your hearts to us. We have wronged no one, we have corrupted no one, we have cheated no one.” In 2 Corinthians 12:17–18, he defends himself, asking if he took advantage of them through those he sent. And in 1 Thessalonians 4:6, Paul warns believers not to “take advantage of and defraud his brother in this matter.” The consistent sense is to rob someone of what is theirs. If the church failed to restore the repentant brother, Satan would cheat both the sinner and the congregation of the grace and reconciliation that belonged to them in Christ.

e. For we are not ignorant of his devices: Paul stresses the necessity of spiritual discernment. He was fully aware that Satan has strategies designed to exploit human weakness and disrupt the church. The word “devices” (noemata) refers to schemes, thoughts, or mental plots. Satan does not always attack through blatant persecution; often, he manipulates attitudes within the church to sow division, pride, despair, or unforgiveness.

John Calvin observed, “There is nothing more dangerous than to give Satan a chance of reducing a sinner to despair. Whenever we fail to comfort those that are moved to a sincere confession of their sin, we play into Satan’s hands.” Withholding forgiveness is not spiritual strength but a snare, driving a repentant believer into hopelessness. In such a case, the church unwittingly becomes an ally of Satan rather than a servant of Christ.

f. His devices: Satan’s devices are diverse and tailored. Against the sinning man, Satan first exploited lust, leading to incest, and afterward sought to drive him into despair after discipline. Against the Corinthian church, Satan first used tolerance of evil, then pressed them into undue harshness. Against Paul, Satan’s strategy was to stir constant strife so that he would lose his peace and grow weary in ministry.

These strategies remain consistent in the church today. Satan tempts through indulgence, then accuses through despair. He pushes congregations to extremes—permissiveness that corrupts holiness, or severity that crushes repentant spirits. Calvin rightly defined these devices as “the artful schemes and tricks of which believers ought to be aware, and will be if they allow the Spirit of God to rule in them.” The safeguard against ignorance is walking in the Spirit, for He exposes Satan’s designs and strengthens believers to resist them.

Thus, the question for every believer remains: Are we aware of Satan’s strategies in our own lives and churches? What weak points is he seeking to exploit? Is it bitterness, pride, lust, or despair? Paul’s words remind us that vigilance is essential, for Satan thrives wherever believers are careless or ignorant of his schemes.

C. The Triumph of Jesus Christ

1. (2 Corinthians 2:12–13) What Paul did on his way to Macedonia

“Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christ’s gospel, and a door was opened to me by the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit, because I did not find Titus my brother; but taking my leave of them, I departed for Macedonia.”

Paul shifts the narrative from his discussion of forgiveness and Satan’s devices to recounting his personal journey. His words reveal the tension between divine opportunity and human concern.

a. A door was opened to me by the Lord: Paul understood that ministry was never a matter of his own ingenuity or force of will but of God’s sovereign direction. The image of an “open door” (Greek: thura aneōgmenē) conveys both opportunity and divine invitation. Paul consistently framed his ministry this way. For example, in 1 Corinthians 16:9 he wrote, “For a great and effective door has opened to me, and there are many adversaries.” Likewise, in Colossians 4:3 he asked prayer “that God would open to us a door for the word, to speak the mystery of Christ.”

The principle here is vital for all ministry: God blesses service that is aligned with His will. As Trapp insightfully notes, “Where the Master sets up a light, there is some work to be done; where He sends forth His laborers, there is some harvest to be gotten in.” Human energy may create activity, but only God opens doors that bring eternal fruit. Therefore, the wise servant waits for God’s opening rather than forcing his own way.

b. I had no rest in my spirit, because I did not find Titus my brother: Despite the open door, Paul confesses that he could not embrace the opportunity fully because of personal concern. His heart was heavy with anxiety, for Titus—his trusted co-laborer and bearer of news from Corinth—was not there. This teaches us two important truths.

First, Paul did not regard himself as a self-sufficient minister. He recognized the value of partnership. Even the great apostle was not a “one-man show.” Ministry, by design, is shared labor. The early church consistently demonstrated this principle, sending men in pairs or teams (Mark 6:7; Acts 13:2; Acts 15:40). Paul’s need for Titus underscores the necessity of fellowship, accountability, and shared burdens in ministry.

Second, it shows Paul’s pastoral heart. He was deeply concerned about the Corinthians and longed for Titus’ report. His love for the churches was so consuming that even fruitful opportunities at Troas could not quiet his spirit without reassurance of their welfare. In 2 Corinthians 11:28, Paul speaks of “my deep concern for all the churches.” This is not weakness but true pastoral care—his joy could not be complete until he knew his spiritual children were walking rightly.

c. Departed for Macedonia: Paul therefore left Troas, moving on to Macedonia where he would eventually meet Titus (2 Corinthians 7:5–7). Between these verses and that reunion, Paul includes a long and passionate section (2 Corinthians 2:14–7:4), often referred to as “the great digression.” In it, he pours out his heart in one of the most personal defenses of his apostolic ministry. Far from being a random diversion, this digression reveals Paul’s theology of ministry: its trials, its triumphs, and its Christ-centered nature.

This moment at Troas reminds us that even the greatest servants of God are human, carrying burdens and emotions. Yet it also affirms that God, in His providence, works through those very concerns to bring about greater revelations of His glory, as the following verses unfold.

2. (2 Corinthians 2:14) Jesus, the Triumphant Leader

“Now thanks be to God who always leads us in triumph in Christ, and through us diffuses the fragrance of His knowledge in every place.”

Paul turns from recounting his anxiety in Troas to a declaration of victory in Christ. Despite personal struggles, uncertainty about Titus, and criticism from the Corinthians, he bursts forth in thanksgiving. The perspective of faith transforms his trials into triumph, because he views his life and ministry as part of Christ’s triumphal procession.

a. Thanks be to God who always leads us: The Corinthians had accused Paul of unreliability and instability due to his altered travel plans. Yet Paul clarifies that his ultimate loyalty is not to human expectations but to Christ his General. His ministry was not governed by personal whims or shifting plans, but by the sovereign leadership of the risen Christ. The thanksgiving here is not merely formal—it is the overflowing gratitude of a soldier who knows his commander is victorious and who delights to be led by Him.

b. Who always leads us in triumph in Christ: Paul draws imagery from the Roman triumphus, the lavish parade awarded to victorious generals. In the Roman world, such a procession was the pinnacle of glory, often occurring only once in a lifetime. The victorious general, clothed in purple and crowned with laurel, was paraded through the streets of Rome with his army, captives, spoils, and sacrifices. Priests swung censers filled with fragrant incense, while the crowds shouted their acclamation: Io triumphe!

Meyer notes, “The idea is borrowed from an ancient Roman triumph, which to the eyes of the world of that day was the most glorious spectacle which the imagination could conceive.” Barclay paints the picture vividly: state officials and trumpeters led the procession, followed by displays of spoils, models of conquered cities, captive rulers in chains, and then the general himself in his chariot, followed by his soldiers shouting in triumph. It was a day of national exaltation, filled with sight, sound, and scent.

Paul adapts this imagery to depict Christ as the conquering General. Christ’s triumph is not over earthly kingdoms but over sin, death, and the powers of darkness (Colossians 2:15: “Having disarmed principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it.”). Paul sees himself and his fellow believers as part of Christ’s victory parade, gladly sharing in the spoils of redemption and displaying the glory of their General. Unlike the earthly triumph, Christ’s triumph is not fleeting—it is continuous and unstoppable, spanning the whole world and all ages.

c. Leads us: The verb here emphasizes that Paul and his companions are not spectators but participants, being “led along” in Christ’s victory. The imagery could even suggest being led as captives conquered by Christ’s love, transformed from enemies into willing subjects. Either way, Paul wants the Corinthians to grasp that he is not charting his own course—he is being carried along in the train of the victorious King. His ministry, far from being weak or aimless, is bound up with the triumph of Christ Himself.

d. Diffuses the fragrance of His knowledge: Paul seizes on another feature of the Roman triumph—the clouds of incense filling the air. Incense in the parade was both celebratory and sacrificial, symbolizing victory offered to the gods. In Paul’s metaphor, the fragrance represents the knowledge of Christ spread through the world. Just as no sense is as evocative and enduring as smell, so the gospel has a pervasive, unforgettable influence wherever it goes.

Meyer reflects, “Thus the apostle wished that his life might be a sweet perfume, floating on the air, reminding men, and above all reminding God, of Christ.” The aroma of Christ’s knowledge is not merely doctrinal precision but the lived sweetness of a life transformed by fellowship with Him. As Meyer further says, “It does not consist so much in what we do, but in our manner of doing it; not so much in our words or deeds, as in an indefinable sweetness, tenderness, courtesy, unselfishness, and desire to please others to their edification.” When believers abide in Christ, their lives become like garments scented with His character—leaving a spiritual fragrance wherever they go.

2. (2 Corinthians 2:15–16a) The triumphal parade means different things to different people

“For we are to God the fragrance of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing. To the one we are the aroma of death leading to death, and to the other the aroma of life leading to life.”

Paul deepens his triumphal imagery by emphasizing that the gospel has a double effect. Just as the incense at a Roman triumph was sweet to the citizens but ominous to the captives, so the gospel is fragrant in different ways depending on the hearer’s response.

a. To the one we are the aroma of death leading to death, and to the other the aroma of life leading to life: In the triumphal parade, the same aroma of incense could signal victory to one group and impending death to another. For the victorious Roman, the smell was celebratory; for the captive bound for execution or slavery, the smell was dreadful. In the same way, the gospel is both life-giving and condemning.

For those who embrace Christ, the message of the cross is “the aroma of life leading to life.” It brings eternal life and deepens the experience of life in Christ. But for those who reject Him, the gospel becomes “the aroma of death leading to death.” Their rejection seals them under the condemnation of their own unbelief. Jesus declared this principle in John 3:18–19, “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.”

Clarke comments rightly: “They are not only not saved because they do not believe the Gospel, but they are condemned because they reject it.” The same message that rescues one sinner hardens another. This explains why gospel preaching always divides humanity—it confronts every heart with Christ, forcing either humble acceptance or rebellious rejection.

b. We are to God the fragrance of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing: Notice that Paul emphasizes “to God.” The fragrance is not primarily about human reception but divine evaluation. The gospel ministry, whether producing life or death among hearers, is to God a pleasing aroma because it glorifies Christ. To the saved, it reveals God’s grace; to the lost, it reveals God’s justice. In both cases, the fragrance of Christ ascends as an offering before the Lord.

3. (2 Corinthians 2:16b–17) Paul briefly characterizes his ministry

“And who is sufficient for these things? For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ.”

The weight of Paul’s metaphor compels him to pause and ask, “And who is sufficient for these things?” The task of bearing the fragrance of Christ, which determines life or death in eternity, is overwhelming. No man, in himself, is capable of such responsibility. The faithful minister must discern God’s will, communicate His truth without distortion, and press it upon the consciences of men. As Poole remarks, “Who is sufficient for these things? That is, to discharge the office of the ministry in the preaching of the gospel, as men ought to preach it.”

a. Who is sufficient for these things? The implied answer is that no man, by natural ability, is sufficient. Sufficiency comes only from God, as Paul will later explain: “Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God” (2 Corinthians 3:5). This recognition keeps the minister humble and dependent upon divine grace.

b. For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God: Paul contrasts his ministry with the false teachers of his day. The word “peddling” (Greek: kapeleuontes) literally referred to hucksters who adulterated wine with water to increase profit. Applied to preaching, it describes those who corrupt God’s Word for selfish gain, watering it down to make it more palatable or profitable. Trapp calls this “one of the devil’s depths” (cf. Revelation 2:24), a deceitful corruption foreign to God’s true servants. Sadly, even in Paul’s time, there were “many” who trafficked in the gospel as a commodity.

c. As of sincerity: In contrast, Paul’s ministry was marked by eilikrineia, a Greek word denoting purity and transparency, like something that can withstand being held up to the sunlight without flaw. His preaching was without hidden motives or manipulation. Barclay notes that the word suggests something genuine enough to be tested by the sun’s rays. Paul’s message was clear, unadulterated truth, without mixture of deceit.

d. We speak in the sight of God in Christ: Finally, Paul underscores his ultimate accountability. His first audience was not the Corinthians, nor the wider Roman world, but God Himself. Every word he spoke was under the gaze of Christ. This perspective shaped his sincerity, for no man who preaches in God’s presence can afford to corrupt His Word. True ministry flows from God, is accountable to God, and is offered in Christ.