Essay 2—Men and Women in the Human Family—(1b) Three Roadblocks

Outline: 009-E2.1b-Three Roadblocks
Passage: 1 Corinthians 5:6b-6:8
Discussion Audio (1h25m)

The effectiveness of a Christian community’s mission is
directly affected by the quality of its relationships with those outside her.

Paul addresses three objections or excuses that the Corinthian Christians might raise toward his instructions to them.

The first excuse Paul anticipates is that the problems are a “small matter.” As far as Paul is concerned, there no problem is “small.” Just as leaven will eventually permeate an entire dough, a “small” problem will infect the entire community. The community must come together and do what it needs to do in order to remove itself of any “leaven.” The major issue is not any specific examples of problems, but rather, the result of allowing problems to spread: divisions and strife. A divided church community is powerless to perform its mission. A bickering church hold no appeal to those outside her. Paul must direct the church to come together and take action as a united community.

The second excuse Paul anticipates is that some among the community have wrong ideas about community and what freedom in Christ means. These seem to have an over-realized eschatology where they are already experiencing the full effects of salvation; i.e., the community of the saved is fully realized so they have no need to associate with those outside, and even more, there is danger with such associations; and, because salvation is fully realized, they can do whatever pleases them. The specific issue of immorality triggers Paul’s argument, but his main issue is with their misunderstandings around their responsibility to those within and without the community of faith. Their over-realized eschatology is compromising the church’s mission, and he must correct it.

The third excuse Paul anticipates is their lack of responsibility. There appears to have been a small, but powerful, faction within the Corinthian church. The other, larger group were unable or unwilling to directly confront the arrogant, powerful, and wealthy faction. Instead this larger group’s recourse (or at least some of them) was to take the problem to outside judges. The issue here isn’t about airing the community’s dirty laundry in public (most likely the public already knew quite well what was going on). The issue rather is that by doing so, the church community is admitting she is incapable of functioning as a responsible member of society. (Groups were expected to resolve problems amongst themselves.) The church would be shamed; she would lose honor. Not only that, but if the powerful group asserted that because freedom in Christ meant no responsibility to conform to societal norms and expectations, it would present the church as a direct threat to Roman rule. A church community that fails to perform as a good member of society has no power to perform her mission. Paul must remind her of her societal responsibilities.

The issue of a man’s sexual immorality in 5:1 triggers Paul’s three concerns in 5:6b-6:8. But immorality is not Paul’s primary concern. Paul’s primary interest is the church and her mission. Paul’s primary concern is that arrogance has given birth to a number of symptoms that are weakening and defeating the church and compromising her mission. Paul writes to bring attention to these issues and provide corrective guidance.

When this passage is read improperly (e.g., out of context, ignoring cultural norms, ignoring surrounding context), it gives rise to a number of misguided and harmful applications. First, churches can overly focus on sexual behaviors that are deemed “sin” when that was not Paul’s primary concern. Secondly, churches often miss the portion where Paul writes they are not arbiters of morality of those outside the church. Thirdly, the instruction to not bring matters to courts is misconstrued by churches and religious organizations and used as justification to cover-up misdeeds and criminal activity by members, volunteers, and employees, in the name of “protecting the organization’s reputation.” Doing any of these things goes directly against what Paul was trying to instruct in this very passage.

A community’s integrity in relationships within and without matter. They are the currency with which she gains a hearing among those not a part of her. Paul’s interest was to maintain the believing community’s honor so that her effectiveness for mission would not be compromised.

Essay 1—Cross and Unity—(4) Unity Revisited, Part 2

Outline: E1.4-Unity Revisited-2
Passage: 1 Corinthians 3:18-4:16
Discussion Audio (1h54m)

Christianity is not about who “I follow” but who “We imitate”

This session discusses the closing of Paul’s first essay in his First Epistle to the Corinthians. Paul continues to focus on the cross of Christ event and applies its meaning as the solution to the problem of divisions.

At least some of the Corinthians had broken into factions, each looking to a different leader and placing him on a pedestal as above all the others. They thought they were doing the leaders a favor, but Paul writes that what in fact they are doing is attempting to elevate their own positions, using the leaders as weapons against one another. Paul denounces this anti-Christian behavior. Paul writes that ethical behavior must take priority over knowledge or doctrinal purity. When the question is on who is teaching a more pure gospel, it is not for him or anyone else to judge, but judgment is to be left to Christ. All who are faithful to their calling from Christ are building the temple of Christ. All who promote harmony in the community of believers are doing the work of building up. Any who foster strife, quarreling, and division are destroying the temple.

Paul writes that all teachers have something to contribute to the church. By claiming only one is worthy, or one is more worthy than others, Paul writes that the Corinthians are in fact rejecting God’s gifts.

The Corinthian error is an easy one to repeat… Our slogans take the form of "I am of the Presbyterians," or "of the Pentecostals," or "of the Roman Catholics." Or they might take ideological forms: "I am of the liberals," or "of the evangelicals," or "of the fundamentalists." And these are also used as weapons: "Oh, he's a fundamentalist, you know." Which means that we no longer need to listen to him, since his ideology has determined his overall value as a spokesman for God. It is hardly possible in a day like ours that one will not have denominational, theological, or ideological preferences. The difficulty lies in allowing that it might really be true that "all things are ours," including those whom we think God would do better to be without. But God is full of surprises; and he may choose to minister to us from the "strangest" of sources, if we were but more truly "in Christ" and therefore free in him to learn and to love.^[1]

Paul writes that Christians are responsible to serve one another, but they are only accountable to God. The measure of evaluation is not what results have been achieved, but have they been faithful to God’s assignment. Paul’s employer is God, not the Corinthians. He serves the Corinthians, but he will not be dictated or influenced by their evaluations and criticisms.

In the concluding remarks on this first essay, Paul engages in strong irony and sarcasm to gain the Corinthian Christians’ attention. He repeats back to them statements they have made about themselves and infuses them with sarcastic irony. He then contrasts himself and his colleagues against what the Corinthians are saying about themselves.

Paul and the apostles live the way of the cross. The Corinthians (at least some of them) thought Paul’s way was weak and foolish. Paul cites scripture to show that his way is true and their way is false.

Paul describes his way as that of non-retaliation. He does not respond to violence and abuse in kind.

[Paul] knew what physical deprivation meant… His reward was often insult, persecution and slander; but Paul responded according to the irenic admonition of Jesus. The end result of all this was that the dirt scoured from the world was poured upon him and his apostolic co-laborers. They then acted as cleansing agents, taking to themselves hate, malice, and bitterness; and by absorbing this without violent or vengeful response, they took away those evils. Thus in a particular way they were carrying on the work of Christ.^[2]

Paul’s final appeal is “imitate me.” He does not say “follow me” or “follow my teachings” or to follow anyone else’s teachings. It is “imitate me.” Christian discipleship is not all about gaining more knowledge, more book learning, more lectures, more sermons, but it is more about imitating Christians in our midst who have developed the character and display the glory of Christ.

What becomes transparent in this final appeal is that for Paul right thinking simply is not enough. The gospel must result in appropriate behavior as well.^[3]

---

^[1] New International Commentary on the New Testament, The First Epistle; entry on 1 Cor. 3:23.
^[2] Orr/Walther, 1 Corinthians; quoted in Bailey, loc. 1748
^[3] NICNT, 1 Cor. 4:14-21

Essay 1—Cross and Unity—(4) Unity Revisited, Part 1

Outline: E1.4-Unity Revisited-1
Passage: 1 Corinthians 3:1-17
Discussion Audio (1h33m)

You – the church community – are the restoration of the Land and the Temple
promised to Israel by the prophets of old.

[Paul] was not de-Zioning the tradition; rather he was transforming it into a new form of Zionism that needed no particular geography and no special building.^[1]

In this section of the letter, Paul crafts his argument around a radical thought: the Third Temple of Old Testament prophecies is fulfilled in the community of the faithful, the believers of Jesus Christ. The Second Temple in Jerusalem was still operating, going through its rituals and traditions. For Paul, however, the presence of God was no longer found in a physical temple located on a physical plot of land, but in the spiritual Temple of spiritual Israel. (No wonder many Jews in Jerusalem were upset with Paul and his teachings – see Acts.)

As children of the Enlightenment we have largely come to see the acquiring of truth as a head trip, and that a good mind and a willingness to work hard is all that is required to understand any form of truth, including theological truth. Paul disagrees.^[2]

In the first part of the section under discussion, Paul returns to the problem of division and the Corinthian claims that they were “following” one named leader or another. As a result of their claims the church was undergoing division and strife, as each faction claimed they were better than the others.

Paul would have none of that. The truths of Christianity are not found through teachings alone. Dedication to teachings is not enough. Placing teachers on pedestals, holding up their teachings, and making the claim to follow them are not enough.

Paul sees ethical actions (orthopraxy), not intellectual orthodoxy, as the primary evidence of a genuine Christian life. By their quarreling and strife, the Corinthians demonstrate that they are not spiritual, in contrast to the claims they have made about themselves.

As Paul works through the closing arguments in this first essay, he introduces motifs that he will repeat in subsequent essays, and which he will bring to a climax in the Ode to Love in chapter 13.

Paul uses two parables—the parable of the farmer and field, and the parable of the builders and building—to illustrate the importance God places upon the community of believers, the Church. Paul declares that this new land and temple, placed on the foundation of Jesus Christ and being built up by his servants, is the eternal temple. God will protect this temple. Nothing will be allowed to destroy it. Anyone who works against it will be destroyed. Salvation is found, not by an individual devotion to God, but by choosing to enter into a relationship with God by becoming a part of his faithful community. (This thought is foreign to modern Western people where a “personal relationship with Jesus” is so often held as the key to salvation; but the concept of salvation through belonging to a community would have been perfectly normal and expected in Hebrew thought.)

The security of God's people is found not so much in their individuality ("if anyone destroys") as in their membership in the corporate people of God ("you are that temple"). God formed and God guards God's temple from destruction.^[3]

---

^[1] Bailey, loc. 1447
^[2] Bailey, loc. 1378
^[3] Understanding the Bible Commentary: 1 Corinthians, entry for 3:17

Essay 1—Cross and Unity—(2) Wisdom of the Cross—Part 2

Outline: E1.2-Wisdom of the Cross (2)
Passage: 1 Corinthians 1:17-2:2
Discussion Audio (1h17m)

Isaiah, Pericles, Paul…

I was not rebellious; I turned not backward. I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pull out the beard; I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting.[1]

We examine 1 Corinthians 1:17-2:2 once more; this time from the perspective of a Jewish audience and a Greek audience. We examine how Paul carefully utilizes rhetorical patterns from each audience and skillfully combines them into a single hymn of the cross. By literally (literally!) combining Hebrew and Greek thought, Paul illustrates how the church ought to be a community where diversity can come together in unity. Ethnic differences remain and are appreciated, but all are united around the cross of Christ.

… You must yourselves realize the power of Athens, and feed your eyes upon her from day to day, till love of her fills your hearts; and then, when all her greatness shall break upon you, you must reflect that it was by courage, sense of duty, and a keen feeling of honour in action that men were enabled to win all this… [2]

God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.” [3]

Here are summary points (duplicated from the study outline):

1. The cross is the center of Paul’s Christian theology. Not Jesus’ teachings or his ethics, but the cross. Jesus’ teachings and ethics are an outflow of the power demonstrated by the cross event.
2. Paul responds to Jewish objections to the cross of Christ by appealing to Isaiah’s servant song: it is not a stumbling block; it is the greatest sign that could be given.
3. Paul responds to Greek objections to the cross of Christ by structuring his words around an epitphios [funeral oratory] delivered by Pericles: it is wisdom, not foolishness, to those who believe.
4. Paul affirms the use of well-crafted rhetoric and eloquence to deliver the gospel.
5. Paul disavows that any human words or wisdom can add to the power of the cross.
6. Paul warns against removing the cross from gospel proclamation, as that will remove the source of gospel power.
7. Paul affirms that ethnic differences can (should) remain and be appreciated and celebrated, but that differences need not be cause for division.
8. God sends, Paul came. God calls, and people believe. God is the agent of initiation. Human responsibility is to respond appropriately.

---

^[1] Isaiah 50:5b-6 (ESV)

^[2] Thucydides (c.460/455-c.399 BCE): Pericles' Funeral Oration from the Peloponnesian War (Book 2.34-46) at http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/pericles-funeralspeech.asp 

^[3] 1 Corinthians 1:27-31 (ESV)

Essay 1—Cross and Unity—(2) Wisdom of the Cross–Part 1

Outline: E1.2-Wisdom of the Cross (1)
Passage: 1 Corinthians 1:17-2:2
Discussion Audio (1h30m)

Is Paul in favor of anti-intellectualism?  

And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.[1]

This section of 1 Corinthians is sometimes used by Christians to discourage (in particular) exposure to secular knowledge, including but not limited to: literature, arts, philosophies, and sciences. It is sometimes used as a proof-text to promote the idea that any apparent conflict between biblical knowledge (whatever that really means) and “secular” knowledge must always be resolved in favor of the apparent biblical view (again, whatever that means). It is a bedrock and foundation for Christians who hold to anti-intellectualism of whatever degree.

We must ask ourselves, not, “What did Paul write?” but rather, “What does Paul mean?” (And I will concede here that this is already a Catch-22 for those who reject any kind of interpretive flexibility in regards to scripture.)

As we analyze this portion of 1 Corinthians this session and in the next, we will observe that Paul uses very polished and powerful rhetoric that includes forms and reasoning that come from both Jewish and Greek traditions. He weaves the patterns artfully and skillfully into his material so as to appeal to as broad an audience as he can.

For rhetoricians of his time, polished rhetoric may have been the end – for entertainment, for acclaim, and for making some money. For Paul, rhetoric is just the means, not the end, of the gospel. But Paul does not want poor or bad rhetoric to get in the way of the gospel, either. Paul does his best, in writing and in speech, to put the cross of Christ in the best light possible. But the cross is inherently foolish, weak, and a stumbling block. That’s what he means when he writes, “I didn’t come to you proclaiming the gospel with lofty speech or wisdom.”

Paul is not writing against good and excellent practice of reason, knowledge, and intellect. Paul is writing against minimizing or eliminating the cross of Christ, because of embarrassment or shame or appearing weak, in the proclamation of the gospel. The true gospel will always appear “weak” and “foolish” when compared to the world’s standards and expectations of power.

The Roman could boast of the power of empire. The Greek could boast of the greatness of Greek civilization. The Jew could boast in the covenant, the patriarchs, the law and much more… But for Paul the power and the wisdom of the cross made all such boasting meaningless… [Paul affirms] that earthly power is not a mirror image of the power of God. Granted, righteously executed earthly power was not for Paul inherently evil… The problem emerges when individuals, communities and nations begin subtly to see their power as an extension of the power of God. Then “boasting” emerges, and as that happens, disaster ensues.[2]

---

^[1] 1 Cor. 2:1-2, ESV
^[2] Bailey, loc. 824

Essay 1–Cross and Unity–(1) The Problem

Outline: E1.1-Problem
Passage: 1 Corinthians 1:10-16
Discussion Audio (1h11m)

[Paul’s] point is that any division is wrong, even one based on the claim to be of Christ alone and so rejecting Paulinists and followers of Apollos. (IVP Bible Background Commentary; 1 Cor. 1:12)

What defines Christian community? What is the appropriate focus for Christians?

Paul begins to address the first major issue in which the Corinthian church is embroiled – factional splits. These are not just mere disagreements but, based on Paul’s language, he equates them to all-out war that is tearing the church apart.

Paul appeals to the Corinthians to reconcile in the strongest terms possible. He appeals, not on the basis of leadership – not even Christ’s – but upon the cross of Christ and their initial entry into fellowship through the symbolic act of baptism.

Paul appeals to the Corinthians to “speak the same thing” (literal translation of phrase more commonly translated “agree with one another”, 1:10). It is clear that they are not speaking the same thing. Each faction is saying they follow a different leader. Paul implies that even “I follow Christ” is not appropriate as the primary basis for community.

So what should the Corinthians be saying? What should we be saying? Paul does not yet provide an answer.

1. Summary Points^[1]
   1. Ethnic divisions are unacceptable. Loyalty must not center on human leadership.
   2. No group has the right to claim they alone are loyal to Christ.
   3. “Our Lord Jesus Christ” is the only rightful center and source of unity.
   4. The cross and baptism form the central pillars of the believing community.
   5. Christianity is not about me; it’s about us.

The question is not “Who is my leader?” but rather, “Who died for us?” (Kenneth E. Bailey; location 736)

---

^[1] Bailey, loc. 731