¹⁵In this confidence I intended at first to come to you, so that you might twice receive a blessing; ¹⁶that is, to pass your way into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come to you, and by you to be helped on my journey to Judea. ¹⁷Therefore, I was not vacillating when I intended to do this, was I? Or what I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, so that with me there will be yes, yes and no, no at the same time? ¹⁸But as God is faithful, our word to you is not yes and no. ¹⁹ … but is yes in Him.

One thing Paul does not lack is confidence. Four times in this letter he asserts his self-assurance, but it is not really in himself, but his traction for life, his anchor point is God-confidence. He knows what he believes and how that relates to his everyday ministry. The Lord is his guide. In the immediate context, he is confident in the grace of God concerning his conduct and communication toward the Corinthians (2 Cor. 1:12).

This leads to Paul’s explanation of his changing travel plans, which had apparently subjected him to criticism for being fickle and therefore unreliable. To be sure, wishy-washy people cannot be trusted because of their pattern of changing their mind on a whim. I am sure Paul was aware of Jesus’ assertion, “[L]et your statement be, ‘Yes, yes’ or‘No, no’; anything beyond these is of evil” (Matt. 5:37).

In Paul’s case, he had intended to go to Corinth twice, and with good purpose, namely to bring them a blessing (see 2 Cor. 14, Acts 19:21, Rom. 16:29). His plans were to go to Corinth and then up into Macedonia and back again to Corinth, then on to Jerusalem, collecting benevolence to take back with him to the believers in Palestine (2 Cor. 8:4, 9:1, 12).

It appears Paul’s original plans were changed, and instead he went to Macedonia first, then Corinth (Acts 20:1–2) and then back to Macedonia again (just the reverse of his original plan). This seems like a small point, but we might surmise the back story: possibly the Corinthians were not willing to give Paul the benefit of the doubt, jumping to a negative conclusion that challenged Paul and his character. This may be a reasonable inference to explain Paul’s defense of his change of plans, in view of Paul’s frequent defense of himself throughout this letter.

Paul did not make his decision haphazardly, as though he were saying “yes” and “no” out of the two sides of his mouth. He is not two-faced, politically maneuvering for his best advantage over the Corinthians. No, he is faithful and his word is faithful, because he lived by the word of our faithful God. He is a man of integrity, so his change of plans had a good reason.

Lord, help me be a man of my word, yet flexible to change when You direct.