power of God to then Paul, who in his recent reversals in not visiting Corinth as he promised,
and that he was run out of Ephesus, and with his message of a crucified Messiah,
well he was a sorry figure. He was a defeated figure.
Paul was the embodiment of weakness compared to the self-sufficient power ministry of the super-apostles.
So how would you feel if you were Paul?
How do you think you'd feel?
Well, it's not like there's some sort of moral scandal going on here.
He's preaching the true gospel, and he's being treated as if he is a common criminal.
You see, I think the Corinthians are a little embarrassed,
because the gospel that Paul preached doesn't seem to produce the same sort of results of that of the super-apostles.
I think the sort of criticism the super-apostles are making would be like,
if he's truly God's apostle, and if he was preaching the true message,
well, in fact, our churches would be filled, or his churches that he was preaching to would be filled,
instead of he himself being kicked out of town after town and being put into prison.
And so at the end of chapter 1 and beginning of chapter 2,
and I want you to take your Bibles up, you need to be following me with this.
At the end of chapter 1 and beginning of chapter 2,
Paul is dealing with the criticisms of the super-apostles,
some of the criticisms that he's thrown at him.
One of the big problems is that Paul did not visit Corinth when he said that he wouldn't visit them,
and Paul's last visit with them was a fairly painful visit.
He even refers to that as a painful visit.
But he indicated that he would try and visit again on his way through to Macedonia,
but he didn't, and instead he wrote them a letter.
And this gave ammunition to the super-apostles.
Paul responds to the accusations of the super-apostles
by expressing his love and his care and his concern for this church at Corinth.
He says at the end of chapter 1 that his conscience is clear.
However, you can throw all the stones at me you like.
You can look on the surface and say,
I've disappointed you, I let you down,
but there was no evil intent in me not coming to visit at Corinth.
His reason for not visiting was actually far from evil intent.
He didn't visit because he thought it would be better if he didn't visit.
So chapter 1, verse 23,
I call God as my witness that was in order to spare you that I did not return to Corinth.
Or in chapter 2, verse 1,
So I made up my mind not to make another painful visit to you.
His earlier visit didn't go so well,
so he thought that he would write a letter rather than a personal confrontation.
He didn't visit in order to get revenge, but because of love.
Chapter 2, verse 4,
For I wrote you out of great distress and anguish of heart,
and with many tears,
not to grieve you, but to let you know the depth of my love for you.
Do you think there's any evil intent there with Paul when he decided not to visit?
Paul expresses here a deep love and concern for this church.
The issues brought a deep level of distress and anguish to him.
He even refers to a member of the church who has caused particular grief,
but whom he forgives.
And he mentions here that in fact the whole church,
it's a very significant thing he says,
it's actually the whole church got together and dealt with this issue.
It wasn't just Paul up against this one difficult person.
It wasn't just Paul dealing with it himself.
He says the whole church came together and we dealt with this difficult issue.
And I reckon he wants them to do the same now to deal with these super apostles.
He wants the whole church to band together and deal with these false apostles
who are causing him grief and doing significant damage in this church.
This is a major issue for Paul and it needs to be dealt with.
He is very distracted and distressed by it.
So much so that when he went to Troas and he didn't find Titus there,
he moved on.
It seems that Paul arranged to meet Titus at Troas
to hear how the Corinthians had responded to the letter that he'd written.
But when he found that Titus wasn't there, he moved on.
His zeal for preaching the gospel actually brought him to Troas,
but his passionate care for the Corinthians actually kept him from staying there.
Seems like an odd thing really,
because doesn't it appear that God brought him to Troas?
And then Paul says,
I had no peace of mind.
I was in great distress when Titus wasn't there
and so I moved on.
I moved on.
It's a kind of a strange sort of thing that Paul would even raise this really,
because what he's doing here is again revealing his weakness.
It would seem that he's playing straight into the hands of the super apostles.
Isn't this just another case of Paul getting it wrong?
Another example of his weakness?
Another example of him running away from his problems?
Well, you'd think so.
On the surface anyway, you'd think so.
Paul is actually revealing his weakness.
And in revealing his weakness, he's mustering his defense.
This is where something very interesting happens in 2 Corinthians.
You see, he could have just told us the whole story of what happened
after he left Troas, but he decided not to.
So if you've got your Bibles there, I need you to see this.
Flick over to chapter 7, verse 5.
Because here's the rest of the story.
For when we came into Macedonia, this body of ours had no rest,
but we were harassed at every turn.
Conflicts on the outside, spheres within.
But God, who comforts the downcast,
comforted us by the coming of Titus.
You see, he could have just actually continued on the story.
He could have said we had no comfort because Titus wasn't there.
And so we moved on to Macedonia.
And Titus was there.
And we were comforted.
And God was sovereign.
And he reigned.
And he could have just told a story of God's triumphal intervening
in a difficult situation.
And his ministry in his ministry.
And he would have played straight into the hands of the super apostles.
He could have just traded blows with the super apostles
on whose ministry was more triumphal,
who was more powerful,
whose ministry had God intervening.
He could have done that.
Because clearly God was at work in that situation.
But he didn't.
Why didn't he do that?
Because he's not like the super apostles in one very important way.
Flick back to chapter 5.
This here, I think, is one of the key aspects of 2 Corinthians.
We see here in chapter 5,
where Paul outlines his perspective on life and ministry.
Chapter 5, verse 7.
We live by faith, not by sight.
And this is contrasted to the super apostles,
who a couple of verses later, in verse 12,
we are not trying to commend ourselves to you again,
but are giving you an opportunity to take pride in us,
so that you can answer those who take pride in what is seen,
rather than what is in the heart.
That's the contrast between Paul and the super apostles.
It's taking pride, which is what is on the surface,
the superficial aspects of ministry,
rather than what is at the actual heart of ministry.
And so from this point on until,
so back into chapter 2.
So from this point on,
in chapter 2,
right up until chapter 7, verse 6,
Paul takes,
Paul takes, if you like,
a diversion.
A kind of diversion.
It appears to be a diversion.
But he takes us right into the heart,
in these next 80-something verses,
into the heart of gospel ministry.
He takes us below the surface,
superficial things,
to the things that the world cannot see,
to the things that the world doesn't want to see,
to the things that the super apostles couldn't see,
and he takes a look at what is authentic gospel ministry.
Paul wants this church to know that this conflict is not because he's messed up,
but because of the effect that the Christian message has on people.
And that is the irony of it all.
In the midst of all this antagonism and divisiveness,
God is actually leading a triumphal procession,
because the conflict is actually a sign that the gospel is at work.
It says it there in chapter 2, verse 14,
but thanks be to God,
who always leads us in triumphal procession in Christ,
and through us spreads everywhere the fragrance of the knowledge of him.
For we are to God the aroma of Christ among those who are being saved
and those who are perishing,
to the one we are the smell of death,
to the other the fragrance of life,
and who is equal to such a task.
What Paul is saying here is that despite the appearance of weakness,
it was God who always and everywhere led Paul in triumphal possession.
This was not the triumphal language of Paul's opponents.
They declared themselves to be superior to Paul in missionary success,
as well as experiences of God.
Success and strength were the marks,
as well as the objects of their ministry.
They wanted to see significant numbers,
and they wanted to see this church come under their influence.
Christian triumphalism,
although can I say a contradiction in terms,
has always had its appeal.
Through the Middle Ages,
it was believed that God was glorified through soaring church buildings
and spectacular church ceremony.
Even in our own time,
triumphal language has been used by some in the church growth movements
and the development of the so-called megachurches.
It's partly because we have brought this idea that the world has sold it
and we have taken it on,
the church has taken it on,
that it's effectively the growth fetish of our culture,
where if it's growing,
it must be good,
and bigger equals better.
The number of times I've heard people say,
oh, they must be doing something right,
purely because they look on the surface
and see multiple programs
and people being drawn together.
But I don't want to throw too many stones out there.
There are clearly those who are in the triumphal language category.
You've only got to turn on the Australian Christian Channel
and you see a number of them.
But can I say,
I think that Sydney Anglicans fall into the same category as well at times.
Our own diocese.
It seems to me that you get your article or your picture in Southern Cross
when there's a success to be told.
I'd be surprised if actually, in fact,
that Paul would get an article in Southern Cross.
The stories that are told about how many people have gathered,
what churches are growing,
what programs are effective,
where are the failures,
where are the setbacks.
That's what I want to know.
Where are the failures and where are the setbacks.
Isn't that authentic gospel ministry too?
I even heard a diocesan official one day,
a few years ago,
say that the churches that are growing
are the ones that will get the money from the diocese.
That's triumphalism.
Paul consistently uses anti-triumphalist language
to describe his ministry.
He describes himself as a servant of the Corinthians,
a dying man,
he's weak,
a fool,
his ministry,
like his Christ,
was characterized by crucifixion.
Paul understood clearly
that what is important to God
is not
bigness
of church buildings
or the number of who are gathering,
but faithful and sacrificial service
based on the example of Christ himself.
And so,
to describe this
anti-triumphal language,
Paul tries to come up with an illustration
about what sort of thing he's meaning.
And so he comes up with it there.
It's there in verse 14.
It's like
when the Romans
come through town
just after they have had a big war
and they have this triumphal procession
parading through the streets.
And what they do
is they get the prisoners
that they have captured
in their enemy towns
and they pluck out
the eyes of the leaders,
they chain them to chariots
and they drag them
through the streets
so that all the empire of Rome
might know
how powerful and mighty they are
and what they've done
to their enemies.
And Paul says,
he uses this illustration,
he says in verse 14,
thanks be to God
who always leads us
in triumphal procession in Christ.
I heard someone
on Australian Christian Channel
actually talk about this verse
and he quoted it,
he said,
thanks be to God
who always leads us in triumph.
And then went on to talk about
the triumphal Christian life.
life of success and prosperity.
No, actually,
you didn't quote the whole verse.
It's not a life of triumph,
it's the triumphal procession in Christ.
He says that the great thing is
that when I preach this gospel
from place to place
and I get kicked out of town
from place to place,
it is God who is leading me.
There is a great victory
that has been won
and it is Jesus' victory.
And I am his captive.
I am not the triumphal one,
he says,
it's Jesus who is the triumphal one.
I am the sorry one
who's chained and tethered
behind him
and yet,
at the same time,
I am caught up in this procession
in a positive way
because Jesus,
my king,
is on display.
Not me,
but Jesus,
my king.
Paul says,
don't be embarrassed by me,
by my rejection
for the sake of the gospel.
I might be weak,
in fact,
I am weak.
I am a nobody.
I might be unimpressive
but I've been taken captive
by an impressive king.
I am dead to myself
and now I'm enslaved
to this king,
Jesus.
And it doesn't get
any better than that.
The great victory
has been won
as the procession
moves forward.
The fragrance of Christ
is spread everywhere
and to some
this victory through Christ
is the smell of death.
To them,
the gospel,
its message
about this crucified Jesus,
about a defeated dead man
which they reject,
they reject it
and they move away from it
as they would
from the odour
of a decomposing body.
These people,
it says,
as they hear the gospel message,
they are perishing
as dead in principle
as they perceive Jesus to be.
The gospel to them
is cyanide gas.
And that's why Paul
has been kicked out
from town to town.
And the Corinthian church
was so quick
to walk back
and wipe their hands
because they were embarrassed
by their apostle.
Paul is saying
the nature of true gospel ministry,
nature of the true gospel itself
is that it will bring rejection.
To others though,
the message is about
a risen Christ
which they perceive
in the way a person receives,
sorry,
in the way that a person
welcomes Chanel number five.
These people are being saved
and they are alive in principle
as they perceive Jesus to be.
It would be no surprise
then that Paul
could have felt embarrassed
by a message
that proved to be so divisive.
Those who turn away
from the message
inevitably turn away
from those
who bear the message.
We don't need to seek out
rejection
and unpopularity.
The nature of the gospel
means it will find us.
It will find us.
The gospel of our Lord Jesus
polarizes people.
It is either cyanide gas to them
or it is Chanel number five.
That's the nature of gospel ministry.
I expect people to get offended
and turn away in anger.
I expect people to smell Jesus
and I expect them to want Jesus.
I expect both things to happen.
Either way,
it is our lot to suffer hardship
as a result of faithful gospel ministry.
What a task.
To think that as I stand up
week after week
that I am polarized
because the gospel polarizes
and the bearer of the gospel
will be polarized.
And Paul says,
who is equal to such a task?
Who can do this work
of proclaiming Christ
and not knowing
if it's going to be rejected
or accepted?
Not Paul.
I think that's his answer.
Well, actually,
not Paul in his own strength
is the answer.
And frankly,
the longer I've been involved
in Christian ministry,
the less I feel equipped,
the less I feel
I'm able to do this job,
the more I know
about God
and his word,
the less I realize
I know about him
and his word.
But there is one thing
I'm certain of.
I am one thing
I'm certain of.
The crucified Jesus
is alive
and he's Chanel number five
to me.
And I will not,
therefore,
peddle the word of God
for profit.
I will not twist the message
or preach a sermon
or not counsel a hard word
just because people might
reject me.
Going soft for fear of rejection
is to peddle the word of God
for profit.
It is to say and do things
that make people like me
and to find Jesus
a little bit less
like cyanide gas to them.
It might not be as pleasing
as Chanel number five
for them
but maybe smell,
maybe more of a wet dog smell
would be just a little bit
more comfortable
than cyanide gas.
Unpleasant
but not as offensive.
And I think it's the problem
sometime with the gospel
we often peddle
in our society.
It doesn't polarize people.
It is neither death
or life.
It's just
pleasant
or
bland.
When was the last time
there was deep offence
at an Easter service
or a Christmas service?
Now don't hear me wrong.
I don't program
for deep offence.
I'm not
I'm just asking
the question
is the gospel
and all its implications
clear?
We need to see clearly
that the authentic gospel
brings both acceptance
and rejection.
Authentic ministry
will result
in acceptance
and it will result
in rejection.
And when the rich young ruler
came running up to Jesus
what must I do
to have eternal life?
Jesus didn't whip out
a two ways to live line
and say
pray this prayer
and you're in.
He said
no no
you actually don't trust me
you get rid of
all your
all your wealth
then come follow me.
And when he walked away sad
Jesus didn't go
oh come on
hang on a bit
let's just rethink this
for a moment.
He walked away sad
and potentially
walked away angry.
The authentic gospel message
brings both acceptance
and rejection.
And so may God
give us the courage
to stick at it
and preach the hard word.
May we remain
true to Christ
and not tamper
with a message
for the sake
of popularity.
What a great example
we have here
in the apostle Paul
who continued
even when he got
the boot
even when it was
difficult
even though Paul
rejects the triumphalism
of his opponents
his ministry itself
was not without
its effects.
He says there
but thanks be to God
who always leads us
in triumphal possession
in Christ
and through us
spreads everywhere
the fragrance
of the knowledge
of him.
The fragrance
is going out there
because of Paul's
ministry.
Just like a fragrance
that is invisible
it clearly makes
its presence known
so Paul's ministry
made its presence known.
Paul's ministry
although it seemed weak
was in fact
effective
and noticeable.
and so as Christ
leads us
in triumphal
possession
as his slaves
we will see
both acceptance
and rejection.
People may come
to know Jesus
and people
may be repulsed
by Jesus
and so
St Paul's
may grow
or it may decline
whatever the outcome
though
when the going
gets tough
the tough
keeps smelling.
Amen.