I grew up in a church where nearly all the sermons were from the letters of the apostle Paul. We loved Paul. Those whose heritage lands squarely in the Reformation like ours have a theology very dependent upon the apostle Paul. By more than one he has been described as the greatest theologian ever. In his book Why I Love the Apostle Paul, John Piper described the apostle Paul as a “towering intellect” who operated with a “logic on fire” that turned over into “lyrics of love.”
But not everyone likes the apostle Paul. The apostle Paul’s claim about his own observance of the law was, he said, “blameless” (Philippians 3:6). Not a few critical scholars of the New Testament think his claim reflects not Christian character but hubris and arrogance. Some feminists have argued that he was androcentric, that he never compromised in debates, that he was insensitive, and that he was therefore nothing short of thick-skinned. He had learned to dodge the darts of criticism with skill.
Yet, that’s not the apostle Paul that I see in his most personally revealing letter, 2 Corinthians. Paul was sensitive, vulnerable, and tender. He was, not to put too fine of a line under his name, a people-pleaser type. His relationship with the Christians in Corinth kept the man awake at night. They seemed to have slept well.
What Does 2 Corinthians Tell Us About Paul?
Paul wrote something to the Corinthians that upset them. So tense was the situation that Paul sent Titus as a mediator. And he waited for Titus to return to him to inform him how the Corinthians responded. When he was in Troas (modern Turkey) on a mission trip, waiting for Titus with his eyes on the horizon, Paul informs us that “my mind could not rest because I did not find my brother Titus there” (2Co. 2:13 NRSVue). What stuns many readers today is that so vexed was Paul over the Corinthians that he abandoned a great opportunity for evangelism in Troas (2Co. 2:12). He headed for modern-day Greece.
Paul catches us up just a little bit later. When he arrived in Macedonia he was still awaiting news from Titus. Now writing to them again, a most tender statement is made by Paul when he pleads with the Corinthians to “make room in your hearts for us” because “you are in our hearts” (2Co. 7:2–3). He describes himself as “afflicted in every way — disputes without and fears within” (2Co. 7:5).
The Corinthians, with all their criticisms of Paul, were living rent-free in his head. “But God” forms his transition to relief in the heart. Titus showed up with good news. The Corinthians evidently liked him after all! Titus “told us of your longing, your mourning, your zeal for me, so that I rejoiced still more” (2 Co. 7:7). He now fills in a detail. He had written a nasty letter to them. “I grieved you with my letter” (2Cor. 7:8). He sort of apologizes but he knows that letter, painful as it was to write and to read, led them to genuine “repentance” and “godly grief” (2Cor. 7:9).
What we should notice here is Paul’s pastoral heart, his love for the Corinthians, his desire for them to do what was right. His emotions were tethered tightly to their response to him. If they responded with Christian character, he was on top of the world. If not, he was in the pits of despair. This is not a thick-skinned man.
Paul, the Traumatized Apostle?
Now to the most revealing passage about this so-called thick-skinned man. A seminary professor-psychologist, Peter Yuichi Clark,1 puzzled as he was by the apostle Paul’s responses in both 1 and 2 Corinthians, diagnosed the apostle with PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder.
You may need to gulp, so I’ll say it another way. The Corinthians were so harsh with and hard on Paul that he was pushed into the trauma zone. Paul was a traumatized apostle, pastor, and leader.
I give this recommendation to you. Sit down with your Bible, a cup of coffee, a notebook, and a pen, and read 1 Corinthians 16, 2 Corinthians 1, and then especially chapters ten through thirteen. Jot down in your notebook the allegations Paul seems to be responding to in this letter.
7 Criticisms Against Paul by the Corinthians
I have done this and I want to mention seven criticisms the Corinthians wrote out in sticky notes and pasted them at the back of the room for all to see. As you read through the following, I suggest you ask yourself how you would respond if your own house group or close friends lodged such criticisms against you. And, while you’re at it, use your empathy skills to imagine your way into the apostle’s emotions. I think you will say he was traumatized by the Christians in Corinth. He would not be the last leader to have been deeply wounded by those to whom he was ministering.
Here we go.
1. Fickle
First, Paul was accused of being fickle. Not a good trait for a leader then or now. Imagine yourself a Corinthian, read 1 Corinthians 16 and ask yourself when Paul was going to show up. Here’s an indicator of how up in the air his plans were: “I will visit you after passing through Macedonia — for I intend to pass through Macedonia — and perhaps I will stay with you or even spend the winter, so that you may send me on my way, wherever I go. I do not want to see you now just in passing, for I hope to spend some time with you, if the Lord permits” (1Cor. 16:6–7 NRSVue).
They were waiting. No Paul.
On the first page of his next letter he informs them that “it was to spare you that I did not come again to Corinth” (2Cor 1:23). Fickle is fair.
2. Inconsistent
Second, in some settings he was like this and in other settings like that. That is, there were two Pauls. A tough-skinned guy and a thin-skinned guy. Both bold and timid. In 2 Corinthians we catch the raw edge of this when Paul reveals what they were saying about him: “His letters are weighty and strong, but his bodily presence is weak” (2Cor. 10:10).
We might ask today, “What was he like?” Someone will say, “It all depends how you catch him.” It’s not easy to relate a person like that. You have to guess how they are feeling. Guessing is not always accurate.
3. Small and Unmanly
Third, evidently Paul didn’t look the part of a leader. In that world a manly man mattered for leadership, and Paul, well, he wasn’t manly in the perspective of the Corinthians. His name “Paul” translates Paulos, which means little, tiny, short, or small.
A second century text called The Acts of Thecla and Paul describes Paul by someone who saw him: “Then he saw Paul coming, a small [mikros in Greek, which means very short] man with regard to height, bald on the head, curved in the legs [often indicative of dwarfism], healthy, monobrowed, to a little degree, an aquiline nose, full of grace.” So short was Paul that he could be let down a city wall in a basket (2Cor. 11:32–33).
If the average male was about 5’4” to 5’6” at that time (and that’s the most recent conclusion), then Paul was shorter than that. We could guess he was under five feet. Isaac Soon, who has developed this point at length, wrote that “Persons with short stature and dwarfism were stereotyped, made the object of humor and derision, and subjected to violence and processes of dehumanization.”2
Enough of this. We can see why some at least would think Paul didn’t look the part. They maybe had to build a small step on which Paul could stand to see him when he was speaking.
4. Mediocre Preacher
Fourth, the Corinthians alleged he was a mediocre talent when it came to preaching. I cut off the citation of 2 Corinthians 10:10 above about the contrast between his bold letters and his timid physical presence. Now I continue with their hot dart to the heart: “and his speech [is] contemptible.” That is, he couldn’t preach. Or, when he did, his speech didn’t flow. His skills didn’t measure up to the many public orators the Corinthians had heard in their public forums. This one had to hurt.
5. Boastful of Suffering
Fifth, Paul didn’t boast the way the Rome-loving Corinthians expected a man of talent to boast. Boasting was not bragging in our terms. A person with success behind them, measured by actions in the military, athletic competitions, political leadership, and public oratory, was expected to trot out their resume and walk their audiences through their success story.
Not Paul. He boasted about his sufferings. In fact, he went on and on about them (2 Corinthians 11:16–12:10)! For them, that was just weird.
6. Favoritism
Sixth, the Corinthians alleged that Paul played favorites when it came to churches. They were not his favorite. (I wonder why.) He brings this criticism up, too. In 2 Corinthians 11:11 he asks, “And why?” he had not taken funds from them. His answer is a jab back at their criticism: “Because I do not love you? God knows I do!” This appears as an act of desperation on the part of the Corinthians. They said Paul didn’t love them.
7. Old News
Finally, the Corinthians have moved on from Paul as their pastor-leader to others, and this deeply wounded the sensitive heart of Paul. Notice these words — and it only takes a little reading between the lines to hear the Corinthians: “And what I do I will also continue to do, in order to deny an opportunity to those who want an opportunity to be recognized as our equals in what they boast about” (2Cor. 11:12). I have italicized the words that hurt Paul: “our equals.”
The Corinthians, in short, no longer thought Paul was special to them. He was but one leader among many. Others’ talents had moved in and were more up to their expectations for a manly leader and preacher. Every pastor I know who has left a church and returned some time later as a guest, and has heard the kind of observation that suggests the new guy or gal is an improvement, has walked away wounded.
Conclusion: Paul’s Church Trauma
To draw this into a tight knot: The reputation that the apostle Paul was a thick-skinned leader who could deflect and dismiss any and all criticisms is simply untrue.
In fact, we would be better off seeing the apostle as a bit of a thin-skinned, vulnerable, sensitive, tender, and emotional apostle. His love for his churches ruled his life, and their responses to him shaped the condition of his heart. His topsy-turvy, here-a-little and there-a-little language of the final chapters of 2 Corinthians are best explained when one sees him in the trauma zone. He was a deeply wounded man.
Diving deeply into the realities of trauma — how it impacts individuals, communities, and ministries — Traumatized Church: What Paul’s Relationship with the Corinthian Church Teaches Us About Helping Those Who are Hurting pairs theological insights with counseling expertise to guide readers through the four R’s of trauma care: Realize, Recognize, Respond, and Resist.
Whether you’re a pastor, counselor, church leader, or someone who has been hurt by the church, Traumatized Church — written jointly by New Testament scholar Scot McKnight and therapist Adrienne Gibson — will help you on the road to healing and understanding.
Footnotes
- Peter Yuichi Clark, “Toward a Pastoral Reading of 2 Corinthians as a Memoir of PTSD and Healing,” in Bible Through the Lens of Trauma, ed. Elizabeth Boase and Christopher G. Frechette, Semeia 86 (SBL Press, 2016). ↩︎
- Isaac T. Soon, A Disabled Apostle: Impairment and Disability in the Letters of Paul (Oxford University Press, 2023), 195. ↩︎
Scot McKnight(PhD, Nottingham) has been a Professor of New Testament for more than four decades. He is the author of more than ninety books, including the award-winning The Jesus Creed as well as The King Jesus Gospel, A Fellowship of Differents, One.Life, The Blue Parakeet, Revelation for the Rest of Us, and Kingdom Conspiracy.
