Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 147 (519)

 "Suffering fools is unavoidable," said Ray Ipsow, "but don't ask me to be 'glad' about it."

* * * * * * * * * *

Nobody who is actually suffering fools chooses to be glad about it. But Paul makes the rhetorical argument that the Corinthians must suffer fools gladly, having listened to other anti-Christian arguments and seemingly taken them to heart. So Paul is all, "Look. You obviously have a history of listening to idiots. So what's the harm in listening to me, a self-proclaimed idiot?!" In doing so, he's not suggesting everybody in the world suffer fools gladly. He's suggesting the opposite! He's all, "Stop listening to fools, you idiots! Listen to me and Christ and the church!" Sure, he keeps saying in parenthetical references, "I'm a fool too!" But he doesn't mean it! It's just his way of worming himself through the Corinthians' front door so he can preach the gospel directly into their faces. To suffer fools gladly is to listen to terrible, self-serving, idiotic arguments that in no way improve your life (or the lives of others) through debate. Debate isn't a goal in and of itself! It's a tool and sometimes it's not the right tool. So when some asshat like Charlie Kirk or Ben Shapiro spouts a volcano of belligerent nonsense about somebody refusing to debate them, realize that they're basically screaming, "This person wants to drill a hole but they won't accept my hammer to do it!"

Suffer fools gladly? No thank you, sir. Even Paul, who said it, didn't actually mean it!

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 146 (518)

 He had a careful look around the table, estimating the level of Scriptural awareness.

* * * * * * * * * *

Have I mentioned my high school friend Soy Rakelson on this blog yet? Because this is the kind of thing he would have done during a late night game of Warhammer, especially if he were the Game Master. He'd drop a Biblical reference and then nod his head (maybe while rubbing his chin) as he panned around the heathen group at the table, waiting to see if anybody would pick up on it. Then if somebody did reply in a way that showed they understood the reference, he'd say, "Very good, X" where "X" was that person's last name. If it wasn't Roy . . . I'm sorry, I meant Soy! . . . who made the Biblical reference but one of the other ungodly people at the table, he'd be absolutely flabbergasted that they would know anything at all about The Bible. Even though he knew we were all English and Literature majors and what good is an English Lit major without an abundant knowledge of scripture?! You're going to miss 90% of all the references and thematic elements of the text!

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 144-145 (516-517)

 "The Professor's afraid you're going to chase me off with radical talk like that. But I am not that sensitive a soul, I am guided, as ever, by Second Corinthians."

* * * * * * * * * *

"radical talk"
In other words, honestly and truthfully giving a conservative well-deserved criticism.

"Second Corinthians"
I'm fairly certain I know which part of Second Corinthians Scarsdale is referencing but let's talk about some of the other aspects of it first.
    First off, what is Second Corinthians? It's a letter to the Corinthians from the Apostle Paul saying, "Look. I think you guys should believe in God. It's just that, you know, Christ died for your sins and, well, I think you're obligated to believe in God because of that. Also, you're miserable, right? So miserable! But if you believe in God, you'll feel glorious! Because you'll be saved from death or something. Because death is eternal and life is not and you don't want to be dead for eternity, do you?! So just believe in God and you'll live forever! And all you have to do is believe everything I tell you to believe and also tell everybody you ever meet to believe me too. I mean to believe Christ. Thank you! I love you, Corinth! You're not as scared and weak as you think! I mean, you are but you won't be if you just ally with Christ and by Christ I mean this new church I'm working on!"
    I'm no theologian so you might want to take all that with a grain of Lot's wife.
    I love how people often remark on a certain book of The Bible as if they base their life's philosophy on it and then it turns out they're a rich American magnate who forgot part of that book says, "Receive us; we have wronged no man, we have corrupted no man, we have defrauded no man." I suppose, like everybody who bases their life on The Bible, they never mean the parts that disagree with their lifestyle. In fact, they're usually so deluded they think they agree with the parts that actually condemn them.
    Paul's line after that piece I just quoted is "I speak not this to condemn you." It's like an editor was reading through his letter and was all, "Hey. This part here. You're saying you are this which suggests maybe they aren't that? Maybe clarify that a bit before you send it?" And Paul was all, "Oh, yeah, um, 'Hey, man! I didn't mean nothing by that. Remember how I said you're in my heart and all? I love you, man, for all your faults and everything which are totally apparent. God loves people with faults and problems! How else am I supposed to convince them their lives have become unmanageable?!"
    Did you know Paul was the first person to say "Sorry not sorry"? 2 Corinthians 7:8: "For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, though I did repent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry, though it were but for a season." So Paul is all, "Sorry I made you so mad with that first letter. But I'm also not sorry because you needed to be mad for a bit to understand this next letter?"
    I'm also fairly certain Scarsdale isn't saying he's guided by 2 Corinthians 8:14 which states, "But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality" because that's Goddamned socialism.
    Maybe I should just get to the part that Scarsdale is obviously referring to since it bolsters his stance of being sensitive to Ray's radical talk. Let's begin again!

"Second Corinthians"
Scarsdale says he lets Second Corinthians be his guide but he doesn't specify which section. That can be taken a lot of ways! But being that Scarsdale Vibe is a cartoon villain who believes that however he lives his life is the proper way to live, justifying it by any means necessary, he is almost certainly speaking of 2 Corinthians 11:19: "For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise." Like just about every person ever, Scarsdale forgoes context for a line he can manipulate to his liking. Of course I can't be sure this is the part of 2 Corinthians he uses as a guide! But then if he uses the entire thing as a guide, it's simply a letter to a bunch of heathens trying to goad them into believing in Christ and letting his church gain a foothold in their country so the church can get richer. For the sake of the ministry, of course! Paul says as much when he's all, "I know I said that thing about sharing your abundance but don't judge our financial abundance because we need it to administer and portion out our spiritual abundance to all of you spiritually lacking half-wits!"
    Scarsdale obviously means to say that he takes no offense from foolish arguments against his lifestyle because Scarsdale is wise enough to know better. But the ironic part of Scarsdale being guided by 2 Corinthians is that Paul makes a grandly sarcastic argument against boasting and the confidence of the wise. He also seems to suggest that earthly abundance should be shared in the same way that spiritual abundance should be. Unless that's just my socialist take and what Paul is really saying is, "Don't worry about being rich. It doesn't matter either way. Rich, poor . . . who cares?! As long as you plant spiritual seeds so that you can reap loads and loads of spiritual fruit! But remember to share that fruit because we need more fruit seeds all over the world so that everybody and their heathen dog can partake of the sweet, sweet flavor of it!"

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 143 (515)

 Vibe chuckled soothingly.

* * * * * * * * * *

As opposed to "laugh maniacally" which is probably his usual modus operandi.

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 142 (514)

 "Now, Ray," admonished the Professor, "we're here to discuss electromagnetism, not politics."

* * * * * * * * * *

"electromagnetism"
Oh no! The Professor has built Scarsdale a villainous electromagnetic super weapon, hasn't he?!

"not politics"
It's amazing how easily people are let off the hook for believing harmful and unethical things in the name of "talking politics." It's not like politics are some kind of hypothetical fantasy that has nothing to do with reality and therefore is simply a chance for people who disagree about this nonsense fantasy to get angry at each other. Your political beliefs expose who you really are and how you really feel about other people. Of course some guy who thinks poor people should choose between starvation wages and starving faster might be considered the nicest guy in the world among his rich friends. If you all believe the same "politics," you don't think of your views as "political." But as soon as somebody disagrees with you because they think your political views are harmful, you decide maybe talking politics is the problem.

    No. The problem is you. You and all your friends. People who don't want to talk politics, or who want all of their entertainment to be politics free, have terrible politics. If you're not ashamed of your politics, you speak freely of them with whomever you meet. You mention them to strangers. But if your politics are hurtful and disgusting, you become annoyed with people's freedom to criticize you when you mention them and so maybe you stop mentioning them in public. Then you get angry because you feel like you're being silenced but what you're really doing is choosing to self-censor because you have no capacity for self-reflection. Instead of being angry that people have criticized your beliefs, perhaps question why your beliefs are constantly criticized.
    Oh wait. They do ask that question. The problem is they never look inside themselves for the answer. They simply decide that everybody else is too sensitive and brainwashed by propaganda. Probably because they don't understand any belief that might ask you to sacrifice a little something for the greater good.

Chapter 1: Section 4: Page 32: Line 141 (513)

 Foley paused in his whittling and looked over as if in suddenly piqued interest.

* * * * * * * * * *

"piqued interest"
In other words, Foley Walker is hoping there's going to be violence.