Commentary on 2 Corinthians 5:16-21

This passage from Paul’s Second Letter to the Corinthians should be seen in light of his ongoing appeal for his ministry in Corinth. Paul writes to persuade the Corinthians of the truth of his teachings, which are part of his mission to bring the gentiles into the people of God through the power of Christ and the grace of God. Requisite for becoming people of God is a process of reconciliation and change. Through Christ, God makes this change possible.

A fragmentary letter?

Scholars have debated whether 2 Corinthians should be interpreted as a single letter or as a series of fragments. While there are good cases for reading the letter as a series of fragments (with possible breaks in Paul’s argument at the following points: 1:1–2:13; 2:14–6:13; 6:14–7:1; 7:2–16; 8:1–24; 9:1–15; and 10:1–13:13), there are also reasons for reading the letter as a unified whole. For lay readers, this scholarly debate is not incredibly important, since they most regularly encounter the text as a whole. This passage (5:16–21) tends to be interpreted within the context of the surrounding chapters in most configurations, due to the continuation of the argumentation and themes. 

Paul’s Christology

This passage (2 Corinthians 5:16–21) inspires questions about how Paul thinks and talks about Christ when he is interacting with various communities. What does he know about Jesus? 

Paul’s knowledge of Jesus largely concerns Christ’s death and resurrection. Paul writes that Christ Jesus, God’s Son, is descended from David according to the flesh (Romans 1:3–5), born of a woman, under the law (Galatians 4:4). In 1 Corinthians 15 Paul says that he has handed down to the Corinthians the tradition that he received, “that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures,” that was buried, rose from the dead, and then appeared to Cephas and the 12, and to some 500 others (!) before appearing to Paul (1 Corinthians 15:3–8). This aligns with his writings in other letters, such as Romans 4:24–25; Galatians 1:4; and 1 Thessalonians 5:10. 

Interestingly, when Paul discusses Christ’s appearances in 1 Corinthians 15, he does not share familiarity with the gospel tradition of the women receiving the first appearance of Christ. It is possible that he omits mentioning this point due to not wanting to further empower a group of women prophets in Corinth whose ministry may already rival his own.

Paul also references the eucharist, saying he received knowledge about it directly from the Lord, possibly in a vision (1 Corinthians 11:23–26). In Paul’s writings Christ seems to exist in some form prior to Jesus’ human life. Much of Paul’s knowledge of the Lord and what the Lord says seems to have been communicated through ecstatic experiences and visions. Otherwise, Paul does not seem to know much about the life and ministry of Jesus that is shared in the gospels. 

Rhetoric of resurrection

Paul’s discussion of reconciliation, resurrection, and Christ’s death should also be seen in the context of his arguments against those in Corinth who do not adhere to a belief in the resurrection of the dead. These Christ-following Corinthians may emphasize ideas of resurrection and transformation in the immediate context rather than waiting until after death. 

These ideas of transformation may involve social transformation, as is suggested in the pre-Pauline baptismal statement of Galatians 3:28, “There is no longer Jew or Greek; there is no longer slave and free; there is no longer male and female, for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” Paul offers a gloss on this statement in 1 Corinthians 12:13, omitting the “male and female” pairing, perhaps again not wanting to further empower his female rival ministers. 

Yet, for Paul, resurrection of the dead is central to his ministry. It is Christ’s resurrection after death that enables the gentiles to become part of the people of God in its new creation. It is Christ’s resurrection after death that allows weakness to become strength, humiliation to become exaltation and power, despair to become hope. 

The possibilities of change and reconciliation

What is reconciliation? The word “reconciliation” comes from the Greek kata + allasso, related to the term allos, or “other.” The kata prefix is often used to intensify the root word it is paired with—in this instance allasso, or “change,” as in changing from one thing to another. Thus, we might translate katallasso as “radical change.” It also has the connotation of changing enmity to friendship, hostility to favor. When Paul is arguing for people to be reconciled to God, he is arguing that they should remove any barriers to their radical change and restoration of a favorable relationship with God.  

When someone experiences radical change through Christ, the old passes away and new life begins. Part of what changes, Paul writes, is one’s point of view (2 Corinthians 5:16). Through reconciliation, he no longer regards Christ and others from the perspective of flesh, but from the perspective of new life, a radically changed life. Reading this passage with Galatians 3:28 suggests that social hierarchies and relationships should be transformed so that all others in Christ are viewed as clothed with Christ, on equal ground with one another. Through Christ, all are able to be restored, radically changed, and reconciled to God and one another. 

Indeed, Paul writes that “we” are to become ambassadors of this reconciliation, to encourage people to be right with God and live in alignment with God’s justice. The work of a Christian is in the life-giving hope of radical transformation toward justice.

For many Christians, hopes of new life and new creation through Christ are crucial. Yet Christians often allow for this hope for themselves while not really wanting it for others. The idea of one’s neighbor needing to change to “get right with God” is easier for many to imagine than having to change themselves or change their own perspectives on their neighbor. In other words, we are often happy to work toward reconciliation with our neighbor when they have to change, but not when we also must change. The same may have been true of Paul in Corinth, where he wanted the Corinthians to change to adhere to his ministry rather than wanting to incorporate their practices or views into his own.