Why did Paul say he ought to have been commended by the Corinthians?
Paul expected commendation because he, not Peter or Apollos, had brought the Corinthians out of pagan darkness, and he was in no way behind the chiefest apostles. They had compelled him to defend his apostolic authority, yet in humility he still acknowledged that he himself was nothing.
Les explains that at chapter 12, verse 11, Paul is still defending his apostleship and showing his authority as the apostle of the Gentiles. The Corinthians had put him down, comparing him to Peter, Apollos, or even the words of Jesus, and by doing so they compelled him to glory as a fool. He should have been commended by them because he was the one who brought them out of pagan darkness, not Peter and not Apollos. Paul says he was not behind the very chiefest apostles, though in his own humility he says he was nothing. Les points out that Paul's authority had become uppermost, while the Twelve were now behind him, because God had turned from Israel to the whole human race. This was part of the revelation of the mystery, the secret hidden in God but now revealed through Paul. Les also notes that Paul was up against himself, as all in Asia turned against him.
I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing.
More Questions
What did Paul mean by "you have compelled me" in 2 Corinthians 12:11?
When Paul says "I am become a fool in glorying, you have compelled me," he means the Corinthians were putting him down by saying Peter had more authority, that Peter was the big wheel in Jerusalem, that they go by what Jesus said rather than any man, and some even appealed to Apollos.
What credentials did Paul lack that the Corinthians used against him?
Paul lacked the credentials the Corinthians wanted: he had no authority, no letters of commendation, and could not say he had ministered with Christ for three years as Peter could.