II CORINTHIANS 5:13

 

II Corinthians 5:13

This confusing verse takes the form of Hebrew poetry known as antithetic parallelism in which all the individual units of each line are presented in the same order, but one or more of the elements is contrasted. In the NRSV this verse reads:

    “If we are beside ourselves, it is for God,

     If we are in our right mind, it is for you.”

The first thing to note is that these are the first two of nine uses of the formulation “for, on behalf of (hyper) someone” in II Corinthians 5:13-21. Thus, that appears to represent one of the key thoughts found in the second half of Chapter 5. The different actors and recipients involved in these various statements can be summarized as follows:

        Paul and Timothy (“we”) for God          (13a)

        Paul and Timothy for the church            (13b)

        Christ for all                                            (14, 15a)

        believers not for themselves                   (15b)

        believers for Christ                                 (15c)

        Christ for believers                                 (15d)

        Paul and Timothy for Christ                   (20a)

        Christ for believers                                  (21)
There is a form of symmetry in these occurrences in that the negative formulation in v. 15b separates two groups of four positive statements each. Most of these are self-obvious in meaning, except for the first two cited above. So what is Paul talking about in II Corinthians 5:13? The following scholars weigh in on that question, with notable lack of agreement.

The first thing to discuss is the meaning of the Greek word hyper. Stott says, “The preposition 'for' can translate either hyper ('on behalf of') or anti ('instead of'). Most of the references have hyper...The two prepositions do not always adhere to their dictionary definitions, however. Even the broader word hyper ('on behalf of') is many times shown by its context to be used in the sense of anti ('instead of'), as, for example, when we are said to be 'ambassadors of Christ' (2 Cor. 5:20)...The same is clear in...'God made him who had no sin to be sin for us' (2 Cor. 5:2)...and God declined to 'impute' our sins to us, or 'count' them against us (2 Cor 5:19) with the implication that he imputed them to Christ instead.”

Much also depends on the meaning of the phrase “beside ourselves,” a subject on which commentators are divided:

Furnish explains: “Used intransitively, as here, the verb existanai means 'to lose one's mind,' 'to be beside oneself,' etc. Paul employs this verb nowhere else, but in Mark 3:21 it is used in the same way with references to allegations that Jesus was 'beside himself' (RSV), that is, 'possessed!'...Here Paul is mindful of the criticism that the authenticity of his apostolate has been supported by no 'religious' evidence in the form of public displays of ecstasy. In response, he disallows the pertinence of ecstatic experiences for the question of apostleship (v. 13a), and emphasizes instead the commitment of his apostleship to the preaching of the gospel (v. 11a) and to the care of those who have received it (v. 13b).”

The first point to note is rather obviously stated by Knox: “Beside ourselves no doubt refers to a criticism leveled against Paul.” But there is some disagreement regarding what in Paul's actions prompted such a criticism in the first place. Thus, we have the conflicting opinions reflected below.

“Paul's opponents may have derided Paul for lack of ecstatic experiences (12. 1,12), to which Paul answers by distinguishing between being beside ourselves (having an ecstatic experience), and being in our right mind. The former has to do with God; the latter has to do with his ministry with the Corinthians. Cf. 1 Cor 14:2-5, 18-19, 27-28.” (Wan)

“Paul says in 1 Cor. 14:18 that he was no stranger to speaking in tongues. Hence some have seen in 2 Cor. 5:13 a reference to ecstatic speech. In that case the thought would be the same as in 1 Cor. 14:19. It is more probable that Paul is defending himself against the charge of having exaggerated his authority above measure.” (Mundle)

Jerusalem Bible: “Paul is taxed with 'folly'; he retorts that this is in God's cause. But he adds that he can be 'reasonable' when he wishes, for the sake of his children in Christ.”

O'Brien: “Paul himself practiced glossolalia [speaking in tongues] (1 Cor 14:18; 2 Cor 5:13, possibly), but he downplays the gift in favor of prophecy which edifies the congregation.”

“To affirm his sincerity, Paul was willing to be thought a fool (cf. 11:16-17, 21). Who but one out of his mind ('insane'; cf. 11:23; Mark 3:21) would show such disregard for himself? (cf. 4:9-13) Would a sane man willingly face a riotous mob intent on destroying him...Only a person who was so utterly devoted to God would show so little regard for himself. Such a man was Paul.” (Lowery)

Clines says, “If he was ever beside himself, lost in spiritual ecstasy (had his critics also said he was crazy? cf. 11:16), that was for God's sake; if he was in his right mind, that was for the Corinthians' sake.”

Tasker expresses his opinion on the subject in the following words: “In this difficult verse Paul seems to be telling the Corinthians that they should gladly rally to his defense if only because, in all his dealings with them, he had never shown any sign of wishing to please himself. They had seen him in many moods. Sometimes, as he spoke at their meetings under the stress of great spiritual emotion, they must have thought that he was beside himself, lost in ecstasy; but he had never sought glory for himself because of such experiences. Rather did they redound to the glory of God, the dative to God being probably a dative of advantage...Other scholars consider that the reference in the phrase beside ourselves is not to excessive devotional fervor, but to extravagant self-commendation.”

Paul's detractors are evidently making such a charge against him (Mk. 3:21). In both his intense enthusiasm and times of spiritual ecstasy (12:1f), and in his more sober moments, Paul is never out for his own ends...it is for God and His glory and for you and your spiritual benefit.” (Hillyer)

You may have noted that in the above opinions, even those who feel that being beside oneself refers to having an ecstatic experience disagree as to whether the criticism leveled against Paul was because he had such experiences or didn't have them. In the face of all the diverse opinions above, the most cautious approaches to understanding this verse are perhaps best expressed below.

Hughes: “Whatever his state or disposition, Paul, in contrast to his critics, is entirely free from self-interest: if in an ecstatic condition, it is to God; if sober-minded, it is for the Corinthians' sake. The question as to what precisely Paul meant by being beside himself, or in a state of ecstasy, is one which we are not in a position to decide with assurance. It is at least clear, however, that the two verbs which he uses stand in contradistinction to each other as opposites, and it is also apparent that the former describes a state which is directed towards God, while the latter is related to those to whom he ministers.”

Martin: “On the surface, it comes into view that no matter the state of Paul''s mind or disposition, he does nothing for himself; all is done for God and the Corinthians. But under the surface is the mystery of what he means by existasthai, 'to be out of one's mind.' The total understanding of this passage may be beyond our grasp.” After discarding several proposed interpretations, Martin concludes: “Paul is dividing into two categories his behavior toward God, namely, ecstatic; and toward the Corinthians, namely, rational and controlled...This then, is the closest we can come to getting underneath the surface to the meaning of this verse.”