To Teach or Not to Teach?

     In 1 Corinthians 12:29, Paul rhetorically asks, “Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles?” The implied answer is “no.” Not everyone in the first-century church was expected to be a teacher, any more than everyone was an apostle, a prophet, or a miracle worker. But in Hebrews 5:12 we read, “For though by this time you ought to be teachers …” Why do these two passages seem to be saying conflicting things?

     The texts in question are addressed to two different audiences in separate places and times, dealing with two very different issues. In 1 Corinthians 12 Paul is confronting the problem of jealousy and discord due to the misuse of miraculous gifts; each member should be contributing his/her part for the benefit of the whole body. In this context, “teachers” fulfil a special role in the church (cf. James 3:1).

     In Hebrews 5 the problem is lack of spiritual growth and maturity. There comes a time when all Christians ought to be “teachers” in some sense, whether by: (a) example (Matt. 5:13-16; Rom. 16:19; 1 Tim. 3:7; 4:12, 15; 5:25; 1 Pet. 2:11-12); (b) open confession of one’s faith (Matt. 10:32; Heb. 4:14; 10:23); (c) defense of the faith (1 Pet. 3:15; Jude 3); (d) fulfilling one’s “ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:17-21; cf. Matt. 28:18-20); and/or (e) developing and utilizing God-given teaching talents (Rom. 12:7; Eph. 4:11). It is this latter (more specific) sense that is considered in 1 Corinthians 12, whereas in Hebrews 5 the broader sense is in view.

--Kevin L. Moore

Related Posts:

Image credit: http://livingwater.no/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/daniel-teaching-1280x854.jpg

Baptism for the Dead

     In his defense of the resurrection, Paul writes: “Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? Why then are they baptized for the dead? And why do we stand in jeopardy every hour?” (1 Cor. 15:29-30).¹ What exactly is Paul talking about here? Is he advocating vicarious baptism on behalf of those who have died? Is he alluding to literal baptism in relation to the spiritually dead? Is this a metaphoric baptism of suffering and martyrdom? Were loved ones of deceased Christians getting baptized in hopes of a reunion in the afterlife? While it has been estimated that there are over 200 different interpretations of this passage,² they can’t all be right!

     If we pay close attention to the pronouns used, Paul seems to be pointing out the inconsistencies of the ones arguing against the resurrection. The third person “they” (v. 29) refers back to “some among you [who] say that there is no resurrection of the dead” (v. 12), and it is a prelude to the subsequent observation, “for some do not have this knowledge” (v. 34). Apparently there were some among the Corinthians who were practicing vicarious baptism on behalf of the dead. Although there is no biblical or historical precedent for such a practice, this is the most straightforward reading of the text. Appreciating the fact that we only have one side of the conversation (Paul’s side), this was probably a unique situation in Corinth at the time, of which the apostle and the original audience were aware. Paul is simply noting the inconsistency – why do this if there is no resurrection? “We” (in contrast to “you” the Corinthians and “they” the false teachers) is a pronominal allusion to Paul and his apostolic colleagues (cf. vv. 9, 11, 14, 15); if there is no future hope, then why would teachers of the gospel be risking their lives? (vv. 30-32; cf. 4:9-13).

     Vicarious baptism is never enjoined on followers of Christ. The practice serves no functional purpose, seeing that the fate of those already deceased is unalterable (Luke 16:22-31; Heb. 9:27). Accordingly, as far as the living are concerned, “Awake to righteous …” (1 Cor. 15:34a); “Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation” (2 Cor. 6:1b).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Scripture quotations are from the NKJV.

     ² Ernest Evans, ed. Tertullian’s Treatise on the Resurrection (London: SPCK, 1960): 312.

Related Posts:

Image credit: https://www.gladstoneslibrary.org/assets/images/media/news/gothic-grave_display.jpg 

Who is “Anointed” in 2 Corinthians 1:21?

     In 2 Cor. 1:17-22, the unexpected change in Paul’s travel plans left him susceptible to criticisms of indecisiveness, unreliability, and dishonesty (1:17). But he reassures the Corinthians that he is not as fickle and inconsistent as some may have charged; he is not in the habit of making contradictory and untruthful statements, like “Yes and No” at the same time (1:17a-19). Just as God is faithful (1:18a), Paul, Silvanus (a.k.a. Silas), and Timothy – the three missionaries who first preached “God’s Son, Jesus Christ” in Corinth (1:19a; cf. Acts 18:5) – proved themselves as men of integrity and faithfulness (cf. 1 Thess. 2:1-13). They communicated a positive (“Yes”) message “in him [Christ]” (1:19b); God’s promises are affirmative (“Yes”) “in him [Christ]” (1:20a) and “amen” (an affirmation of truth = “so be it” or “truly”) “in him [Christ]” (1:20b), “for the glory of God through us” (1:20c) – not self-promoters but genuinely seeking to honor God – and God is confirming “us” [the teachers] with “you” [the Corinthian recipients] “in Christ” (1:21a).

     Furthermore, God is the one having anointed [χρίω]¹ “us” (1:21b), and the one having sealed [σφραγίζω]² “us,” and the one having given “us” the Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee [ἀρραβών]³ (1:22) – contextually applicable to Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy (1:19) as distinct from “you” the Corinthian audience.    

     Attempting to identify those to whom these contrasting pronominal references apply, a number of commentators argue for nuances that fluctuate back and forth, particularly at 1:21-22. But this significantly disrupts the flow of thought and unnecessarily obscures an otherwise cohesive presentation. Since mentioning names is less common in 2 Corinthians than in other Pauline texts, the explicit naming of Paul, Timothy, and Silvanus (1:1, 19) is not without significance in the context of the forty-seven first person plurals in chapter 1. Although three of these betray an inclusive meaning (1:2, 3, 14c),⁴ the rest are distinguished from “you” and almost certainly do not apply to the readers.

     This is the only occurrence in Paul’s writings of the verb χρίω (“anoint”), and elsewhere in the NT it is always applied to Christ [Χριστός = Anointed One] (Luke 4:18; Acts 4:27; 10:38; Heb. 1:9). Whatever the anointing is, it is something that God has done for these first-century evangelists in conjunction with divine confirmation, sealing, and impartation of the Spirit.

     Christ had been “anointed” with the Spirit, enabling him to preach the gospel [εὐαγγελίζω = “announce glad tidings”] and to heal (Luke 4:18; Acts 10:38; cf. Isa. 61:1).⁵ The early disciples were commissioned to proclaim [εὐαγγελίζω] the gospel [εὐαγγέλιον] (Mark 16:15; Acts 5:42; 8:4, 12; etc.) and, in the absence of the compete NT, to confirm the message with accompanying miraculous signs (Mark 16:20; Acts 8:4-8; etc.).

     In 2 Corinthians the readers need to understand [1:13-14] that their first preachers (Paul, Silvanus, Timothy) have divine confirmation via God’s Spirit (1:21), irrespective of any false allegations against them. They “also” (καί) have been sealed [σφραγίζω – authenticated as belonging to and representing God] (1:22a), like all other Christians (Eph. 1:13; 4:30), and have been given the Spirit in their hearts as a guarantee [ἀρραβών] (1:22b), like all other Christians (2 Cor. 5:5; Eph. 1:14).⁶

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The verb χρίω (“anoint”) appears five times in the NT, and only here (2 Cor. 1:21) in Paul; elsewhere in Luke 4:18; Acts 4:27; 10:38; Heb. 1:9, all applied to Christ (the Anointed One). The noun χρίσμα (“anointing”) appears only in 1 John 2:20, 27 (see previous post).

     ² The verb σφραγίζω (to “set a seal upon” and thus to “certify” or “authenticate”) occurs fifteen times in the NT, only once in the literal sense (Matt. 27:66). The metaphorical usage is mostly in John’s writings, esp. in Revelation (John 3:33; 6:27; Rev. 7:3, 4, 5, 8; 10:4; 20:3; 22:10), and four times in Paul (Rom. 15:28; 2 Cor. 1:22; Eph. 1:13; 4:30).

     ³ The noun ἀρραβών (an earnest, pledge, down-payment, security, guarantee) is employed in the NT only in the Pauline writings (2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:14).

     ⁴ Expressions like “our Lord” and “our Father” more naturally express the inclusion of all believers and not just the Corinthians.

     ⁵ In Heb. 1:9 (quotation of Psa. 45:7; cf. Isa. 61:1-3), Christ is metaphorically anointed with “the oil [ἔλαιον] of ecstatic joy [ἀγαλλίασις],” confirming his ministry and the inevitable gladness it brings (cf. Luke 1:14; Acts 2:46; 8:8; Rom. 14:17; Gal. 5:22; 1 Thess. 2:20).

     ⁶ See God's Indwelling Spirit 

Related Posts: Anointing in 1 John

Image credit: https://acwade98.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/image.jpg

Let the women “keep silent” in the churches: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35

The Context

     First Corinthians is an occasional letter, addressed to the Christian community at Corinth (1:2), written by the apostle Paul around AD 56. In 12:1–14:40 the misuse of spiritual gifts in worship assemblies is the pressing issue. The church is one body comprised of many diverse parts intended to work in harmony for the benefit of the whole (12:1-31). The selfish abuse and temporary nature of spiritual gifts is contrasted with the better way (12:31) of love – its importance (13:1-3), description (vv. 4-7), and lasting duration (vv. 8-13). Then the proper use and the misuse of prophecy and tongues in the Corinthian assemblies is addressed (14:1-40): the misuse of tongues vs. the correct use of prophecy (vv. 1-5); the necessity of understanding vs. confusion (vv. 6-25); and a call for order in church gatherings (vv. 26-40).¹

Specific application to the situation at Corinth

     First, rules for tongue-speakers in the assembly (14:27-28). Multiple tongue-speakers are to speak in turn (not all at once) and have someone interpret (v. 27). If no interpreter is available, “keep silent” (sigáō) in the church, i.e. do not speak publicly. In this situation it is appropriate to speak silently to oneself and to God (v. 28), but do not disrupt the assembly and generate confusion.

     Second, rules for prophets in the assembly (14:29-33). Let two or three prophets speak in turn; let the others (cf. 12:10) discern (14:29). Speak one at a time so that everyone can learn and be encouraged. If one prophet is speaking, let the others “keep silent” (sigáō) and exercise self-control (14:30-32). “God is not [a God] of confusion/disorder but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints” (14:33).

     Third, rules for women in the assembly (14:34-35).² Let the women “keep silent” (sigáō) in the churches (assemblies), “for it is not permitted for them to speak (laléō)” (14:34). In other words, do not speak as to lead the church (cf. vv. 5, 6, 19). In this particular context, silence is also enjoined on male tongue-speakers (when there is no interpreter, v. 28) and on male prophets (when someone else is speaking, v. 30); i.e. they were not to speak publicly as leaders in the assembly.

     The silence enjoined here on tongue-speakers, prophets, and women does not prohibit singing (v. 15), saying “amen” (v. 16), public confession (1 Tim. 6:12), etc.; they are simply instructed not to speak as to lead the public assembly. In 1 Corinthians laléō (to “speak”) is used with reference to public speaking, particularly in the exercise of a spiritual gift (cf. 2:6, 7, 13; 3:1; 9:8; 12:3, 30; 13:1, 11; 14:2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 18, 19, 21, 23, 27, 28, 29, 34, 35, 39).

     “But if they [women] desire to learn anything, let them ask their own andras [‘men’] at home” (14:35a). This appears to have reference to spiritually-gifted women who potentially had the miraculous gift of prophecy or discernment (cf. 11:5; 12:10). If a woman questioned the public message of a prophet, she was not to exercise her gift in the public worship assembly but wait and ask her husband (or father, brother, etc.) outside the assembly.

     To limit the meaning of andras to “husbands” would exclude unmarried women, widows, and those married to unbelievers (7:8, 13), so the more generic “men” might be intended, unless all the spiritually-gifted women in Corinth at the time were married to believers. There were things appropriate at home that were inappropriate at church gatherings (cf. 11:22), and Paul dissuades women from the appearance of taking a lead in the worship assembly.

     “It is a shame/improper for a woman to speak (laléō) [as to lead] in an assembly” (14:35b). The prohibition here no doubt had cultural relevance (cf. 11:5, 6, 13-16). However, it is essentially based on God’s design for distinctive roles of men and women (cf. v. 34, “the law”; 7:39; 9:21; 11:3, 8-9; 1 Tim. 2:11-15), and is thus unchanging.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² A number of critical scholars contend that 14:34-35 blatantly contradicts 11:2-16 (under the unwarranted assumption that 11:2-16 is restricted to a mixed worship assembly) and propose that 14:34-35 is a post-Pauline interpolation (cf. C. K. Barrett, First Corinthians 330-33; G. Fee, First Corinthians 699-705; et al.). However, these verses are found in all extant manuscripts, although a few erratic ones place them at the end of the chapter. See Gary Workman, “I Cor. 14:34-35,” The Spiritual Sword 3 (April 1995): 35-46.

Related Posts: Female Head-coverings Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5; Woman Preacher?; A Woman's Service; Questions Concerning Woman's Role 

Related articles: Wes McAdams' "No Male and Female"; Dave Miller's Male and Female Roles

Image credit: http://brentmkelly.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/silence.jpg