A ridiculous message
# In his book, The Cross of Christ, John Stott makes this statement: "The Christians' choice of a cross as the symbol of their faith is the more surprising when we remember the horror with which crucifixion was regarded in the ancient world" (p.23).
# This cruelest form of execution deliberately delayed death to inflict the maximum torture. The helpless victim could suffer for days before dying. The Romans reserved it for criminals convicted of murder, rebellion or armed robbery - provided that they were also slaves, foreigners or other non-persons. Except in extreme cases of treason, Roman citizens were exempt from crucifixtion.
# The Jews made no distinction between a tree and a cross - and so between a hanging and a crucifixtion. They out of hand applied to crucified criminals the terrible statement of Dt 21:23 that "anyone who is hung on a tree is under God's curse". It is therefore not difficult to understand why the Jews could not bring themselves to believe that God's Messiah would die such a death.
# To the world of the first centuries therefore the Christians worshipped a god who was dead, who was a condemned criminal and who had died under God's curse. As Stott says: "This combination of death, crime and shame put him beyond the pale of respect, let alone of worship" (p.23). Surely, one cannot think of a more insurmountable obstacle to the spread of the gospel than this deep-seated perception. Whether Jewish or Roman, the enemies of Christianity lost no opportunity to ridicule the claim that God's anointed and man's Saviour ended his life on a cross. The idea was crazy.
An unacceptable method
# Corinth was a large Greek city - sophisticated, but at the same time terribly decadent. And, being Greek, it had a high premium on intelligent debate, watertight logic and acute eloquence. They were much more interested in discussion than in truth; in skilful presentation than in reality.
# Don Carson, in his book The Cross and Christian Ministry, writes: "It has been persuasively argued that Paul is alluding to the sophists of his day. Many intellectual movements greatly prized rhetoric. Philosophers were as widely praised for their oratory as for their content. But the sophists brought these ideals to new heights.... They enjoyed such widespread influence in the Mediterranean world, not least in Corinth, that public speakers who either could not meet their standards, or for any reason chose not to, were viewed as seriously inferior (p.33-34).
# One can therefore hardly believe your eyes when you read that Paul, before coming to Corinth, had intentionally decided that he would "not come with eloquence or superior wisdom" (1), nor "with wise and persuasive words" (4).
From the world's point of view the apostle's decision seems foolish to the extreme. Surely, here we have something worth exploring.
Paul's resolve
# Why did Paul not demonstrate his considerable learning and oratory abilities? Why this apparent foolish two-fold resolve concerning content and delivery? Did he not realize that he would only impress the Corinthians if he could beat them on their own turf – if his wisdom and eloquence would prove to be stronger medicine than their own? Did he not understand that the content of his preaching would be ridiculed? Was he not aware that it was necessary to fire on all rhetorical cylinders if you wanted to get anywhere – especially in Corinth?
If it was a case of not having what it takes, one can possibly understand Paul's approach. But surely, with regard to his message, his wisdom could match any philosopher's insights. And when it came to the method of delivery, his competence was such that in Lystra he had even been called "Hermes", the Greek god of communication (Acts 14:12). And in Thessalonica he had "reasoned" with the Jews, "explaining" and "proving" that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead (Acts 17:2-3).
And yet, and yet, he had made up his mind not to preach a message that would thrill the unbelievers, nor to depend on grand rhetorical techniques.
# The word translated "resolved" (2) emphasizes a deliberate act of the will, and furthermore that Paul had come to his decision before arriving in Corinth. He had decided not to
"know" - not to exhibit any knowledge (Gr.) - in their midst, except his knowledge of Jesus Christ, and specifically his understanding of Christ as the crucified one. Clearly, the apostle was adamant not to ride the Corinthian bandwagon. Why? Why?
Paul's reasons
It would seem that the apostle had at least five reasons for his decision - all five of vital importance to us.
1. Paul knew that he had a very narrow mandate: his only task was to preach the gospel of God's grace in Christ, nothing more.
In 1 Corinthians 1:17 he says: "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel - not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power." In no way Paul wanted to draw attention to himself - he did not want to preen his own feathers. Throughout the book of Acts and the apostolic letters it is overwhelmingly clear that his one and only passion in life was to glorify Christ. This is of course true of all the apostles, but of no one more so than Paul. The one response he desired from his listeners was, "What a great Saviour!"; never, "What a great preacher!"
2. If there was one thing the apostle feared, it was insulting and quenching the Spirit by trusting the arm of flesh.
Paul depended on God through His Holy Spirit to powerfully bring the Corinthians to faith (4b; 5b). But he knew two things: firstly that the Spirit had come to glorify Christ (Jh 16:14-15); and secondly that the Spirit will never allow Himself to be drawn into elevating man - not even Christ's beloved apostles. Paul was therefore acutely aware that he had to stay within the bounds of his mandate, because he would quench the Spirit if he stepped outside. And without the unction of the Spirit his mission - his whole life-task - would be an exercise in futility.
3. Paul knew that his task was to proclaim the sovereign God's command that all people everywhere repent and bow their knees before Him (Acts 17:30).
In verse 1 the words, "the testimony about God", can also be translated, "the testimony from God". Whilst the gospel is the revelation of God's wonderful salvation in Christ, it is also an urgent and serious proclamation - and a divine command to repent - coming from God.
The gospel is therefore not something to be discussed, debated or judged. It is the message that all men are under the judgement of God, and that it would culminate in eternal damnation unless they humble themselves before Him. God is never hard up for our acceptance, He never negotiates, He never compromises. He proclaims, He promulgates, He confronts.
Paul knew that by playing eloquent Corinthian games, he would be pandering to his pagan listener's pride and arrogance. They would see the gospel as something which could be weighed and disposed of at will - and as just another alternative to all their religious theories.
4. The last thing Paul wanted to do, was to lure people into accepting Christ for unacceptable reasons.
Paul knew that not every conversion is real. He understood that the seed of the gospel easily falls in rocky places or among thorns. And he was painfully aware of the God-dishonouring damage false conversions cause. So he wanted to avoid persuasion that is manipulative, to steer clear of preaching that moves people by its eloquence without faithfully presenting the gospel. He firmly believed that conversion had to be brought about by the truth and power of the gospel; not by glamourous oratory or emotional stories.
5. Paul left no stone unturned to make sure that each and everyone of his listeners understood that there is but one mediator between God and men – Jesus Christ and him crucified.
Preaching which is not consistently Christ-centred can easily create the impression that mere religiosity leads to salvation. Even when preaching focusses on Christ, but is delivered in a way which is inconsistent with the content, it causes all sorts of twisted ideas in listeners.
No, we must never grow tired of emphasising that true Christianity is not being religious; it is not even in the final instance a way of living - it is being united to Christ through a true and living faith. And although true faith allways shows, its deepest mark of authenticity is hanging onto Christ the crucified like a drowning man. A true Christian is not in the first instance being known by his morality, but by his deep, deep conviction that he never dares to appear before the thrice-holy God without a perfect Mediator.
Preachers must never presume that their flocks have sola gratia, solus Christus and sola fide written on the tablets of their hearts - they must preach it, again and again. Why? Because the true gospel goes against the grain of everything in fallen man. In a sense it is the exact opposite of religiosity, churchianity and moralism. Let us never forget the remarkably pious Cornelius who was only saved after the grace alone, Christ alone, faith alone gospel took root in his heart. Before that he was heading for hell - with all his devotion, fear of God, generosity and regular prayers (Acts 10:2; 11:14)!
Paul wanted to make sure that nobody misunderstood him. He had one message only: Christ and him crucified - and nothing else! There is but one Saviour! There is but one salvation!
A few qualifying remarks
Let us not stretch the apostle's statements too far.
1. We are not to understand Paul as telling us that he could not care about the cultural orientation of his listeners.
If in the book of Acts you compare his addresses to Jews and gentiles, you find quite a difference in approach. He explicitly tells us that, in order to win as many as possible, he became like a Jew to the Jews, and like a gentile to the gentiles (1Kor 9:19-23). In fact, one suspects that his cultural adaptation would have shocked many of us.
What he is saying in our text, is that he would never compromise his main calling - to preach Christ and Him alone as the crucified - in order to gratify people's cultural whims and hobbys. He would bend backwards not to cause his listeners to stumble, but never would he allow their cultural fads and fancies to dictate the content of his message or the style of his delivery.
2. We are not to understand Paul as telling us that he preached a simplistic message.
It was Luther who said to Erasmus: "There is more involved in preaching Christ crucified than going up and down saying simply, Christ was crucified!" Surely at Corinth, as everywhere else, Paul would have expounded the whole counsel of God. But he would have done it in such a way that the cross was always his centre of reference. He would never have allowed himself, or those to whom he was speaking, to get out of sight of the hill called Calvary.
So, whatever we preach, must always, in some way or another, be tied to the cross - whether it be Old Testament or New Testament, indicative or imperative, ethics, ecclesiology or eschatology. We must always be gospel-centred, cross-centred, Christ-centred.
3. We are not to understand Paul as telling us that the manner of our presentation is unimportant.
Every man with red-hot words from a heart on fire streaming over his lips, will appear to be fighting with bees. What is more, we should continually ask ourselves whether we communicate in a way which penetrates our hearers' minds and hearts. But cleverness, wit, flattery, amusement, smooth showmanship and entertainment is something completely different. No, our presentation must always be an expression of the solemnity of our message.
In conclusion
# The first question to ask in our missionary, evangelistic and pastoral work - and especially in our preaching - is not about methods, programs or institutions, but about the message. And the message is a Person. And the Person is Christ - the One who was crucified 2000 years ago for the sin of the world.
# Let us never forget that a Christ- and cross-centred ministry can depend on God's promises.
Paul's remark that he had preached "in weakness and fear, and with much trembling", tells us that he did not find it easy to keep to his resolve. It made him feel and look foolish.
We know that when he first came to Corinth he was at the point of throwing in the towel. But "one night the Lord spoke to Paul in a vision: Do not be afraid; keep on speaking, do not be silent. For I am with you, and no one is going to attack and harm you, because I have many people in this city. So Paul stayed for a year and a half, teaching them the word of God" (Acts 18:9-11).
And the result? The church at Corinth!
# Let us remember that our weaknesses, fears and inadequacies do not disqualify us for ministry. When I am at the end of my tether, that is often the moment God most greatly displays His power. As long as people are impressed by our powerful personalities and impressive gifts, there is very little room for us to impress them with a crucified Saviour.
Later Paul would write these telling words to the Corinthians: "Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me (his thorn in the flesh). But he said to me, My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness. Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me. That is why, for Christ's sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong" (2Cor 12:8-10).
# O, let us stay with the Paul of 1Cor 2:1-5!
Nico van der Walt
No comments:
Post a Comment