The Wisdom of God and Factionalism: 1 Corinthians 1-4

John B. Polhill

The first four chapters of 1 Corinthians form an appropriate introduction to the letter. The problems of factionalism treated in them are at the center of the congregational difficulties which surface in the rest of the epistle. Factions, however, usually form around ideas. They have their pet watchwords and slogans. This explains why in the first four chapters Paul interweaves a discussion of wisdom with his treatment of the Corinthian factions. The problem of congregational divisions which center around various leaders is introduced in 1:10-17. It is seemingly interrupted by a contrast between human and divine wisdom in 1:18-2:16. Then Paul turns to the subject of the manner in which the Corinthians should regard their leaders (chap. 3) and rounds off the section with some biting irony which castigates the seeming wisdom of the Corinthian factions (chap. 4). The key to Paul's interplay between these twin themes of faction and wisdom is his conviction that the Spirit unites (see chap. 12). Where the Spirit of God is present, who alone reveals the divine wisdom, there can be no factions. Consequently, Paul does not tackle the ideas of the various Corinthian groupsthey will always remain something of an enigma for us. For him, the very existence of division was proof that their ideas stemmed from human and not divine wisdom. He lumps them all together and chastises them all alike. Were the wisdom of God really among them there would be no dissensions, and they would be united in mind and judgment (1:10). Epistolary Introduction (1:1-7) Paul's address to the Corinthians follows the mode of personal letters for his day: A to B, greeting. Paul uses an expanded form of this typical greeting. As in most of his letters, he makes personal reference to his apostolic calling (1:1). For Paul his calling was a direct commission from the risen Christ. This is most forcibly treated in Galatians. There, facing an attack on his apostolic authority and the implication that he was inferior to the Jerusalem apostles,, he insists that his apostleship came directly from Christ and not through any human agency (Gal. 1:1). The same is implied in 1 Corinthians. His calling is "through the will of God." When Paul wrote 1 Corinthians, he did not seem to be aware of any direct attack on his authority from any segment in the congregation. The situation changed radically by the time he wrote 2 Corinthians, much of which is devoted to the defense of his apostleship.

325

Paul often mentions a co-worker in the addresses of his letters. It is Timothy and Silas* for example, in the Thessalonian letters and Timothy alone in Philippians and Colossians. Here Sosthenes is mentioned. This may be the same Sosthenes whom Luke mentions as the ruler of the Jewish synagogue when Paul was taken before Gallio (Acts 18:17). If so, his subsequent conversion is implied. Sosthenes, however, is not an uncommon name, and the identity of the two is not certain. It has been argued that Paul's inclusion of a co-worker in the greeting designates him as the amanuensis of the letter. This is not likely, as the one certain reference to an amanuenis (Ttertius, Rom. 16:22) occurs at the end and not at the beginning of the letter. It is probably better to view Sosthenes as a co-worker at Corinth whose mention would strengthen Paul's identity with the congregation. Paul addresses the Corinthians as the church (ekklsia), sanctified in Christ (hgiasmenos), called (kistos) to be saints (hagioi). All four terms refer to the samethe Christian community is a people set apart, God's people in the midst of the world. Paul's letters generally use the word church to refer to the local congregation. Bphesians is an exception, where the reference is to the universal church, to the worldwide body of all who call upon the name of Christ. Here in Verse 2 universal and local may be combined in the reference to "all who call upon the name of the Lord Jesus in every place." "All in every place" are not to be seen as recipients of the letter along with the Corinthians, but are joined to them as those who are "called to be saints." It is a reminder to the Corinthians that they are only one part of a much larger body of Christ. Some of the more factionalistic Corinthians may have had the delusion that they were the center of the Christian universe. Verse 3 rounds off Paul's greeting in his characteristic form. For the customary Greek greeting, "hail" (chaire), Paul substitutes the similar sounding but distinctively Christian word grace (charts). He also includes the distinctive Jewish wish for peace (shstm) for the well-being of a life ordered under God. In verses 4-9 Paul continues to follow the customary Greek letter form of following the greeting with a word of thanks to the gods for the well-being of the recipient. Again, Paul's thanksgiving is greatly expanded and thoroughly Christianized. It is not merely perfunctory, since there are hints of subjects which will occupy him later in the letter, such as his gratitude at their being made rich in Christ in all speech and knowledge (v. 5). This could be taken as irony, for l:18ff. hints that the Corinthian knowledge was all too worldly, and chapters 12-14 testify to the abuse of gifts of speech. It is probably best, however, to see Paul here as first approaching the subject positively. There are gifts (charismata, v. 7) which the Spirit bestows on the congregation, but they are just thatgifts. They are endowments from God, not self-attained, and thus no cause for pride or basis for factions (see 4:7). The reference to the Day of Judgment in l:7b-8 is perhaps also a subtle reminder. The overestimation of spiritual gifts ran the danger to which later Christian Gnosticism succumbed
326

The Wisdom of God and Factionalism: 1 Corinthians 1-4

Review and Expositor

namely, a fully "realized" eschatology so engrossed in the present experience of the Spirit that it left no room for the future. This sort of ecstatic religion easily lent itself to a perfectionism which saw the adherent as completely fulfilled in Christian experience and left no room for further development. In short, there was no future. One "had it all" now. Paul combats notions of this sort in 4:8ff., and the moral aberrations of 5:lff. and denial of the bodily resurrection treated in chapter 15 may testify to such ideas being afoot at Corinth. Paul's reference to the Day of the Lord serves to remind them that there is a future for Christians and that they have not yet experienced it all. The Crux of the Corinthian Crisis (1:10-17) At verse 10 Paul moves into the main body of the epistle, beginning with an appeal for unity. Literally, he exhorts them to be "made complete in the same mind and conviction." He does not mean that they are to think alike on all issues but rather that they are to share the same basic Christian conviction and to be at one with the purposes and goals of the congregation. That such unity is absent at Corinth has been indicated to Paul by "Chloe's people." The phrase denotes slaves of a women named Chloe. Whether she was a Christian or whether only her slaves were Christians is uncertain. Nor is it clear whether their residence was in Corinth or Ephesus. In any event, they were one source of information for Paul about Corinth along with the letter the Corinthians had sent him (7:lff.) and three laymen from the church, who were probably the official bearers of that letter (16:17f.). For the first four chapters there is no reference to the letter, and Paul's source of information was such word-of-mouth reports. In 1:10 Paul refers to the Corinthian divisions as schismata. The Greek word means literally a tear or a crack, a division but not a break. It is not as strong as the English schism. The word used in 1:11 is erides, which means contentions or quarrels. There thus does not seem to have been an actual breakup of the congregation along party lines. It was more the case of a divided congregation with factions forming around favorite leaders. These Paul enumerates in 1:12. There is no indication that the leaders themselves endorsed the groups which hoisted the banner behind them. Paul makes it clear that he had no more patience with those who claimed to be "Paul's people" than the Apollos or Cephas groups, and the same was probably true of the other two. There is no evidence Peter had been to Corinth (1 Cor. 9:5 notwithstanding), and Paul's discussion in chapter 3 of his relationship with Apollos gives no hint of competition between them. There is no clear evidence as to the actual theological stances of these various groups. One can conjecture from the names involved.1 Those claiming to belong to Paul would espouse his law-free "gospel for the Gentiles." The Cephas group would hold a more Jewish-Christian perspective, and the Apollos group may have been impressed by the erudition and eloquence of the Alexandrian
327

Christian (ci Acts 18:24ff.). The perplexing question is the identity of the "Christ group." It is possible that Paul is being ironical. "Everyone claims a herodoes anyone claim Christ?" The phrase "I am of Christ," however, is in strict syntactical parallel with the other three and is best seen as a reference to an actual group which rallied behind a slogan of Christ as their leader. One can only speculate as to what such a group espoused. Perhaps they represented the "spiritualist" position already mentioned. This is possibly confirmed by Paul's impassioned defense against a group which called itself "Christ's" and had launched a personal assault against Paul in the interval between the writing of 1 and 2 Corinthians (2 Cor. 10:7). Indeed, this group may have been Paul's main Corinthian headache, and the listing of the other groups may only have been a diplomatic means of avoiding direct focus upon them. The thought of the "Christ people" prompts Paul's ironic remark, "Has Christ been divided?" (v. 13). Has he been apportioned to one group? Surely the very existence of such groups is evidence of division in the body of Christ. True Christian faith is in Christ alone and not in any human leader or group. Baptism was the outward sign of their inclusion in the people who call upon Christ and claim him solely as Lord. To place allegiance in leaders like Paul, even in those who first acquainted them with Christ and led them to the commitment of baptism, was to confuse the proclaimer with the one proclaimed. Paul's ironic question about baptism into his name and his seeming uncertainty about whom he had baptized in Corinth (w. 13b-16) emphasize the relative unimportance of the one who performs the act in comparison with the faith and commitment to Christ which the rite represents. In the background here may have been the practice in the Greek cults of considering a person who led another through the initiatory rites as that person's "father" in the cult. In any event, Paul wants to eliminate any occasion for diverting the primary commitment from Christ to some human leader. One cannot take pride in being baptized by Paul One can take pride in being baptized into the body of Christ. Verse 17 emphasizes this with its reference to the apostle as a proclaimer and serves as a transition to Paul's long contrast between the wisdom of the gospel and the wisdom of the world (1:18-2:16). Wisdom: Wise and Unwise (1:18-2:16) First Corinthians 1:18-2:16 is built around the subject of wisdom and can be broken down into four sections. The whole is marked by quotations and allusions from the Old Testament and may be Paul's adaptation of a sermon he had preached. Verses 18-25 form the first section, a contrast of human-centered wisdom with God's revealed wisdom. That Gods wisdom contradicts human standards of wisdom is then illustrated in two sections. First, God's calling of the Corinthians contradicted human expectations (1:26-81). Second, Paul's initial preaching at Corinth scarcely met with human rhetorical standards (2:15). The final section (2:6-16) returns to the subject of the divine wisdom and its locus of revelation in the Spirit. 328

The Wisdom of God and FactionnaMsm: 1 Corinthians 1-4

Review and Expositor

The Foolishness of God (1:18-25) In this section Paul contrasts human with divine wisdom. To follow his argument it is necessary to note the constant shift in meaning of the word wisdom. When used of human reason apart from God it has a negative connotation, mere "wisdom of this world." When used of God it has positive force, referring to divine revelation and being virtually equivalent to "God's wise plan, of salvation" Finally, since God's plan of salvation is ultimately revealed in the cross of Christ, the word is personified. Christ, particularly Christ on the cross, is the ultimate wisdom of God. The contrast is thus between wisdom as human intellectual striving to attain the ultimate and wisdom as revelation, as God's gift. The threat Paul is attacking is the substitution of human wisdom, philosophy, and rhetoric for the divine plan of salvation in Christ. The basic question is the locus of salvation. Is it to be found in human wisdom and accomplishment, or does it he with God alone? The cross is the basic divider separating those on the way to salvation from those on the way to perdition (1:18). It divides the one who would attain from the one who experiences salvation by receiving God's revelation in the word of the cross. It is as if God deliberately chose it so, since salvation by a cross is illogical by all standards of human reason and thus becomes God's final "no" to all human attempts at self-salvation. In a series of quotes and allusions from Isaiah (1:19-20), Paul establishes his basic premise that God has rendered worthless all human-centered attempts at salvation. Human wisdom has failed in its quest for God (1:21). Perhaps at this point Paul had in mind something like his argument in Romans l:18ff. that humanity had distorted the divine revelation in nature, perverting it into idolatry and worshiping creation rather than creator. God did not merely reject the fruitless striving of human wisdom; He chose a means of revelation actually contradictory to that wisdomthe foolish proclamation of a crucified Savior (1:21b). l b the Greeks with their high standards of intellect, the idea was folly The Jews were no better off, for their quest for signs scarcely differed from the Greek love of wisdom. The demand for a sign is a request for an observable proof from God which serves as a confirmation to reason. It too becomes an attempt at salvation by human achievement. God rejects both wisdom and sign and substitutes the foolish insignificance (by human standards) of the cross. Those, however, who are set apart as God's own by their response in faith to the gospel are able in that faith to discern that Christ is the ultimate wisdom and power of God (1:24). Paul rounds off the section with a seemingly proverbial saying about the foolishness of God being wiser than humanity and the weakness of God being stronger (1:25). Paul, however, is not making a general statement about God's poorest being superior to humanity's best. The verse is closely connected with 329

the context which has just stated that the word of the cross, God's ultimate word of salvation, is foolishness and weakness by human standards. That same word, however, is God's ultimate wisdom and power. The cross thus stands as the final negation of all human attempts to attain to God. Its truth cannot be achieved through the best of human intellect and strength but must be received as a gift in the humble submission of faith and trust. Somebodies Who Were Nobodies (1:2&31) The Corinthians were themselves a living testimony to how God's standards contradict human standards. They came from the ordinary ranks of society, but God chose them. In Paul's day, as in the present, it was the wise, the powerful, those from influential families, who had status in society. Such standards are amply illustrated, for example, in Phflostratus* biography of Apollonius of Tyana, a popularly acclaimed Cynic philosopher two generations after Paul. The very words Paul uses in this passage are used to describe Apollonius' accomplishments. He was wise (sophos), having mastered not only the Greek philosophers but the mystics of India and Egypt as well. He was powerful (dunatos). Philostratus delights in relating Apollonius5 personal charisma as well as the many miracles he was reputed to have worked. He came from prominent blood lines (eugenes); indeed, there were even stories of his relationship to the gods. This was the sort of person one could admire. The Corinthians could boast of none of these things. And yet, God called the Corinthians, not the Apolloniuses. This was another way of God's rejecting the self-attainments of humanity and speaking his "no" to human standards. The capstone of Paul's argument is 1:29: God chose the nobodies of the world "so that no one might boast before God."2 There is no human ground for boasting before God. The only human ground for boasting is in God himself (1:31). He alone is our wisdom, righteousness (virtually, salvation), and sanctification (grounds for belonging to the saints, his people). All of this comes through belonging to Christ, who became (in his death and resurrection) the ultimate wisdom of God (1:30), the ultimate disclosure of God's provision for salvation. It is hard not to see our own reflection in Paul's admonitions to the Corinthians. Like them, the world's standards allure us. No one wants to be a nobody. If one cannot have the status of wealth or boast of noble "roots," at least one can become a professor and boast of intellectual achievements, l b take pride in God alone seems hardly sufficient. There are too many ordinary people who can do that. But that is precisely Paul's point. With God, these human symbols have no value; in fact, they become an actual stumbling block to the humble submission of faith which is the sole legitimate basis for our relationship to God. The unimpressive Paul (2:1-5) As a final demonstration that God's standards are not human standards, Paul reminds the Corinthians of his first preaching among them. He did not
330

The Wisdom of God and Factionalism: 1 Corinthians 1-4

Review and Expositor

come preaching the mystery (or witness) of God with a superiority in speech or wisdom (2:1).8 Rather, it was with fear and trembling that he first proclaimed the gospel to them (2:3). He demonstrated no persuasive powers or rhetoric (2:4)4 but preached only the "foolish" message of the crucified Christ (2:2). That Paul's speaking presence was not particularly impressive is borne out by comments he makes elsewhere (2 Cor. 10:10; 11:6). His reference to weakness (2:3) may possibly refer to a chronic physical ailment besetting him on his first visit to Corinth. In any event, it was not the power of Paul's argumentation or the force of his speaking gifts which the Corinthians witnessed in his first preaching. Power was present, but it was again the power of the gospel itself (2:4). Paul is almost saying that the Corinthians were not persuaded by his preaching abilities but in spite of them. This he welcomed, lest the speaker get in the way of the gospel message with its own unique power of persuasion. When Paul says in 2:4 that there was a demonstration of Spirit and power in his initial Corinthian visit, he probably is not referring to his working any miracles or demonstrating any charismatic gifts. The emphasis on his weakness in the context bespeaks the opposite. More likely the reference is to the convicting power of the gospel. It is this power which led to their response of faith, a faith in the gospel alone and not in the abilities of the messenger (2:5). A Wisdom Not of This World (2:6-16) In 2:6 Paul returns to the subject of wisdom begun in l:18ff. Paul does have a wisdom to share with mature Christians. It is a hidden wisdom, a mystery (2:7). In Paul's writings the word mystery does not refer to esoteric rites and doctrines as it did in the mystery religions. The background for his usage is Jewish apocalyptic, where mystery refers to the hidden counsels of God which can only be received through divine revelation. That this is the meaning here is indicated by Paul's statement that this mystery was ordained by God before the ages (2:7b).5 Here Paul does not define the content of this mystery, but in Colossians and Ephesians the term refers to God's plan of salvation, particularly the inclusion of the Gentiles and the final goal of summing up all things in Christ (Eph. 1:9-10; Col. l:26f.; Rom. 11:25-32). Something on this order may have been in Paul's mind here. Paul does not seem, however, to be speaking of an additional wisdom to that discussed in l:18ff. There the divine wisdom refers to God's redemptive act in the cross, the gospel message of the crucified Savior. Likewise here, the primary mystery is God's redemptive work in Christ, the ultimate wisdom of God. Paul is not reversing himself after having rejected speculative wisdom in l:18ff. The "wisdom for the mature" is the full implications of the gospel, the ultimate dimensions of God's purposes in Christ. Paul had not expounded these in his first preaching at Corinth. The basic gospel message of God's revelation in Christ was enough. The full ramifications of that could be unfolded later when the Corinthians attained greater maturity as Christians. That Paul was wise in holding back is attested by their tendency to pursue a speculative wisdom, as is implicit in l:18ff. 331

Three points should be noted regarding Paul's "wisdom for the mature." First, it serves as an antidote to the misinterpretation of l:18ff. in terms of Pauline anti-intellectualism. Paul was not anti-intellectual, as the intricate reasoning of his epistles amply attests. What Paul rejected was an anthropocentric theology through which the mind seeks to attain to God through reason. Paul was convinced that God could be known only through his own selfdisclosure, not through human achievement, and further, that his ultimate selfdisclosure had taken place in Christ. For those, however, who have responded to that revelation in faith there is a challenge to understand the full ramifications of the divine act in Christ. A second observation about Paul's wisdom for the mature is that it treats the cosmic dimensions of the gospel; this is indicated by his reference to the, "rulers of this age" not recognizing the Lord of Glory (2:8). This is a specialized phrase which refers not merely to human leaders but to spiritual forces which influence human affairs and decisions. Paul's point here is that even such spiritual powers did not know God's hidden purposes in Christ; otherwise, they would not have allowed his crucifixion. If these powers are seen as those opposing God, this passage would reflect the Christus Victor theme: their seeming victory in crucifying Christ is turned into their final defeat. Whether this particular idea is presented or not, the cosmic dimensions of Paul's treatment are clear. The wisdom for the mature expounds the gospel in its ultimate dimensions of God's purpose for the universe. A final observation about the wisdom for the mature involves the role which the Holy Spirit plays, as set forth in 2:10-16. The Spirit comprises an element in Christian wisdom which was not explicit in l:18ff. The wisdom for the mature is not human reflection on the gospel but, like the gospel itself, only comes as revelation, as a divine gift. The agent of this revelation is the Spirit of God (2:10). Just as an individual alone knows what is on his or her own mind, so God's Spirit alone knows the thoughts of God.6 Thus, only the Spirit can reveal the secret counsels of God and impart this wisdom for the mature (2:1 If.). Those who are in Christ have received the Spirit and thus are receptive to its revelation (2:12). It is through the Spirit that Paul teaches, and only those enlightened by the same Spirit are able to understand the teaching (2:13).7 Thus, there is a radical dichotomy within humanity. Those who are "natural" (psychikos), who Uve on a wholly human level with no relationship to God, are incapable of understanding the lessons of the Spirit. Lacking the guidance of the Spirit, the divine revelation appears foolish to them (2:14). Here Paul has come full circle and completed the thought begun in l:18ff. From a worldly viewpoint, the ways of God are foolishness. For these who have received the Spirit, there is a different way of viewing reality. What appears foolish to the world is seen in its true light as God's ultimate wisdom. For them, a transformation has taken place; they no longer Uve and think on a purely natural level but are guided and enUghtened by God's own Spirit (cf. 2 Cor. 5:161).

332

The Wisdom of God and Factionalism: 1 Corinthians 1-4

Review and Expositor

With their emphasis on judging, 2:15f. are transitional verses. Paul will refer expUcitly to attempts at judging him in 4:lf. In the background probably lurks the Corinthian factionaUsm. There is much judging going on. This leader is superior to that one, this idea to that. Paul states that the truly spiritual person is able to make proper judgments in all respects. Such a one, guided by God's Spirit, is not really subject to human judgment. Paul's impUcation may be that the Corinthian factions' propensity to judge may bespeak their lack of the Spirit. Nowhere in the long discussion of wisdom which began at l:18ff. does Paul define the Corinthian "wisdom" which accompanied the factions. Nor does he define the content of the wisdom for the mature in 2:6ff. It is not to his purposes to do so. Indeed, it would sidetrack his whole argument. His whole purpose is to bring the Corinthians back to the only wisdom which counts, the wisdom of the cross. Likewise, he would lead them to a fuller experience in the Spirit, the Spirit that unites. Were the cross central, with its wisdom which negates all human values, the pet ideas of their cUques would cease to be a source of pride. Were the Spirit present, their vision would be clearer, and the factions would vanish. The Proper Regard for Leaders (3:1-23) At l:10ff. Paul began his discussion of the Corinthian factions by pointing to their tendency to rally behind individual leaders. He returns to this in chapter 3, using himself and Apollos as examples and discussing the interdependence of their ministries under various metaphors. The opening section of the chapter (3:1-3) is transitional, building upon the treatment of wisdom for the mature in 2:6-16. Paul had not yet shared this with the Corinthians because they were not yet mature but only infants in Christ (3:1). Paul nourished them with the basic milk of the gospel and refrained from the more mature meat of the gospel's further ramifications (3:2).8 The jealousy andrivalrywhich accompanied the congregational factionaUsm was evidence of their immaturity (3:3). Paul uses two forms of the same word to describe their immaturity: sarkinos (made offlesh)in 3:1, and sarkikos (belonging to the realm of flesh) in 3:3. In this context the two scarcely differ and refer to the Corinthians' manner of deportment. The realm of the flesh is the world apart from God, the whoUy "secular" lifestyle. It is opposed to the world of the Spirit, which marks one's relationship with God. Living in the world, the Corinthians were being controUed more by the world's values than by the Spirit. As such, the reference to the Corinthian "fleshliness" is to be distinguished from the purely "natural" (psychikoi) of 2:14. Those on the natural level have no awareness of the Spirit and no relation to God in Christ. The Corinthians do, having responded to the gospel and received the Spirit. They have, however, failed to nurture that relationship and grow into Christian maturity. Verse 4 moves to a specific example of this "worldliness"the rallying behind various leaders. The selection of ApoUoa as an example need not indicate 333

that he had a particular role in the factionaUsm. It may evidence the opposite, Paul's choosing one with whom he had a harmonious relationship to avoid focusing on those most culpable. In any event, Paul decries any attempt to raUy behind ApoUos or himself. Both are to be seen as servants (diakonoi) of Christ, and the ministry of each depends on that of the other. It is a mutual, not a competitive, ministry. Neither can boast, for ministry is itself a gift of God (3:5). Paul illustrates this interdependence with three metaphors. The first (3:6-8) depicts the Corinthians as the farm of God. As the one who first brought them the gospel, Paul is the sower of the seed. As the one who continued the work at Corinth after Paul had left (see Acts 18:27-19:1), Apollosis the cultivator who watered the field. A successful harvest depended on the faithful work of both; but neither could lay claim to it, for the miracle of growth was the gift of God alone (3:7). Each worker depended on the other, ApoUos on Paul's sowing, Paul on ApoUos' cultivation. They were one in their goal of a fruitful harvest. Ultimately, however, each was responsible for his own work (3:8). To this Paul wiU returnin3:12ff. Verse 9 provides a transition to the metaphor of architecture (3:10f.). The Corinthians are likened to a building, with Paul as the layer of the foundation and ApoUos the builder of the superstructure. For the mature church, pioneer "church planters" like Paul are necessary to bring people to faith with the foundation of the gospel. Just as important are the "builders" like ApoUos who undertake the long-term task of building the congregation. Here Paul is sidetracked into a specific appUcation of the metaphorfor the church, Christ is the sole foundation (3:11). In the Galatian congregation, Paul had reason to suspect a foundation other than Christ was being laid (Gal. l:6ff.), and he may have feared that the Corinthian wisdom would lead to the same result. At 3:12 Paul shifts metaphors again, this time to that of the materials used in buding. The point also shifts. Paul no longer speaks of the interdependence of ministries but of the minister's responsibiUty for his workmanship (cf. 3:8). A workman can use materials of varying value and permanenceanything from gold to straw (3:12). It is a strange Ust, a mixture of materials noted for value or permanence with those known for their high combustibihty. Paul is thinking ahead to his next point, the work of each minister facing the testing fire of divine judgment (3:13). The description of judgment in terms of fire is a common bibUcal metaphor and apt for Paul's point here. Fire gives off Ught, and this shows up workmanship as it is, soUd or shoddy. Fire also consumes, burning up shoddy impermanent workmanship. StiU, the salvation of the workman is not in question, even though his shoddy work be burned to a crisp. He wiU be saved, but only as if by rushing out of ^a flaming buding with aU his hair singed (3:15). This last metaphor raises aU sorts of questions. For one, the passage has been used to support a doctrine of purgatory. It does not; it has nothing to do with the purging of the workman's sins but only with the loss of his workman334

The Wisdom of God and Factionalism: 1 Corinthians 1-4

Review and Expositor

ship and his reward. Again, the reference to the workman's salvation has been used to support the doctrine of the security of the behever. The question here is not whether one can lose salvation but what happens to a ministry built with worthless materials. Only indirectly does the question of security apply here. Paul certainly impUes that the minister's salvation depends like everyone's on a basic faith in Christ; that is not questioned here; the quaty of ministry is. For Paul, ministry could never be a basis of salvation, for that would be salvation by works. StUl less is it a question here of "backsUding." Not one's moral deportment but his or her service for Christ is the sole issue in this context. A final question revolves around Paul's mention of a reward (3:8, 14). Rewards are difficult to square with a doctrine of salvation by grace and can easUy become the back door for a theology of works. Both Jesus and Paul, however, speak of rewards for faithful service. It is best to avoid seeing this in terms of graduation in heavenly rank or in materialistic terms such as various types of heavenly real estate. It is more likely that both Paul and Jesus had something in mind like the Lord's commendation, " WeU done, good and faithful servant" (Lk. 19:17). Thinking about shoddy workmanship leads Paul to a further thought in 3:16-1?. Use of poor materials can lead to use of destructive materials. It is one thing to serve the church with a poor ministry that leads to no real development. It is another to minister in a manner which damages faith and undermines the gospel There is a difference between the poor leader and the false teacher. The latter wiU not escape the fire but wiU suffer inevitable destruction for such destructive ministry. Paul concludes the chapter with a section which brings together the twin problems of the Corinthian wisdom and their preference for various leaders (3:18-23). Verses 18-20 reiterate the theme of wisdom and fooUshness. Paul rounds off that discussion with Old Testament texts which Ulustrate the foUy of human wisdom in God's eyes. Once more Paul exhorts the Corinthians to see their wisdom for the foUy it reaUy is and calls them back to the foolishness of the cross, the true wisdom. He likewise admonishes them to cease their boasting in human leaders (3:21). They had done so for recognition and status but seemed blind to the one relationship that gave them everything, their relationship to Christ. Their boast should not be in belonging to Paul, ApoUos, or Cephas; these were Christ's servants on their behalf, who thus belonged to them. They had no need to seek for recognition or security in any wisdom or relationship other than in Christ. In Christ alone they had the ultimate acceptance and security which comes from God (3:23). The Reigning Corinthians and Their Suffering Apostle (4:1-21) In chapter 4 Paul addresses the factionalism on a more personal level First, he rejects any judgment they may have levied upon him (4:1-5). Then, with irony he berates the false sense of achievement fostered by their group
335

mentaUty (4:6-13). He concludes with the promise of a personal visit and a threat to discipline the offenders (4:14-21). Verses 1-2 serve as a transition, linking the discussion in chapter 3 of the ministers' interdependence with the new subject of the congregation's judging them. Paul had already broached the latter subject in 2:15. He returns to it with a flat rejection of any judgment the Corinthians might pass on him. This is the first hint in the Corinthian correspondence that the factionaUsm may have involved a personal attack on Paul. At this point it is only implicit. Later it developed into a bitter challenge of Paul's apostolic authority, as 2 Corinthians attests. In chapter 3 Paul depicted himself and ApoUos as God's servants. Now he argues that servants are accountable to the one they serve. The Corinthians belong to God, and Paul is a steward of that possession. Consequently, his accountabity is to God, the possessor, and not to the Corinthians, the possession. Ultimately, he is not even accountable to himself. There is nothing on his conscience impugning the trustworthiness of his ministry, but even such selfacquittal is of no consequence (4:4). Paul's language is that of the law courts. The choosing of leaders by the Corinthian factions is a human judgment, as is the self-scrutiny of the conscience. The Christian minister, however, faces a divine judgment and is ultimately accountable to God alone (4:5). As in 3:14ff. it concerns whether one wiU be found faithful in the quaUty of one's workmanship and receive a reward of praise from God (4:5b). One must not take Paul's rejection of human judgment as a blanket bibUcal injunction against all attempts at judgment. There is a difference between making condemnatory judgments and the necessary appUcation of discrimination. Paul is constantly calling upon his congregations to make such discrimination, even as here he exhorts them to acknowledge the foUy of their worldly wisdom and divisive factionaUsm. Likewise, Paul does not reject the importance of the conscience. He would, of course, argue that the Christian conscience is the more certain guide as it is enlightened by the Holy Spirit. The question here is neither the importance of others' opinions nor of one's conscience. It is, rather, the authority of such human judgments to pass a final verdict on the vaUdity of one's ministry. For Paul, the minister is ultimately accountable to God alone. Verses 6-7 provide a transition to Paul's final rebuke of the Corinthian factionaUsm. He has used himself and ApoUos as an illustration of the general lesson the Corinthians need to learn (4:6a).9 What foUows in the text is obscured. Paul seems to say that the Corinthians must learn "not to go beyond scripture, in order that you not become puffed up one on behalf of one against the other" (4:6b). The drift is clear. The Corinthians are to drop their factional spirit, not to favor one leader or feUow member over another. The problem is the seeming reference to the Scriptures. Rendered UteraUy, it reads, "That you may learn the
336

The Wisdom of God and Factionalism: 1 Corinthians 1-4

Review and Expositor

meaning of the phrase 'not beyond what stands written.' "10 As Paul has not appealed.to any particular scripture here, it is difficult to determine his references. Is he referring to scriptures he has previously used, such as 1:19 and 31, 2:9 and 16, 3:9 and 20? Those texts mainly apply to God's wisdom, and it is difficult to see how they would relate to the subject of Corinthian favoritism. Is Paul picking up a slogan from one of the Corinthian groups which urged its members to go beyond the Scriptures? This would assume a group of "superspirituaUsts" who claimed an enlightenment taking them beyond the written word. Such could be tied in with the passage immediately foUowing where Paul chastises the Corinthian feeling of having arrived, but it is difficult to see why Paul would not have attacked more directly such a flat rejection of scriptural guidance. The passage remains difficult at best. Perhaps it harks back to an earUer conversation Paul had with the Corinthians, which they understood readily but which is no longer accessible to us. Verse 7 provides an apt transition to the biting irony of 4:8-13: "What makes you so special? What do you have that you did not receive (as a gift)?" In the group spirit at Corinth there was a sense of status and self-achievement, of having the better leader or espousing the finer wisdom. Once more Paul reminds them that aU they have as Christians is a gift of the divine grace and no ground for human boasting. The Corinthians, however, are boasting. They have arrived, entered into their kingdom, and have it aUand aU this without Paul (4:8). Paul uses biting irony to contrast the Corinthian smugness with his own trials as an apostle. He would give up those trials and join them, if only they did reign. His own experience has scarcely been that of a reigning monarch. It has been a spectacle on the earth's stage, entertaining human and spiritual beings alike (4:9). He has played the fool, weak and dishonored. The Corinthians have played the king, wise, strong, and respected. Paul drops the contrast and concentrates on his own trials in the Lord's servicehungry, thirsty, Ul-clad, knocked about, homeless, paying his own way with manual labor (4:ll-12a). Playing the fool, he has accepted humiliation, blessing when abused, not retaliating when persecuted, speaking a good word for those who slandered him (12b-13a). In the world's eyes he has been the scum of the earth, the very dregs (4:13)." But the Corinthians ah, the Corinthiansthere they sit on their thrones. The sense of arrival which Paul mocks here is evidence of a gnosticizing tendency among some of the Corinthians. In the Corinthian correspondence there is no evidence of the cosmologica! myths which marked later Christian

337

gnosticism. The tendency, however, is there, in the fuUy realized eschatology, the sense of spiritual fulfillment, of having already reached perfection. Paul balances this with constant reminders of thefinaljudgment and with a theology of the cross which views suffering as a mark of Christian existence. It is such suffering which has accompanied Paul's own experience. The sharp contrast with that of the Corinthians indicates something is awry in their theology. In verses 14-16 Paul appeals to the parent-child relationship he has with the Corinthians, calling upon them to imitate him. It is obvious from his discussion of his own experience in 4:1 Off. that he is calling them away from their theology of glory to a theology of the cross. Verses 17-21 go into Paul's plans to visit the Corinthians and contain a threat to confront the problems face-to-face, if necessary. Paul has already sent Timothy as his personal representative. Timothy does not seem to be the bearer of the letter, as 16:10 points to Paul's expectation that the letter would reach Corinth before Timothy. Paul hopes to come soon himself (4:19), and the tone of his visit wiU depend on their willingness to straighten themselves out. Evidently some are boasting that Paul lacks courage to face them. If necessary, he wiU chaUenge this in person and determine how much of the Spirit's power Ues behind their words (4:19-20). As their father in Christ, shaU he come with a rod to punish them or in a loving spirit of gentleness (4:21)? The choice is theirs. Paul's threat to punish the Corinthians and his reference to those who haughtily oppose him are the clearest indication in 1 Corinthians that the Corinthian factionalism involved some degree of personal attack on Paul's authority. Evidently some of the Corinthians did not heed his warning, and his subsequent visit to them was marked by bitter confrontation. This can be inferred from his comments in 2 Corinthians, but that story must be left to the exposition of that epistle. Conclusion The church in every age has suffered a bit of the Corinthian syndrome. In a real sense, the Corinthian groups are the forebears of Christian denominationalism.12 The division evidenced there has only intensified in ensuing centuries. Paul's words become a chaUenge to contemporary Christians to accept our variety and seek a oneness in basic commitment and goals (1:10). On a less ecumenical level, the Corinthian problems have resurfaced in the general human tendency to line up behind favorite leadersin convention raUies behind candidates who express the "right" view in the "right words/' in the local church where members pit one pastor or staff member against another, in the individual minister who seeks to emulate the style of some popular preacher or preaches only from the sermons of some homiletical patriarch of a day long past. It is easy to substitute a human leader or human style or human idea for the gospel. When this happens factions develop, and the wisdom of this world is substituted for the gospel
338

The Wisdom of God and Factionalism: 1 Corinthians 1-4

Review anoTLxpositor

It is the old problem of the church in the world. Because it exists in the world, the world's values are constantly creeping in. Paul's antidote is simple, but not easy. It is humble submission to God by accepting the "foUy" of the gospel message and incorporating it into our very being, to Uve a life under grace with the constant awareness of having nothing which we did not receive, to carry out a ministry under grace where our only boast is in God and our ultimate accountabiUty is to the prospect of his "well done." This is what marks us off as Christians. This is where our real wisdom and power and unity rest.
I Such conjectures are numerous, grouping around various combinations and modifications of F. C. Baur's Judaizing theory and the Gnostic view more recently in vogue. For a useful summary of the various suggestions see W. G. Kmmel, Introduction to the New Testament, trans. H. C. Kee (17th rev. ed.; Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1975), p. 273. * The whole of 1:26-31 is based on Jer. 9:23f., which is directly quoted in 1:31. Indeed, 1:18-31 may be an adaptation of a synagogue sermon with Jer. 9:23f. as the prophetic text. See C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1968), p. 51. * The mss. are divided in having mystery (musterion) or witness (marturion). Both make sense in the passage, and a choice between them does not substantively change the meaning. 4 Another significant textual problem, with a number of variants. The best solution seems to be that Paul coined the adjective peithos (persuasive) and that the variants are scribal attempts at correction. * 2:6-8 are a key for those who see Paulfightinga Gnostic aberration at Corinth. Important is the concentration of terms like teleios, sophia, and musterion and the idea of a "hidden Messiah" in v. 8. There is, however, no clear evidence of a Gnostic myth in 1 Corinthians; the Corinthian tendency is best described as pre-gnostic or incipient gnosticism, not a developed Gnosis. See Hans Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, trans. J. W. Leiten, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), pp. 57-63. In 2:11 Paul uses the term pneuma in two senses, for the human spirit(mind) and for the Holy Spirit. The distinct meanings make the analogy somewhat strained. 7 The translation of 2:13b is difficult, sunkrino having distinct meanings of combining, comparing, and explaining. Pneumatikos is equally ambiguous (either spiritual things or persons). The translation followed here is "explaining spiritual matters to spiritual persons." It is interesting to note how Paul, often accused of chauvinism, here depicts himself with the image of a nursing mother. MetaschWmatizein often has the meaning "to disguise." If that is taken strictly here, Paul would imply that the real culprits are other than himself and Apollos and that he has deliberately disguised his attack. It should probably be taken in a broader sense here, "to use as an illustration." 10 The most intriguing solution to this crux is that of the Dutch scholar Baljon, who translated the phrase, "the me~ has been written above the alpha," seeing it as an incorporated scribal gloss which originally explained the position of the negative (me) in his ms. See Jean Hering, The First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corinthians, trans. A. W. Heathcote and P. J. Allcock (London: Epworth Press, 1962), pp. 28f. II There is some evidence for the words perikatharma andperispsema being used in the classical period of Athens for a practice of sacrificing socially undesirables as scapegoats believed to benefit the city. This usage does not seem current in Paul's day, and no idea of Paul's trials being a sacrifice or ransom is present in the context. See Archibald Robertson and Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians, International Critical Commentary (New York: Scribner's, 1916), p. 88. 11 For a discussion of the ecumenical application of 1 Corinthians 1-4 see William Baird, The Corinthian ChurchA Biblical Approach to Urban Culture (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1964), pp. 29-60.

339

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.