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—(3) Wisdom Through Spirit

Outline: E1.3-Wisdom Through Spirit
Passage: 1 Corinthians 2:3-16
Discussion Audio (1h27m)

The Lord of glory was crucified for our glory.

The cross of Christ continues to be the center of Paul’s message. In this next section of his first essay, Paul writes that the Spirit of God is necessary for a person to comprehend the mystery of the wisdom and power of the cross. What is this mystery of the wisdom and power of the cross?

This mystery teaching of the Spirit is that “God decreed before the ages” (2:7) “the Lord of glory” (2:8) would be crucified “for our glory” (2:7). In other words the wisdom and power of the cross is its power to transform believers into Christ’s character.

Behind the Greek word doxa (glory) is the Hebrew word kabod (weight). In Middle Eastern culture, a "weighty" person (rajul thagil) has to do with wisdom, balance, stability, reliability, sound judgment, patience, impartiality, nobility and the like.^[1]

It is this teaching that Paul believes he was called to preach. It is the only teaching that can unite peoples of different ethnicity, culture, socio-economic backgrounds, and religions. It is a teaching that requires both Reason (Logos) and Spirit (Pneuma) to comprehend fully.

Logic and reasoning are not enough. There is a component in the gift of grace that equips the believer to understand the things of God. Paul moves in a world that cannot be reconciled to the worldview of the Enlightenment.^[2]

---

^[1] Bailey, Paul Through Mediterranean Eyes, location 1227

^[2] Bailey, loc. 1323

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