Bible Creed

Preemptive Measures Against Disunity
1 Corinthians 1:10-17 (Part III)
Pastor Jimmy Snowden
Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship in Boscawen, NH on July 4, 2010

Introduction

This morning will be a practical application of last week’s message. For the sake of jogging your memory I will recap what we discussed last week. Let me start by reminding you of the fact that the church in Corinth was dividing over leaders as Paul makes clear in 1:11-13. Some in the church in Corinth had an elevated view of her leaders. The issue was apparently large enough for Chloe, a respected member of the church, to send notification to Paul to inform him that things were starting to get out of hand. We do not know exactly how deep the division went, but we do know that it was bad enough to warrant four full chapters of warning, instruction, and rebuke from Paul’s pen. In other words, the rivalries in the church over leaders was reaching a boiling point.

As we discussed last week, it was not Paul, Apollos, Cephas, and it definitely was not Christ who was to blame for the relational chaos and party spirit in Corinth. Who then was responsible? The people in the pew. The problem in Corinth was the result of competitive followership. The fact is that the believers in Corinth had elevated God’s messengers so high that they began to divide over these leaders. And doctrine was not the root of their quarrels. In other words, the believers in Corinth were not pitting Paul against Apollos because Paul and Apollos were on opposite ends of the theological spectrum. No! Paul and Apollos, as demonstrated last week, saw themselves as co-laborers, fighting on the same team. The divisions, rather, revolved around issues of personality, gifting, and emphasis. Or, to say it another way, the Corinthian believers were not dividing over the content of Paul and Apollos’ respective ministries but rather over the packaging of Paul and Apollos’ respective ministries. Paul and Apollos (as well as Cephas and Christ) were preaching the same crucified and risen Jesus; they were just packaging the message of that same crucified and risen Jesus differently, and in this way evidencing the unique set of gifts and emphases that God Himself had given each of them.

Paul chastises the Corinthians for using God’s messengers, and even for using Christ, as reasons for division. Although I mentioned this last week, it is worth repeating: on the first read-through one may find nothing wrong with those who are claiming to be ‘of Christ.’ However, this group was just as divisive as the rest. And why? Because they were using Jesus Himself as a cause for division. John Chrysostom helpfully explains, “Even those who said they were of Christ were at fault because they were implicitly denying this to others and making Christ the head of a faction rather than the head of the whole.”[1] The fact is that the church in Corinth was splintering, and the catalyst of their division was a competitive followership, a pitting of the leaders of Christ against themselves.

Modern Day Division Over Leaders

So, how does all of this biz about division over leaders hit us where we are at today? Anyone who has been in church for any length of time knows that it hits us in more ways than we would like to share. The fact is that the church of Jesus Christ today struggles with the reality of leader-based rivalries just as much as did the church in ancient Corinth. I will be answering one main question this morning: How do we keep ourselves from falling into the same trap of division into which the Corinthians fell? Or, to put it another way, how do we protect ourselves against the sin of dividing over leaders? This is why the sermon is titled, “Preemptive Measures Against Disunity.” Although Paul certainly sets out to answer this very question in 1:18-4:21 (that is the whole aim and point of Paul’s words from 1:18-4:21), it will be helpful to just make a few introductory comments about how we can protect ourselves from repeating the sins of the Corinthian church. I have just four practical guidelines for our consideration.

1. Be on the alert:

Recognize this as one of the tactics of the enemy. The fact is that we have no excuse. There is no questioning the craftiness of Satan (2 Corinthians 11:1-15; 1 Peter 5:8), and yet the word of God and church history have proven that his tactics against the body of Jesus Christ are all-too predictable. This is why the word of God must remain central; in many ways the word of God is a manual about our enemy. I can tell you right now with 100% confidence that Satan will try to pit the leaders of Sovereign Grace Fellowship against each other and will try to turn followership into the same competitive game that it was in Corinth. He will get the people of God to so elevate one leader that they demonize all the other leaders. This is exactly what seemed to be happening in Corinth. Apollos came on the scene with the skills of a master orator. Many of the Corinthian believers looked on in wonder and began to elevate him to the place of second command (second, of course, only to Jesus Christ). They elevated him so much that they began to demonize all other leaders who packaged the same message in a different way.

So, if I dare ask, how has Satan been working in your life; how has he been elevating and deflating the leaders here at SGF in your own mind? In what areas has he said to you, “You know, if Pastor A. and Pastor B. were more like Pastor C. in this way…” or “If Pastor B. and Pastor C. were more like Pastor A. in this way…” or “If Pastor C. and Pastor A. were more like Pastor B. in this way…” If he can pit God’s messengers against each other, creating doubts in the minds of God’s people about those He has appointed to serve His body, half of the battle has already been won.

God has Satan pegged and has revealed to us his ‘top secret’ tactics in His word. The goal is to cut Satan off at the pass, short-circuiting his plans of division. Any military or a sports team that is serious about victory will take the time necessary to learn the moves and tactics of the opposition to avoid being caught off guard by the strategies of the opposition. Or as Katsumoto says in reply to Captain Algren (played by Tom Cruise in The Last Samarai) after being challenged as to why he was so interested in continuing a relationship with the prisoner of war; I want “To know my enemy.”  To know your enemy is to gain an advantage over your enemy, because you can preempt before he strikes. To simply be aware that this is one of the schemes in his bag of tricks is to be one step ahead of the opposition. We know that Satan loves to sew discord among the people of God and that he loves to discredit God’s appointed messengers (see 2 Corinthians 10-13). He loves to do so because he knows that this is the sure-fire way of discrediting the message of the cross. If you can discredit the messenger, you can discredit the message he preaches.

2. Embrace God’s view of leaders.

To embrace God’s view of leaders involves two things: 1. not elevating God’s messengers/leaders too high, and yet 2. it also involves honoring them with an understanding of their unique role in God’s economy. Satan is so crafty at this point. If he can’t beat you one way, he will beat you another (unless, of course, you keep your nose in God’s word and anticipate his predictable attacks); he will tempt you to either idolize God’s messengers or he will tempt you to discredit them altogether. The reality of this sort of an extreme reaction to God’s messengers is clearly seen in 1 Corinthians 1:12.

What I am saying is this: each of you says, “I’m with Paul,” or “I’m with Apollos,” or “I’m with Cephas,” or “I’m with Christ.”

It is obvious that some in the church of Corinth fell into the trap of lionizing men, setting Paul, Apollos, and Paul up as demi-gods (as is evidenced by the Paul, Apollos, and Cephas groups) while others saw themselves as completely independent, deeming God’s appointed messengers as unnecessary, replaceable fixtures in the church (as is evidenced by the Christ group). Both reactions are simply sinful. It is sinful to look to men to do for you that which only Christ can do, and it is sinful to not honor those whom God has appointed to leadership.

Paul will go on in 1 Corinthians 3:5-8 and 4:1 to tell them how they should esteem both himself and Apollos.

1 Corinthians 3:5-8; So, what is Apollos? And what is Paul? They are servants through whom you believed and each has the role the Lord has given. I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. Now the one who plants and the one who waters are equal, and each will receive his reward according to his own labor.

1 Corinthians 4:1; A person should consider us in this way: as servants of Christ and managers of God’s mysteries.

In these two passages Paul is trying to deflate their idea of both himself and Apollos. He is going to every length, almost pleading with them, to not think of men too highly. This was the cause of their division; they were elevating certain men to the level of a demi-god to the detriment of all of God’s other messengers. And yet although Paul deemed it an utter necessity to deflate the Corinthians view of leaders, he also saw it essential to teach the people of God to not devalue the place and role of God’s appointed leaders. In other words, although we must not elevate men too high, we must also remember that God demands His people to respect and honor those whom he has placed in leadership roles in the church. For example look with 1 Corinthians 16:15-18 and 1 Timothy 5:17-19.

1 Corinthians 16:15-18; ¹⁵ Brothers, you know the household of Stephanas: they are the firstfruits of Achaia and have devoted themselves to serving the saints. I urge you ¹⁶ also to submit to such people, and to everyone who works and labors with them. ¹⁷ I am delighted over the presence of Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, because these men have made up for your absence. ¹⁸ For they have refreshed my spirit and yours. Therefore recognize such people.

1 Timothy 5:17-19 (ESV); ⁷Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. ¹⁸For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.” ¹⁹Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses.

Keep in mind now that the same Paul who wrote 1 Corinthians 1-4 also wrote 1 Corinthians 16 and 1 Timothy 5. Paul insisted that God’s people not think too highly of God’s appointed leaders and yet that they not esteem them too lowly either. We can truly say of the Corinthians that they simultaneously had too high of a view of leaders and too low of a view of leaders. For example, some of them had too high of a view of Paul while at the same time having too low of a view of Apollos. Others had too high of a view of Apollos while at the same time having far too low of a view of Paul. Have a healthy view of those whom God has appointed for leadership in the church. Paul tells Timothy to “Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor.” Double honor certainly involves financial compensation (as the context suggests) and yet it involves much more than that.

Paul tells Timothy further that he is to not entertain an accusation against a leader unless it can be established on the basis of 2 or 3 witnesses. Why would Paul have to command Timothy to not entertain such accusations? Because such false accusations are common. And why are they common? Because Satan does everything he can to discredit the teaching and lives of God’s appointed messengers. He does everything he can to get our focus off of Christ-either by elevating God’s appointed messengers to point of pushing Christ out of the picture or by discrediting God’s appointed messengers and in so doing discrediting their Christ-centered message (as evidenced in 2 Corinthians 10-13). This in no way means that God’s messengers are above sin or that they are impervious to church discipline. In fact, Paul will go on in the context to explain to Timothy that when an elder is caught in unrepentant sin that the church must deal with his sin publicly (see 1 Timothy 5:20-21).

If we view God’s leaders from His perspective then we will neither elevate them too high nor will we devalue their worth and value in the Kingdom of God. So… the lesson: understand that God’s appointed leaders for the church are nothing but servants and managers who are worthy of double honor. Understand that Satan wants nothing more than for you to either elevate God’s leaders to the status of a demi-god or to so take them with a grain of salt that their ministry has no effect whatsoever on your heart. Certainly, we are to be like the Bereans who “examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things [that Paul was preaching] were so” (Acts 17:11). But we must read the whole verse. So often the Bereans are known as those who were scrupulous, examining every little word of Paul, turning over every little phrase, to see if they could find fault with anything that he said-as if God praised them for their suspicion of God’s appointed apostle. But this is just not the case. The Bereans were not known for their knit-pickiness, but rather for their biblical discernment. There is a world of difference between these two ideas. In fact, a simple reading of this passage in its context proves the fact that the Bereans were not endlessly suspicious of every little word that came out of Paul’s mouth. Notice that they were “open-minded” and that they “welcomed the message with eagerness.” They were not looking to trip Paul up or to prove him wrong; rather, they were simply just doing their best to guard themselves against blasphemy. They were excited about the things that Paul was saying about Jesus being the fulfillment of the Old Testament and yet they wanted to be careful to make sure that they were not swallowing a large lump of heresy. Consider the passage.

The people here were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, since they welcomed the message with eagerness and examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so (Acts 17:11)

Why do I bring this up? Because many have misused this passage as an excuse for division, suggesting that it is our job as Christians to be suspicious (as opposed to being level-headedly discerning) about what comes out of the mouths of God’s appointed messengers. There are some Christians out there who seem to believe that God’s messengers are somehow guilty until proven innocent. There is nothing of Acts 17 in this. This is nothing more than an attack from the enemy to discredit God’s messengers. Those who justify such divisiveness in the name of having a ‘Berean spirit” must be called to repentance.

To have such a low view of the leaders that God has appointed leads to division; it leads to suspicion and rebellion. And yet we know that it is just as dangerous to exalt any one of God’s leaders to the place of preeminence, as if the ministry were about the exaltation of men. The ministry is about the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, and although those who lead well are worthy of double honor, they are to be seen as nothing more than servants and mangers.

3. Do not use the world’s standards for evaluating the worth of a leader.

You will remember from last week’s message that this is exactly what the Corinthians were doing; they were evaluating the worth, value, and effectiveness of their leaders according to the standards of Corinth. This is most likely the primary reason why some in the church were favoring Apollos over Paul; because Apollos preached with the eloquence just as did the public debaters (Sophists) who were so popular in secular Corinth. Paul’s ministerial credentials were suspect because he did have a demanding, larger-than-life, pomp and circumstance presence in his preaching. He simply didn’t fit the bill-he didn’t look like or talk like any of the popular secular leaders of the day. And because of this, many discredited his ministry and his worth as a Spirit-filled leader of God’s church.

We struggle with the same thing today, it just evidences itself differently. Is it not true that we often use the world’s ideals and standards of leadership to judge the worth and value of God’s Spirit-filled leaders? Surely, we do not have rhetoricians running around (as the Corinthians did); however, we do have the tendency to evaluate the worth and effectiveness of God’s appointed leaders by comparing their methods or credentials to the methods and credentials of America’s corporate leaders. The first questions asked about a potential pastor usually have nothing to do with his character but rather with his strategic abilities. Instead of asking about his love for God, God’s Son, God’s word, and God’s people, we ask the following sorts of questions: Can this man sell a product? Can he rally people around himself, sell them an idea, and bring a vision to fruition? How good is this man at delegating? Does he run a tight ship and yet maintain healthy relationships with his underlings? How efficient is he? How successful is he? How many parts per hour can he produce? How well can he sell and implement good ideas? How large is his church? How many followers does he have? How many baptisms does he perform every year?

Now don’t get me wrong, these are incredibly important skills and tasks, and yet these are not the tell-tale signs of a Spirit-filled leader. What then are the marks of a Spirit-filled leader? Paul identifies it for the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 4:18-19;

Now some are inflated with pride, as though I were not coming to you. But I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills, and I will know not the talk but the power of those who are inflated with pride. For the kingdom of God is not in talk but in power.

The power of the God is the tell-tale sign. How is this power evidenced? Not in eloquent preaching nor in massive conversion, but in changed lives. Here is the first question which should be asked about a potential leader: Does the power of God rest on this individual? That is the question to ask. Not power in eloquent preaching per-se-in other words, not powerful, thunder persuasion from the pulpit, but the powerful effects of the Spirit of God on the hearts and in the life of the people of God.  How do you evaluate the worth, value, and effectiveness of God’s leaders? Here are the questions we ought to be asking to make an accurate assessment: How much does he love God? How much does he love God’s Son? How much does he love God’s word? How much does he love God’s people? How good of a grasp does he have on the theology of the Scriptures? Does he have an ability to break open the word? Does he love truth and hate sin so much that he will not tuck his tail and run the other way when confrontation is necessary to uphold truth and combat error? These are the tell-tale signs of Spirit-filled leadership.

What is the point? As soon as you start evaluating the worth, value, and effectiveness of God’s leaders with the yard-stick of the culture, you will discredit the worth, value, and effectiveness of those leaders who do not emulate such qualifications, and you will elevate those who do. You will end up creating in the body of Christ an unnecessary divide; those leaders who fit the part of corporate America and those leaders who don’t. The leaders who do fit the part will be elevated and the leaders who do not fit the part will be devalued.

We must remember that God’s standards of leadership have more to do with character than they do with strategy. So many modern day books on leadership are useless for this very reason; they focus more on strategy than character, more on fostering relationships with the well-to-do than fostering a relationship with Jesus. This is a problem. So many churches today fire pastors simply on the basis of a lack of results. “Sure, he loves Jesus, loves God’s word, loves God’s people, is not afraid to deal with sin, is able to break open the word with boldness and passion… but we had to let him go. He just wasn’t cutting the cheese; he just didn’t know how to close the deal; he just didn’t know how to wrangle them in.”  I trust that you know that success in regard to numbers is not the tell-tale sign that God is at work. Oftentimes numbers are nothing more than an indication that leaders are manipulating the truth to fit the sensitive palates of sinners who want to find company, security, and ease in their sin. Of course, growth is a good thing (and a lack of growth can be an astounding wake-up call to get more serious about the advancement of the Gospel), but numbers are not the tell-tale sign of Spirit-filled leadership. In fact, sometimes faithfulness to the Gospel will result in a period (even an extended period) of decline as opposed to growth. Just look at Isaiah’s ministry (Isaiah 6:9-13), Jeremiah’s ministry (Jeremiah 17-20), and even the very ministry of Jesus himself.  Jesus was contested on every front. Many times whole droves of people left Him simply because of His passion to speak God’s truth (for example see John 6:60-71). What then is the tell-tale sign of Spirit-filled leadership? The power of God! In other words, Spirit-filled leadership is not evidence as much by strength, courage, or eloquence but rather by dependence and humility.

In order to win the war against disunity we must adopt God’s yard stick for evaluating leaders or we will at the same time discredit certain leaders who do not ‘fit the part’ and elevate those who do.

4. Celebrate diversity

Celebrate the fact that God has given each leader a specific set of gifts, specific emphases, and specific passions. So often we read passages like Romans 12, 1 Corinthians 12, and Ephesians 4, passages which deal primarily with the diverse gifts that God has given different members of the body, and we celebrate the fact that God has not made us all the same. Just as a sample let us consider Romans 12:4-8

⁴ Now as we have many parts in one body, and all the parts do not have the same function, ⁵ in the same way we who are many are one body in Christ and individually members of one another. ⁶ According to the grace given to us, we have different gifts: If prophecy, use it according to the standard of faith; ⁷ if service, in service; if teaching, in teaching; ⁸ if exhorting, in exhortation; giving, with generosity; leading, with diligence; showing mercy, with cheerfulness.

When we read passages like this we have a desire to know where we fit-what unique gifts the Lord has given us. As we share with others which gifts the Lord has given, we celebrate the fact that no two Christians are the same. We celebrate the diversity of the body of Christ. However, for one reason or another, when it comes to leadership, such diversity is oftentimes not appreciated as much. But we must remember that the principles of Romans 12, 1 Corinthians 12, and Ephesians 4 apply to leaders just as much as they apply to anyone else in the body of Christ.

Certainly, there are certain gifts that all pastors and elders are to possess. For example, Paul makes it quite clear in 1 Timothy 3:2 that every elder must be ‘able to teach.’ This is true and yet we all know that although each elder must be able to teach, not all elders will teach in the same way, emphasize the same things, or communicate the same passion. Acts 6:2-4 clearly lays out the primary role of God’s appointed church leaders in the body of Christ.

“2 Then the Twelve summoned the whole company of the disciples and said, “It would not be right for us to give up preaching about God to wait on tables. 3 Therefore, brothers, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and wisdom, whom we can appoint to this duty. 4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word” (ESV).

It seems that most Christians have a different idea as to what the “ministry of the word” entails. Some suggest that by devoting themselves to ‘the Word of God’ the apostles were devoting themselves to evangelism (i.e., ministering the Word to the unconverted), others suggest that this means that they were devoting themselves to ‘preaching’ (i.e., ministering the Word for the purpose of encouraging and equipping the already-converted),  still others suggest that it refers to ‘crisis counseling’ (i.e., ministering the word to those in emotional, spiritual, and/or mental turmoil), others suggest that it refers to ‘word-based discipleship’ (i.e.,, ministering the word in the context of a small, select number), while others have a more holistic view and suggest that by devoting themselves to the ‘Word of God’ the apostles were setting themselves apart for the whole kit and caboodle, including any and every ministry having to do with the word. The fact is, however, that no one man can give due attention to each of these vital aspects of word based ministry, nor should he try.

The Lord has simply given some pastors a passion for the public preaching of the Gospel to unbelievers, to others he has given a passion for one-on-one discipleship, to others he has given a passion for crisis counseling, to others he has given a passion for the pursuit of accuracy in regard to theology and interpretation. This is not to suggest that it is acceptable when pastors neglect essential aspects of their calling to fulfill their unique passions, but it does mean that diversity in leadership emphasis and gifting must be appreciated.

Let me take this a step further, I may walk up to a pastor-we will call him “Pastor A.-and ask him, “What makes you tick; what unique passion has the Lord given you?” Pastor A. responds, “The Lord has given me a passion for evangelism.” I then ask, “How does your passion for evangelism evidence itself in your week-to-week, day-to-day schedule?” Pastor A. responds, “Well, the Lord has specifically given me a passion to evangelize the elderly. I go to a different nursing home in our area every day of the week. I spend time with the elderly, hold their hands, listen to their stories, listen to their struggles, and minister the word of God to them.” I then go up to another pastor-we will call him Pastor B.-and ask him, “What makes you tick; what unique passion has the Lord given you?” Pastor B. responds, “The Lord has given me a passion for evangelism.” I then ask, “How does your passion for evangelism evidence itself in your week-to-week, day-to-day schedule?” Pastor A. responds, “Well, the Lord has specifically given me a passion for open air preaching. I go to the town square at least twice a week, pass out tracks, meet new people, and preach for about an hour or two, emphasizing nothing but the cross of Christ.” I then go up to another pastor-we will call him Pastor C.-and ask him, “What makes you tick; what unique passion has the Lord given you?” Pastor C. responds, “The Lord has given me a passion for evangelism.” I then ask, “How does your passion for evangelism evidence itself in your week-to-week, day-to-day schedule.” Pastor C. responds, “Well, the Lord has especially given me a passion for evangelizing the down-and-outs. I make frequent trips to the jail during the week and spend a healthy amount of time with the folks at the local rescue mission.”

This is true is it not? Each of the three pastors mentioned above are emphasizing the preaching of the word of God to the lost and yet each of their respective ministries reflect the unique set of gifts and passions that the Lord has given them. The same is true for those who have a passion for discipleship; while one pastor may emphasize discipleship by taking 3 or 4 or 10 men under his wing (as Jesus did) by teaching them the theology of the Scriptures in a small group setting, another may emphasize discipleship by inviting different individuals or families over to his house for dinner a couple times a week. One emphasizes discipleship mostly through instruction, the other through exemplification, putting his life on display. Which one is right and which is wrong? Both are necessary. Both discipleship ministries must be appreciated.

What is the point of all of this? Every leader is different. God has given each and every leader in the church a unique set of spiritual gifts and unique passions. No two pastors emphasize the same things in the same way. Not only is this the case, but no two pastors have the same personality. Some pastors are outgoing while others are socially reserved; some pastors are humorous while others are more serious; some talk a lot while others are quiet; some are quick on the draw to exercise tough love while others have a tendency to avoid confrontation. Every leader is different and unless a pastor is being biblically negligent, the variety of gifts and passions and emphases must not merely be put up with, but celebrated and enjoyed.

Often times, though, what happens, is that the people of God have a specific picture in their head of what a pastor should look like, talk like, and sound like; the people of God oftentimes have in their heads a prefabricated understanding of what a pastor should emphasize and how he should go about emphasizing it. This was certainly the case with the divide between Paul and Peter. God had called Paul to be the apostle to the Gentiles and Peter to be the apostle to the Jews. On the one hand, one wonders whether Paul really had a heart for the Jews when he would so quickly turn to the Gentiles after being immediately rejected by the Jews when he went from town to town. On the other hand, one would have to question if Peter really understood the universal implications of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in light of his predominately Jew-oriented preaching itinerary. The fact is that Paul did have a heart for the Jews (see Romans 9) and Peter did understand the universal implications of the Good News of Jesus Christ for the nations (see Acts 15:7-11). Why then did their ministries look so different? Because God had called them to fulfill a specific purpose. Some questioned Paul’s credentials as an apostle simply because of his unique calling while they elevated Peter, and others questioned Peter’s apostolic credentials to be simply because of the unique calling that God had given him while they elevated Paul. Whose emphasis was more biblical, Paul’s or Peter’s? They were equally biblical. Their unique gifting and unique calling brought about a unique emphasis.

Sometimes those who have a special passion for the down-and-outs will become immediately suspicious of a pastor if he does not exude the same passion. Sometimes those who have a passion for truth, precise biblical truth, will immediately become suspicious of a pastor if he does not spend more time reading and writing books than he does counseling the people of God. Sometimes those who have a passion for evangelism will immediately become suspicious of a pastor if he allows more time for the study of the word of God than evangelism. Sometimes those who have a passion for discipleship will immediately become suspicious of a pastor who spends more time evangelizing or preparing sermons than he does emphasizing one-on-one or one-on-two (or three-on-one or… etc.) relationship building.

God uniquely gifts and equips each leader to serve specific functions for the advancement of the glory of God. Not only is such diversity necessary for the church to display a full-orbed view of the multi-faceted glory of Christ (as Kevin so eloquently communicated a few months ago), but it is also necessary that the ministry of the church might be able to reach as many people from as many backgrounds and as many age groups as possible. Diversity among leaders is to be celebrated; the more diverse the leadership, the greater the potential for a ministry which is not partial in its mission. No one man can reach every single niche or group in society. No one man can effectively equip every single person in the church for ministry (see Ephesians 4:11-13). A homogenous leadership team will be limited in its scope and mission.

What is the point of all of this? If diversity is celebrated, differences will be a cause for celebration, not division.

Conclusion

These are just a few guidelines that should help us in our battle against disunity. The list offered above is not exhaustive and must not be treated as such. However, the church must be aware of the great temptation that lies at our door. The church has always and will always struggle with division over leaders. Paul’s whole goal and aim in 1 Corinthians 1:18-4:21 is to radically reshape the Corinthians worldview in order to fix this issue of division over leaders. So consider this sermon a practical introduction of sorts to the rest of this section.

Appendix: I am a Calvinist

Although this is not a matter of central importance, I have heard many Christians use 1 Corinthians 1:10-16 as a proof text to suggest that it is a sin to refer to oneself as a Calvinist or an Arminian or an Augustinian or the like. However, it is important to note that there is a great deal of difference between calling yourself a Calvinist and saying “I am of Calvin.” This passage in no way prohibits the people of God from identifying ourselves with Christ’s leaders. To suggest such is to miss the point of the passage entirely. The problem with the Corinthian church was not that they were naming doctrines after the men who had packaged them in helpful ways, but rather that they were following personalities, dividing over leaders. As I have already said, the issue in Corinth was not doctrinal; it had to do with personality, gifting, and ministerial emphasis. When I say that I am a Calvinist, all I mean is that I agree with what Calvin had to say specifically about God’s sovereignty in the salvation of men and women. This is an entirely different thing than what was going on in Corinth. Now, if I were to read and pour over John Calvin’s works and push them on everyone else, suggesting that your Christianity will be largely lacking unless you delve into the bulk of Calvin’s works, that would be a different thing altogether. However, there is nothing inherently wrong with labels (even if the label bears the name of a theologian from church history). In fact, labels can be extremely helpful in the task of hashing out and communicating the rich truths of God’s word. Although some may suggest that the mere presence of doctrinal labels brings unnecessary reasons for division, there is no Scriptural precedent for issuing such warnings. The Scriptures never speak out against the usage of labels which are oftentimes extremely useful in the communication of theological truth. I do not doubt that such labels invite unnecessary division, but I am also keenly aware that anything and everything in the life of the church invites unnecessary division (including the apparel of a pastor and his family)!

[1] Dio Chrysostom as cited in Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 134.

Click here to watch this sermon on video.

Click here to listen to this sermon (right click  on ‘Click here’ and choose ‘Save link as’ to download).

Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship, Boscawen, NH on July 4, 2010.

Dividing Over Leaders
1 Corinthians 1:10-17 (II)
Jimmy Snowden
Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship in Boscawen, NH on June 27, 2010

Introduction

This morning we are going to be continuing our trek through 1 Corinthians. Last week we began to tackle the first major section of the letter, which runs from 1:10 all the way to 4:21. In this section Paul addresses one of the church’s largest problems, division over leaders. The fact is that the church in Corinth was beginning to splinter, the church was in turmoil because certain members were “in favor of one person over another” (4:6). Paul set out to rebuke them for their disturbingly elevated view of God’s messengers and then sought to fix their unbiblical view of leaders by drawing their attention to the supremacy of Christ in the Gospel. Last week we took up the issue of division in a general way, focusing on vs. 10. This morning we will be focusing our attention on two things: 1. we will seek God’s perspective on divisive people and 2. we will considering the specific concern of division over leaders as discussed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 1:10-17.

God’s View of Divisive People

The bulk of the letter of 1 Corinthians has to do with Paul addressing the unity problems plaguing the church in Corinth. Over the last few weeks I have been asking myself; what does God think about divisive people? What does God have to say in His word about those who sew discord and dissension within the body of Christ? I am not going to spend much time answering this question, but the Lord has directed me to two specific passages which deal with God’s take on divisive people. As I have been meditating on these two passages, it has become quite clear that I have had far too soft of a stance on the sin of divisiveness. This morning I want to visit these two passages.

Is it not true that we oftentimes attribute divisiveness to a person’s unique personality? Do we not often look to divisive people and make excuses for their contentiousness? For example, we may look at a person who is bent on dividing the church over an issue having to do with the conscience; they have no problem, for example, for dividing over a debatable issue such as eschatology or a conviction for women to not wear pants or for a certain conviction having to do with a certain style of Christian music or for a conviction regarding what sort of schooling Christian parents should chose for their children-we often times look at such Christians who cause divisions over such issues and excuse their divisive actions or behavior out of deference to their ‘good intentions.’ After all, even though they may be causing division are they not doing it in order to protect their week conscience; are they not doing it out of a passion for what they believe to be the truth? Well, I want to take you to two passages to see what God has to say about those who cause divisions. Let us first look at Proverbs 6:16-19.

16 Six things the Lord hates; in fact, seven are detestable to Him; 17 arrogant eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, 18 a heart that plots wicked schemes, feet eager to run to evil, 19 a lying witness who gives false testimony, and one who stirs up trouble among brothers.

Notice the last ‘thing’ that is detestable to the Lord. Notice that the last thing is not just an action but a person who does a certain action. God hates “one who stirs up trouble among brothers.” Other translations translate it as, “a man who stirs up dissension among brothers” (NIV) or “one who sows discord among brethren” (NKJV). Do you think that we might be a bit too soft on divisiveness? God hates not just the sin of divisiveness, but the person him/herself who actually sews the seeds of discord. To get an even keener understanding of how God sees divisive people, turn with me to Titus 3:9-11.

9 But avoid foolish debates, genealogies, quarrels, and disputes about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. 10 Reject a divisive person after a first and second warning, 11 knowing that such a person is perverted and sins, being self-condemned.

What is God’s way of dealing with a divisive person? Well, Paul warns Titus to simply ignore their knit-picky arguments-ignore their petty disputes. If they continue in their divisiveness after two warnings, disciplinary action needs to be taken. As with any other disciplinary matter, action must never be motived out personal revenge and must always be intended for the restoration of the brother or sister. Now you must understand that some of these knit-pickin’, law-keepin’ legalists had great intentions. I am sure that many of them were just wanting to do the right thing; I am sure that many of them were standing up for what they knew was right. Although we must be sensitive to this fact, Paul’s statements are clear. How does God view a divisive person? As a detriment to His body, the church. As I said last week, divisiveness is not tolerated in Christianity. It is no more tolerated than sexual immorality. What seems clear from Titus 3 is that divisive people get the church side-tracked from the things of first importance, sucking the people of God into a vortex of endless, speculative debates and contention, and in the process replacing the things of first importance with peripheral issues. Divisive people need to be rebuked as opposed to being engaged. Paul’s game plan for dealing with divisive people is to ignore their positions and call them to repentance (which can be difficult, because it gives the appearance of weakness-but the mature, humble man or woman of God will willingly take a shot to the ego for the sake of the health of the community and the centrality of the Gospel).

Do we take divisiveness this seriously? Do we see divisiveness as something worthy of church discipline? Paul’s words to the Corinthians are no less strong than what we find in Proverbs 6 and Titus 3.

Division Over Leaders in Corinth

Now we get to the particular issue of division that plagued the church in Corinth. Last week we looked at vs. 10 where Paul introduces the topic of division in a general way. In vs. 11 Paul provides the Corinthians concrete proof that they are actually in need of the appeal/exhortation to not be divided as given in vs. 10. What is this concrete evidence? A verbal report from persons in some way connected to a respected member of the church of Corinth, Chloe.[1] Yes, to put it in modern day terms, Chloe ‘ratted them out.’ We must not see Chloe as a big tattle tale or anything of the sort, but there is no mistaking the fact that Chloe had great reason to be concerned. After all, she sent messengers from her house to Paul to inform him of the division that was beginning to contaminate the unity of the church in Corinth. Take a look at the passage with me.

¹¹ For it has been reported to me about you, my brothers, by members of Chloe’s household, that there are quarrels among you. ¹² What I am saying is this: each of you says, “I’m with Paul,” or “I’m with Apollos,” or “I’m with Cephas,” or “I’m with Christ.”

Paul appeals to the report by the members of Chloe’s house in order that they might know that he was not basing his rebuke on mere hearsay.[2] All sorts of churches have all sorts of quarrels for all sorts of reasons. Some churches quarrel over doctrine, others over the color of the carpet, others over church government, others over a certain translation of the Bible, others over church music, others over personality differences; however, the specific quarrels (divisions) in Corinth centered on leaders.

Before drawing out some modern day parallels of the situation in Corinth, it will be helpful to first understand the nature of the conflict in Corinth. I want you to notice three things about the situation at Corinth. First, notice that the saints in Corinth were segregating themselves by the specific leader that they followed. They were each following a specific leader, and claiming that the leader that they were following had the best form or version of the Christian faith. Some were saying “I have the best form of Christianity; I follow Paul.” The next man stood up and said, “No, I have the best version of Christianity. I do not doubt that Paul is a man of God, but if you really want to be full of the Spirit, you must adopt Apollos’ version of Christianity.” We human beings have this incessant desire to become immediate evangelists of whatever thrills us. Think of your favorite movie or your favorite restaurant; do you not have an overflowing desire to tell everyone you know about these things? Of course you do! There is nothing inherently wrong with this (especially when it involves being thrilled with Jesus). However, whenever we become especially enamored with a certain leader, we have the tendency to so elevate that one leader that we begin to demonize all other leaders who do not share with him/her the same gifts or emphases. Although Paul, Apollos, and Cephas all preached the same Gospel, they packaged the Gospel in their own unique way, using the unique set of gifts that the Lord had given them. Paul is quite transparent about the fact that he was not an eloquent speaker, but we know from Acts 18-19 that Apollos was. In fact, this may be what caused so much of the division in Corinth-some were questioning the validity of Paul’s calling because of his inability to speak (see especially 1 Corinthians 2:1-5 and 2 Corinthians 10).

The fact is that the church in Corinth was dividing over leaders. They were turning followership into a competitive game. Competition ran deep in their veins in Corinth, and especially when it came to public speaking. Rhetoricians were the Hollywood movie stars of ancient Corinth. Instead of flocking to a concert stage to watch the Dave Matthews Band or Garth Brooks perform live, they would flock to the amphitheater to watch professional debaters, Sophists, dismantle each other with eloquent (even if unintelligible) speech. The rhetoricians were the movie stars of the ancient world. These circumstances created quite the stage for the entrance of a religion which was built on the back of public proclamation (see Romans 10:13-17). It was easy for the believers in Corinth to evaluate their church leaders on the same basis that they evaluated their favorite rhetoricians, because they really did the same thing, speak in public. It is also true that one’s social status and public reputation was largely determined by whomever they followed in the public square.[3] These same practices found their way into the church. An overemphasis on eloquence coupled with competitive followership for the sake of gaining status and power marked Corinthian Christianity. The values of the Corinthian world slowly but surely crept into the church, hence all of the strife in the church over leaders.[4]

This competitive edge crept into the church and they began to evaluate and profile each other based on which leader they followed. They would think something of this sort; “I am closer to God because I follow the right leader. Sure, we have Christ in common, but we don’t have Paul in common, and until we have Paul in common, seeing him as the spiritual leader, we will not have true unity. When you see the light-that is, when you follow the right leader-we can have true unity.” It seems that what was at first a mere preference in regard to leadership became a litmus test for Spirit-filled leadership. In other words, when Apollos came to town many were wooed by his charismatic presence and larger-than-life preaching. As a result, many of the believer’s in Corinth had a certain affinity for Apollos. However, it did not take long for that affinity to turn into idolatry. Those who were at first merely appreciative of Apollos’ ministry began to favor Apollos so much that they made him the standard of all Spirit-filled, Christian leadership, chalking all other leaders up as second rate, lower-class leaders.

Second, it is important to note that the problem did not lay in the leaders themselves. In other words, it was not Paul, Apollos, Peter, and it certainly was not Christ who was to fault for the party spirit at Corinth. Sometimes division over leaders is the fault of the leaders. Sometimes leaders build themselves up, tearing all other leaders down as if they alone had an insider’s relationship with the Godhead. But this was not the case in Corinth. The sin lay at the feet of the people in the pew in Corinth. When you first read through 1 Corinthians you might begin to wonder if Paul and Apollos didn’t get along well; however, once you read it a few times it will become quite clear that Paul and Apollos were both annoyed with the church for ‘lionizing’ them,[5] using their names as a cause for division. For instance, we know from 1 Corinthians 3:5-6 that Paul considered Apollos his partner in the advancement of the Gospel. 1 Corinthians 16:12 is also quite interesting;

About our brother Apollos: I strongly urged him to come to you with the brothers, but he was not at all willing to come now. However, when he has time, he will come.

You get this sense that Apollos didn’t want to come to Corinth for a specific reason. Some have suggested that Apollos didn’t want to return because he did not want to fuel the fire; he did not want to make the competitive party spirit even worse, knowing that he himself, as much as he hated it, was a large part of the equation.[6] This makes good enough sense. Either way, it evidences the fact that Paul and Apollos had a good relationship-there was no bad blood between them. This verse gives us every reason to believe that they advocated for each other, combating the very division that revolved around them. You even get the sense that Paul himself was annoyed with the Corinthians for elevating him. Look at his biting words of rebuke in 1 Corinthians 1:13-17.

Is Christ divided? Was it Paul who was crucified for you? Or were you baptized in Paul’s name? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so that no one can say you had been baptized in my name. 16 I did, in fact, baptize the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t know if I baptized anyone else. 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel-not with clever words, so that the cross of Christ will not be emptied [of its effect].

There is no doubting the fact that Paul is expressing frustration in these words. In this way, it reminds me of how Martin Luther responded to his followers when they did silly and even destructive things in his name.[7] Paul challenges the Corinthians by asking a series of rhetorical questions that are clearly to be answered with a resounding ‘Never!’ In vss. 13-17 Paul is going to the extreme to show them how stupid they have been by dividing over mere men, himself included. He even goes so far to thank God that he didn’t baptize many of the believers in Corinth. And why does He thank God for this? Because if he had baptized more people, more people would have had reason to elevate him above Christ. He is thankful that God did not give him a greater platform than what he had. How contrary to the our modern day ’success-driven’ mindset! Verse 16 is especially interesting because Paul communicates the fact that he doesn’t even really care to know how many people he baptized-it is really no concern of his-he does not put another notch in his belt as he baptizes more people, as if baptism could be used as a reason for boasting!

Third, let us consider the dynamics of each of the four groups that Paul mentions.[8] First, there is the Paul group. Some in the church elevated Paul, making him out to be the quintessential Christian leader. It is easy to understand why many in Corinth would have done this. After all, Paul was their “father in Christ” (1 Corinthians 4:14-15). He planted the church in Corinth (Acts 17). This is common in Christianity; oftentimes a special affinity exists between a believer and the pastor or leader that led him/her to the Lord. Paul brought the Gospel to Corinth. He spent a year and a half organizing and establishing Christ’s work in Corinth. There is no doubt that those who were ‘of Paul’ were following him for these precise reasons. There is, of course, nothing wrong with having an affinity for a certain leader; however, the Corinthians had taken what was at first a simple affinity and had turned it into an issue for division. They had so elevated Paul that they excluded all other leaders from being in ‘Paul’s league,’ as it were.

Second, it seems reasonable to say that those who followed Apollos did so because of his great speaking ability (see Acts 18-19). There is no doubting the fact that he was something of a George Whitefield or a C.H. Spurgeon or a John Chrysostom or a D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones; he was able to captivate a large audience with his preaching. Apollos was to Paul what Barak Obama is to George Bush, or what John Piper is to J. Vernon McGee.[9] It is also true that Paul handed the baton off to Apollos in Corinth. In other words, although Paul dug the ditch in Corinth, Apollos labored with the people in the ditch after it was dug (”I planted, Apollos watered” 1 Corinthians 3:6). I am sure that many saw Apollos as the true discipler while Paul was just the evangelist. Some may have been thinking, “Surely, things got off the ground with Paul’s ministry, but we really grew when Apollos took over-he carried the church from her mere infantile stages of development over the threshold into maturity.”

Third, it is more difficult to nail down exactly what the distinctive marks of the Peter group were. It is true that Peter was the apostle to the Jews. Some may have preferred Peter for this very reason-especially the Jews in their number. It is also true that Peter had walked with Jesus from the very beginning. They may have seen him as one of the only fully legit apostles. It is obvious, for example, from 2 Corinthians that many in Corinth were questioning Paul’s apostleship because he had not walked with Christ as had the other apostles. Some may have preferred Peter, considering him to be a “super-apostle” (2 Corinthians 11:5). They may have pitted him against Paul and Apollos for these reasons. Paul also knew that many in the church consider Peter, James, and John to be the ‘pillars’ of early Christianity (Galatians 2:9). For whatever reason, the believers in Corinth were elevating Peter to the exclusion of Christ’s other Spirit-filled leaders.

Fourth, the Christ group is the most difficult to assess.[10] Paul just doesn’t elaborate on who the Christ group consisted of or what set them apart from the other groups. It has been suggested, however, and I would agree, that those who are ‘of Christ’ are those who have come to a place where they feel that they are not in need of any of God’s messengers or apostles. This sounds good on the face of it, but is actually quite absurd. First of all, it must be said that this group was not merely pledging allegiance to Christ alone; no, they were pledging allegiance to Christ alone as a way of separating themselves further and further from those who were pledging allegiance to Paul, Apollos, and Peter. Thus, they were using Christ Himself as a reason for division. As Dio Chrysostom says, “Even those who said they were of Christ were at fault because they were implicitly denying this to others and making Christ the head of a faction rather than the head of the whole.”[11] They were claiming to be independent; they thought that they didn’t need Christ’s appointed messengers, not realizing that Christ has gifted certain men for that very task. We would call these sorts of Christians ‘Lone Ranger Christians.’ They see themselves above the need of leadership. This position seems to be the most spiritual, but is actually just as horrid as the others.

Bottom line, each party was ‘out of bounds,’ spiritually speaking. They were using God’s very messengers, and even Christ Himself, as a reason to divide. This is what Paul is calling them to repent of.

Conclusion

Next week we will conclude our study on 1 Corinthians 1:10-17. I will be dealing with modern day parallels to the situation that was confronting the Corinthian church. In the meantime, let it be sufficient to remember that Christ’s messengers must never be pitted against each other. Christ, and Christ alone (as revealed in Scripture, of course), must be the banner around which we rally.

[1] I describe the “members of Chloe’s household” as those “in some way connected to… Chloe” because Paul does not make clear the exact relation of these people to Chloe. They are literally referred to as ‘those of Chloe’ (in the Greek). Gordon D. Fee speculates as to who these ‘members of Chloe’s house” could be: “One cannot tell whether her ‘household’ was intended, or her ‘business,’ although the two could be one in this case. These people could be either family, slaves, or freedman; there is no way to tell.” He does go on, however, to assert that he believes that it is more likely a reference to slaves or freedman. See Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians; The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1987), 54. Ben Witherington III strongly suggests that the ‘members of Chloe’s household’ were slaves. He helpfully explains the ancient practice of slavery, demonstrating that the slavery of Greco-Roman society was much different than that experienced in Colonial America. He says, “In ancient society slaves had a wide variety of roles, including serving as business agents for their owners, as Chloe’s people are likely to have been doing. ‘Slaves served in occupations ranging from personal stewards, custodians of children (paidagogoi) to grammarians, geometricians, musicians, managers of farms, masters of ships, estate stewards (oikonomoi) and money-lenders.’ Slaves were not necessarily people of poor background and little education. Some slaves were reasonably well-to-do, well-educated people who were then captured in some Roman conquest. These conquests were the major source of slaves for the empire. Furthermore, numerous people sold themselves into slavery because of economic necessity. There was often more security and more possibility for advancement as a slave than as a free poor person.” Witherington goes on to explain; “This does not mean that slavery was a good thing , but in order to perpetuate this huge pool of relatively low cost labor, the Romans had built into the system certain advantages not available to free poor people. These advantages also served as hedges against slave revolt.” Witherington III, Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995), 99. To get a better understanding of what God thinks of slavery read 1 Corinthians 7:20-23; Ephesians 6:5-9; Colossians 3:22-4:1; 1Timothy 6:1-2; Philemon 1-25 (especially vss. 15-19).

[2]Anthony C. Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text; The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 120.

[3] Garland offers a helpful modern day parallel; “In our age, it may be compared to persons who aspire to self-importance from the slightest association with someone famous. To give an extreme example: ‘This is so-and-so. His sister-in-law takers her dog to the same veterinarian that movie star X’s aunt uses.’” David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians; Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 44.

[4] For more information on this see Witherington III, Conflict and Community in Corinth, 100-101. Especially helpful is Witherington’s discussion about the seriousness, intensity, and even brutality surrounding the pupil/teacher relationships which characterized ancient sophism. Garland shares a similar view as that posited by Witherington. See Garland, 1 Corinthians; 42-43.

[5]See Garland, 1 Corinthians, 44.

[6] For example see Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 824-825; Witherington, Conflict and Community in Corinth, 86-87, 317; Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 1332.

[7] Garland reproduces Luther’s reaction to how high he had been elevated as a Christian leader; “What is Luther? The teaching is not mine. Nor was I crucified for anyone… How did I, poor stinking bag of maggots that I am, come to the point where people call the children of Christ by my evil name.” See Garland, 1 Corinthians, 49.

[8] There are, as would be expected, a whole host of differing perspectives as to the composition and unique distinctives of each of the four groups listed in 1 Corinthians 1:12. It will not be profitable to lay out the particulars of the debate in this setting. However, I will say that the position I advocate below is standard. Thiselton has produced the most extensive treatment of the subject (it is the most extensive that I have read, at least); however, his treatment of subject is strictly academic and leans on the obnoxiously thorough side of things. See Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 123-133. Fee, Barrett, Morris, Hodge, and Garland all deal sufficiently with the topic. See Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 55-59; C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians; Black’s New Testament Commentary (Peabody, Hendrickson Publishers, 1968, 2006), 43-46 (although Barrett’s position on the ‘Christ’ group is a bit of stretch, his position is clear enough); Leon Morris, 1 Corinthians: An Introduction and Commentary; Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1985), 46-47; Charles Hodge, A Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians; Geneva Series of Commentaries (Carlisle: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1857, 2000), 13-14; Garland, 1 Corinthians, 44-51. Garland’s and Fee’s commentary on the subject are by far the most helpful. Although it would be convenient to nail the distinctives of these various groups down with exact certainty, Paul simply does not lend us enough data to do so. What follows is an educated guess; however, Paul’s main point is clear (and that is all that really matters); the church in Corinth is dividing over leading personalities in the church. The actual make-up of the splintering groups is what is not 100% clear. I would, however, assert that the reasons why some were pitting Apollos against Paul (and vice versa) is much clearer than the divisions existing among the two other personality groups mentioned by Paul in 1:12. After all, the Paul/Apollos divide seems plain enough after even a cursory read-through of 1 Corinthians 1-4, and especially when read in light of Acts 18-19.

[9] I have nothing but the highest respect for Dr. McGee, but there is no questioning the fact that he was from a different generation and communicated the word of God with much less pizazz than does Piper. This is not to say that Piper is more full of the Spirit than Dr. McGee–to say such a thing would be just as absurd as saying that the Apostle Paul was less full of the Spirit than Apollos!

[10] Some have unsuccessfully sought to prove that there was no “Christ group” in Corinth, but rather that Paul was claiming to be of Christ, and in so doing calling the Corinthians to follow him in the practice. Although this would be convenient, the simple grammar of the passage does not favor such a position as Fee explains. “Despite the attractiveness of Lake’s translation… it has against it the clear listing intended by the men, de, de, de, with no signal that there is a break with the fourth member, not to mention that the first question in v. 13 seems to suppose that the fourth slogan is one of theirs.” Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, footnote 54 on pages 58-59.

[11] Dio Chrysostom as cited in Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 134.

Click here to watch this sermon on video.

Click here to listen to this sermon (right click  on ‘Click here’ and choose ‘Save link as’ to download).

Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship, Boscawen, NH Sunday, June 27, 2010.

Cracking Down on Division
1 Corinthians 1:10-17
Jimmy Snowden
Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship: Boscawen, NH on June 20, 2010

Introduction

This morning we will be turning our attention to the main body of Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians. Before moving into this first major section of 1 Corinthians it will be helpful to remember what the Spirit (through Paul) has said up to this point. Paul has been building the Corinthians up by reminding them of the grace of God that is theirs in Christ Jesus. You will remember from our study through 1 Corinthians 1:4-9 that Paul labored to encourage them in the grace of God, reminding them that God’s grace was sufficient to get them in the door, to make them thrive while they were in the door, and to keep them in the door until the return of Jesus. He sought to remind them of the basis of their Christians assurance, which is the faithful and gracious character of God as mediated through His Son. We established the fact that it was necessary for Paul to encourage them in these things because of the hard, stinging word that was to follow.

Overview of 1 Corinthians 1:10-4:21

After greeting the Corinthians (1:1-3) and grounding them in the bedrock of God’s grace (1:4-9), Paul wastes no time and gets right to his reason for writing in vs. 10-13.

10 Now I urge you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all say the same thing, that there be no divisions among you, and that you be united with the same understanding and the same conviction. 11 For it has been reported to me about you, my brothers, by members of Chloe’s household, that there are quarrels among you. 12 What I am saying is this: each of you says, “I’m with Paul,” or “I’m with Apollos,” or “I’m with Cephas,” or “I’m with Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was it Paul who was crucified for you? Or were you baptized in Paul’s name?

As is clear from vss. 10-11, Paul wrote this letter to the Corinthians to combat their divisiveness. The church in Corinth was splintering. And what was the cause of their division? Leaders! Well, the problem was not the leaders themselves, but rather the Corinthian’s elevation of leaders. We are going to discuss this section in greater detail this morning, but I want to first point out the fact that Paul deals with the issue of division over leaders all the way to the end of chapter 4. On the first read through you may not realize that chapters 1-4 comprise a long, elaborate discussion on one primary issue. It at first seems as though Paul were almost aimless in his discourse; first he talks about divisions, then preaching, then the Spirit and revelation, then the danger of desecrating the temple of the Holy Spirit, and then the status of Christ’s ministers. Certainly, Paul does touch on each one of these various issues, but this does not mean that he deals with each of these as isolated topics. This section is comprised of one overarching issue, and the reason why Paul touches on so many different subjects is because doing so is necessary to get a biblical view of the primary issue, which has to do with the Corinthian’s division over leaders.[1]

Paul does not get off topic even once in these first four chapters. This should say something to us about the urgency of the situation in Corinth. Division over leaders is something that the church of Jesus Christ still struggles with today. The problem was concentrated in Corinth because of some of the cultural realities in Corinth at the time (more on this next week). Nonetheless, a word about divisions, and especially about division over leaders, is just as relevant to us today as it was to the Corinthians in the first century. What we will find as we move along in this section is that the root of the Corinthian’s division over leaders was found in the fact that they were evaluating these men with the yard stick of Corinth instead of evaluating them with God’s yardstick, the yard stick of the cross. Because they were not using the cross as their standard of evaluation, they put these men on a pedestal and in the process dethroned Christ as the foundation of their fellowship.

Paul introduces the main reason for which he is rebuking the Corinthians in 1:10-17 (as is clear from the text, he is rebuking them for dividing over leaders), and then he seeks to fix their division problem in 1:18-4:21. The bulk of Paul’s instruction is theological, as opposed to practical, in nature. In other words, he seeks to fix their unity problems by fixing their theology. Paul did not waste his time focusing on their external behavior (as many of our modern day Christian counselors would); rather, he sought to, by the power of the Spirit, foundationally shape their worldview. Paul went straight to the root of the problem. He knew, being inspired by the Holy Spirit, that orthopraxy (right living) flows out of orthodoxy (right believing).

1 Corinthians 1:10

Let’s go ahead and dive into 1 Corinthians 1:10. It is interesting how Paul just jumps headlong into the heart of his grievances with the Corinthians. Some people have the natural ability of bringing up controversial issues in a completely noncontroversial way. Some of God’s kids are calm, collected, and smooth when they bring up sensitive issues. Some people have the ability to tell you that you are ugly in a way that makes you feel good about yourself. On the other hand, some people are like a bull in a china shop; instead of bringing up a sensitive or controversial issue with ease and fluidity, everything they say lands with a loud Thud! It seems that Paul fell into the latter of the two categories. Although the first nine verses of 1 Corinthians are formal (that is, they are standard components to a typical letter in the ancient world), they are full of encouragement and grace. Once he gets to vs. 10, however, he, in essence, says, ‘Now lets cut to the chase… you guys need to grow up!’ I am not suggesting that his words in 1:1-9 were forced or that they were mere formalities, but I am suggesting that Paul was not the sort who was going to beat around the bush. He said it like it is and never danced around the issues at hand. Take a look at the passage with me.

10 Now I urge you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all say the same thing, that there be no divisions among you, and that you be united with the same understanding and the same conviction.

Paul does not disrespect the Corinthians in any way, nor does he speak down to them. He refers to them as ‘brothers,’ putting himself on same level with them. But there is no mistaking the fact that he is here calling them to repentance ‘in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ You get the sense with the word “now” in the first part of the verse that Paul wanted to waste no time in addressing the matter at hand. His approach to the subject is terse, authoritative, and urgent, and yet is not “the lordly demand of a tyrant who bludgeons underlines into submission.”[2] In other words, he approaches them with an element of humble authority. The truths laid forth in vss. 1-9 are no mere trivialities-God had certainly extended abundant mercy to the Corinthians-and yet the truth of God’s grace in no way led Paul to minimize the undeniable truth with regard to the Corinthians need to repent of their divisiveness.

In the second half of vs. 10 Paul issues a series of three similar exhortations: he exhorts them to 1. “say the same thing,” to 2. have “no divisions among you,” and to 3. “be united with the same understanding and the same conviction.”[3] We will look at each of these three exhortations in the order that they appear in the verse. First, Paul exhorts the Corinthians as a whole to “say the same thing.” The phrase “say the same thing” is literally rendered, “think the same thing,” and carries with it the idea of agreement.[4] Those who say the same thing are unified-they speak with one voice, as it were. Garland illustrates Paul’s intended point; “They are to be like a chorus singing from the same page of music, not like a cat’s concert with each howling his or her own cacophonous tune.”[5] They are acting in opposition to one another. They are not in fundamental agreement about what the church is primarily supposed to be about.

When an on-looking world glances our way, what do they see? Do they see a group of people who are basically meeting together but all for completely different reasons? Are we all on the same page or are we all about our own little thing; like a bunch of little kids each playing with their own little toys in their own little microcosms? Are we all wandering around on our own, or are we fixed on one goal? In the church we often times think that we have the same goal when, in reality, we do not. What is our mission as the church? To bring glory to God through the advancement of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We bring this mission about by living, believing, and obeying God’s word. We would all also agree that this cannot happen as a mere exercise in discipline, but must rather be the overflow of a heart that loves and rejoices in the good Person we know God to be. I think that we would all agree that this is the foundational mission of the church. But so often we make our own pet agendas, as biblical as they may be, the center of the church’s mission. Even though our unique emphases may even be essential (that is, they are undeniable, non-debatable truths or activities), when we make them the foundational component to the mission, we set ourselves up for disagreement on the foundational mission of the church. In this way, then, we must be able to distinguish what is of first importance from what is of second importance from what is of third importance. The fact of the matter is that every single letter of the word of God is important, and yet there are certain things that are of central importance. A truly mature believer will learn to discern those things of first importance without losing a passion to hammer out the things of second or third importance.

So when we speak of being in agreement it must not mean that we are to seek complete agreement on every little, cotton-pickin’ issue under the sun. It must mean that we are in agreement on two things: 1. the essential components of the Christian faith and 2. that we will unreservedly maintain unity in the essential components of the Christian faith. In other words, being in agreement has more to do than just agreeing to the same set of essential doctrines, it has to do with being in agreement to let nothing get in the way of our unity on those essential doctrines. On the one hand, I can maintain meaningful and beneficial fellowship with an Arminian believer (or a dispensationalist or a cessationist), even though we will be miles apart on a whole host of theological issues if (and only if) we not only agree on the essential tenets of the Christian faith, but if have an unswerving commitment to keep those essential tenets of first importance. On the other hand, it would prove difficult to maintain any level of serious sacrificial fellowship even with a believer with which I had a great deal of doctrinal agreement on all of the major debatable issues if our fellowship was not built first and foremost upon an unswerving commitment to keeping the first things first. Unity based upon compatibility, even if it be doctrinal compatibility, only goes as deep as the compatibility. In other words, the most minor difference in theological nuance is enough to rip apart a Gospel partnership if there is not something larger than debatable doctrine holding the partnership together.

Paul will go on to assert (in the context) that Jesus Christ crucified must be the center of our fellowship. Paul exhorts the Corinthians to think the same thing. This should not cause us to push for some sort of a universally accepted systematic theology. Rather, it should cause us to unreservedly commit ourselves to the essential tenets of the faith; namely, the person and finished work of Jesus Christ as revealed in Scripture. Not just nodding the head to these central tenets, but arranging our lives and the whole our Christianity around these tenets in such a way that reflects the fact that these essential tenets are in fact of first importance. This is what the Corinthians are not doing, and this is why Paul lambastes them here in this passage. The Corinthians are letting peripheral things (such as what Christian leader to follow) short circuit their unified agreement on the things of first importance. As already stated, and which we will explore in greater detail next week, the Corinthians were not basing their unity on the central tenets (or shall I say Person) of the faith, but rather on their preferred version or expression of the faith-the version or expression associated with the particular leader they happened to find most appealing.

Second, Paul issues forth a negative exhortation; “that there be no divisions among you.” The word ‘division’ (schisma) is a reference to a tear that can be made in a garment. BDAG suggests that it may refer to “the condition resulting from splitting or tearing.”[6] The word is used, for instance, in Matthew 9:16, where Jesus says,

No one patches an old garment with unshrunk cloth, because the patch pulls away from the garment and makes the tear (schima) worse.

Jesus is here speaking of the fact that when you put a new patch on an old garment, because the fabric of the new patch has not yet shrunk-because it has not yet been washed-and because the fabric of the old garment has already been shrunk-because it has been washed-as soon as the garment finds its way into the wash tub for the first time, the new patch will shrink, creating an even larger tear (schisma) in the garment.[7] This is exactly what is happening at the church in Corinth. The body is being ripped apart. The body is being torn in two. No wonder Paul asks such a ridiculous rhetorical question in vs. 16; “Is Christ divided?” He asks this question to demonstrate for the Corinthians the absurdity of their division over leaders. It will become evident that the cause for the division in Corinth is not the result of doctrinal disagreement, but rather is the result of them following certain leaders-which is oft times referred to as the ‘personality cult.’[8]

Third, Paul exhorts the Corinthians to “be united.” The second and the third exhortation should really go together. Paul negatively exhorts them to not be divided (to not be torn) and then he positively exhorts them to be united. The word ‘united’ (katartizo) connotes the idea of “restoring anything to its right condition.”[9] This word was used in the Gospel of Matthew when Jesus called James and John as they were in their fishing boats mending (katartizo) their nets (see Matthew 4:21). The idea is that the Corinthians are being torn (schisma) because of their unbiblical, childish way of turning God’s messengers into superheroes, and he now here exhorts them to mend (katartizo) what has been torn. He is calling them to mend the fellowship, to restore it, to refurbish it to its “proper condition.”[10] Thus, I would see an intimate connection between the second and the third exhortation given in vs. 10. Indeed, Gary S. Shogren says the following about the word katartizo; “‘perfectly united’ in other contexts has to do with the literal mending of tears in a fabric; it is more than keeping it in one piece, but restoring the oneness that had already been lost.”[11]

And how are they to fix (or mend) the tears that have occurred in their fellowship-how are they to seek restoration; how are they to attain perfect unity? By having “the same understanding and the same conviction.” First of all, notice the word ’same.’ They are to have a shared understanding and a shared conviction. To have the same understanding refers to having the same mind, or to “thinking the same thing” (1:10). To “have the same conviction” refers to sharing a common purpose or goal. Paul communicates the same idea in Philippians 2:1-4.

1 If then there is any encouragement in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any affection and mercy, 2 fulfill my joy by thinking the same way, having the same love, sharing the same feelings, focusing on one goal. 3 Do nothing out of rivalry or conceit, but in humility consider others as more important than yourselves. 4 Everyone should look out not [only] for his own interests, but also for the interests of others.

Notice the emphasis on the word ’same.’ Once again he is communicating the idea of sharing. The Philippians are to think the same way, have the same love, have the same feelings, and to have one goal. Everything is shared–everything is the same. Also, notice Paul’s emphasis on unity through selfless and sacrificial service in vss. 3-4. In other words, Paul cannot imagine unity being possible when the people of God selfishly pursue their own agendas to the detriment of the primary mission.

Concluding Application

I want to close with just a few concluding points of application. 1. Unity is not maintained by uniformity, but rather by way of a common goal.[12] There is a world of difference between seeking agreement on every single minute doctrine and seeking agreement on the essentials. The church in Corinth was diverse itself. Paul never exhorted them to put all of their differences aside, rebuking them for their diversity. Rather, what Paul did do was call them to find unity in regard to a foundational purpose. A unity which is dependent upon complete uniformity is no unity at all. In other words, the goal of Christian discipleship should not be the reproduction of carbon-copy, cookie-cutter Christians. Unity is not achieved when everyone reads the same bible translation, when we all wear the same clothes, when we all like the same sort of music, or even when we are all in agreement on all of the confrontational doctrines of the faith. Unity is not evidenced by uniformity.

2. Unity can only be had when the saints rally around Jesus Christ and Him crucified. Unity can only be had when we ‘think the same thing,’ when we have one common goal. The glory of God in the advancement of the Gospel of Jesus Christ born out of hearts that love and cherish God must be a goal that we all share. And we must allow nothing to get in the way of the pursuit of this one ultimate goal. We must have our eyes fixed, our gaze unmoved. We must not simply seek agreement to a set of common held beliefs; we must rather be committed to keeping these common held beliefs at the center of all that we do and believe.

3. It is impossible for the church to keep her focus on one goal if she does not learn selfless and sacrificial commitment to the one goal. Just as in the military, the objective will never be reached unless all of the soldiers embrace the essential agenda, come what may. The problem with the Corinthians was that they were all aimlessly pursuing their own selfish goals. They saw the church as a stepping ladder to get where they wanted to go. All commitments to self must be abandoned for the sake of the ultimate goal.

4. Disunity is not tolerated in biblical Christianity. Disunity must never be seen as a simple fixture in Christianity. As we look back at the 2000 years of Christian history that have went before us, we see a long history of schism upon schism, disunity upon disunity. The saints have found any and every reason to divide. However, we should never look at church history and conclude that divisions are just part and parcel with Christianity, something that we just simply have to accept. To willingly embrace division as an acceptable feature of Christianity is to encourage the dividing of our Christ. Paul chastises the Corinthians for their divisions. Accepting division as a foundational part of what Christianity is distorts the very heart of what it means to be the body of Christ. John, in John 17, seems to communicate that it is unity in the face of diversity that evidences to the world the unique character and mission of our Triune God (see especially John 17:20-31).

[1] Both Anthony C. Thisselton and David E. Garland offer a helpful overview of the flow of Paul’s argument about division over leaders from 1:10-4:21. See Anthony C. Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text; The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 107-108; David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians; Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 37-39. Fee has also developed a helpful outline of Paul’s flow of thought, but differs a bit from Garland and Thisselton in that he sees a greater amount of anti-Paul sentiment in Corinth, and thus suggests that a great deal of 1:10-4:21 is defensive in nature (in other words, Fee argues that Paul spends a great deal of time defending his own apostleship in 1:10-4:21). See both Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians; The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1987), 47-51 and Gordon D. Fee and Douglas K. Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth; 3^rd ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 59-68. Although I believe that Fee reads the ethos 2 Corinthians a bit too much into 1 Corinthians (not allowing for a large anti-Paul sentiment to develop between the deployment of 1 Corinthians and the composition of 2 Corinthians), his reasoning is quite clear. I would allow for more of an anti-Paul sentiment in Corinth that Garland and Thisselton are willing to accept. It seems that both sides go a bit too far in their positions.

Most helpful was Gary S. Shogren’s ‘down to earth’ structuring of 1:10-4:21. Rather than merely explaining the flow of Paul’s thought, he demonstrates it by offering a ‘making-a-long-story-short’ version in modern day lingo. See Gary S. Shogren, 1 Corintios. Comentario Bíblico Iberoamericano (Buenos Aires: Ediciones Kairos, forthcoming), 53-54. Basically, in this section Paul seeks to dismantle their unwarranted elevation of the leaders of the church by demonstrating for them that the power of God lay not in the leader’s ability to package the Gospel, but rather in the Gospel itself (1:18-2:5), that the Gospel is advanced most chiefly through the working of the Spirit, not through the cleverness or determination of God’s messengers (2:6-3:4), and  that God’s appointed messengers are nothing but stewards who fearfully labor knowing that they will have to answer to their master for how they served His sanctuary, the church (3:5-17-4:13). Paul then ends this section of exhortation with a fatherly and gentle reminder that Paul spoke to them bluntly about these things (about their unwarranted exaltation of God’s messengers) for their good, for their restoration (4:14-21). Garland posits that Paul uses the word for “I exhort you” (parakalo) in 1:10 and 4:16 as book ends (called an inclusion), marking the beginning and end of this section dealing the Corinthians division over leaders. See Garland, 1 Corinthians, 39.

[2] Garland, 1 Corinthians, 41.

[3] Notice that the first and third exhortations are positive (do this) and the second is negative (don’t do that).

[4] Ibid. Garland, Thisselton (following Lightfoot) are both in agreement that the language used here by Paul is from the political arena in ancient Greco-Roman culture. See Garland, 1 Corinthians, 41-42 and Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 116-117.

[5] Ibid., 42.

[6] Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG). Edited by Frederick William Denker, 3^d Ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), 981.

[7] Craig L. Blomberg helpfully explains; “One cannot put an unshrunken patch on an already-shrunk garment; for when it is washed, the patch will shrink, pulling at the garment and tearing it further.” Craig L. Blomberg, Matthew: An Exegetical and Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992), 158.

[8] This phrase is used by John R. W. Stott, Basic Christian Leadership: Biblical Models of Church, Gospel and Ministry (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2006), 100.

[9] Leon Morris, 1 Corinthians; Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1985), 46.

[10] See BDAG, 526.

[11] Shogren, 1 Corintios, 55.

[12] Shogren’s commentary stands a good head and a half taller than the others in the area useful application based in solid exegesis. See especially Shogren, 1 Corintios, 55-58.

Click here to watch this sermon on video.

Click here to listen to this sermon (right click  on ‘Click here’ and choose ‘Save link as’ to download).

Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship, Boscawen, NH Sunday, June 13, 2010.

I put up a post a few days ago which contained a quote by John Stott from his landmark work, Basic Christianity, regarding the sinfulness of mankind. I stated that I had every intention on composing a follow up post dealing with the Good News centering on what God has done  through His Son, Jesus Christ, to save us from our sin. Without a doubt, there would be nothing but despair and darkness if God had decided to leave us to our own devices to save ourselves. And it must be stated that God was under no obligation to do anything for us; after all, when the angels in glory rebelled against God He gave them no second chance (2 Peter 2:4). The only reason we can have hope is because God has done something for us that He was in no way under compulsion to do.

The only reason we can have hope is because God, motivated by love (John 3:16), extended His grace to us in Christ Jesus. Stott so very clearly explains the Good News of what God has done for sinners like you and me through  Jesus. After quoting 2 Corinthians 5:21 (which says, “God made Him [Jesus] who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.”), Stott says,

“As we begin to reflect on the cross, we can begin to understand the terrible implications of these words. At twelve noon ‘darkness came over the whole land’ that continued for three hours until Jesus died. With the darkness came silence, for no eye should see, and no lips could tell, the agony of soul that the spotless Lamb of God was now enduring. The accumulated sins from the whole of human history were laid upon him. Voluntarily he bore them in his own body. He made them his own. He took full responsibility for them” (pg. 113).

He continues;

“And then in desolate spiritual abandonment a cry was wrung from his lips, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ It was a quotation from the first verse of Psalm 22… He quoted this verse from the Bible… because he believed that he  himself was fulfilling it. He was bearing our sins. And God whose ‘eyes were too pure to look on evil’ and who ‘cannot tolerate wrong’ turned his face away. Our sins came between the Father and the Son. The Lord Jesus Christ, who was eternally with the Father, who enjoyed unbroken communion with him throughout his life on earth, was momentarily abandoned. Our sins sent Christ to hell. He tasted the agony of a soul alienated from God. Bearing our sins, he died our death. He endured instead of us the penalty of separation from God that our sins deserved” (pg. 113-114)

He concludes with these words;

Then at once emerging from that outer darkness, he cried out in triumph, ‘It is finished,’ and finally, ‘Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.’ And so he died. The work he had come to do was completed. The salvation he had come to win was accomplished. The sins of the world had been carried away. Reconciliation to God was available to all who would trust this Savior for themselves and receive him as their own. Immediately, as if to demonstrate this truth publicly, the unseen hand of God tore down the curtain in the Temple. It was no longer needed. The way into God’s holy presence was no longer barred. Christ had ‘opened the gate of heaven to all believers.’ And thirty-six hours later he was raised from the dead, to prove that he had not died in vain” (pg. 114).

This is Good News indeed. That which makes us deserving of the wrath of God (sin) has been removed. Salvation is now free for the taking. Those who repent of their sins and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ can have peace with God; those who receive Jesus as their Lord and Savior can enjoy eternal life through Him.

John Stott has been nothing short of a giant in Christianity in the last fifty years. I do not mean to elevate a man, and yet I know that God has raised certain men up for the purpose of pointing His creatures to Himself. I have been reading (for the first time) his classic work, Basic Christianity. As I was reading through the chapter on sin, I knew that I just had to post his comments on the subject. His argument is beyond convincing. As you read this, keep in mind that these words were penned well over 50 years ago. Time and history (the history of the last 50 years, that is) have proven even further the truth of what he has written. Here is the quote.

The history of the last hundred years or so has convinced many people that the problem of evil is located in human beings themselves, not merely in human society. The nineteenth century saw a flourishing of liberal optimism. It was widely believed that human nature was fundamentally good, that evil was largely caused by ignorance and bad housing, and that education and social reform would enable people to live together in happiness and goodwill. But this illusion has been shattered by the hard facts of history. Educational opportunities have spread rapidly throughout the world, and many welfare states have been created. But our human capacity to get it wrong seems undaunted. The persistence of conflict on the world stage and the widespread denial of human rights, together with the general increase of violence and crime, have forced thoughtful people to acknowledge that a hard core of selfishness exists in each and every one of us.

Much that we take for granted in a ‘civilized’ society is actually based upon the assumption of human sin. Nearly all legislation has grown up because we simply cannot be trusted to settle our disputes with justice and without self-interest. A promise is not enough; we need a contract. Doors are not enough; we have to lock and bolt them. The payment of fares is not enough; tickets have to be issued, inspected, and collected. Law and order are not enough; we need the police to enforce them. All this is due to our sin. We cannot trust each other. We need protection against one another. It is a terrible indication of what human nature is really like (pg. 76).

This, of course, is not a pretty picture that Stott is painting. There is hope. Stott goes on to speak about the only place hope can be found for sinners such as us. However, it is a good thing to feel the weight of despair that sin brings for a season before being showered with the Good News. I will post another quote from Stott in a few days describing the transcendent hope that can be found in the face of such a bleak situation, a situation that is true of all humans (great and insignificant, male and female, rich and poor, etc.). But don’t push the feelings of despair that may creep up in your soul under the rug as if everything were going to be okay. The fact is that everything is not okay. The fact is that everything is only black and decaying and rotten and condemned apart from the Good News. I will get to the Good News in a few days. But for the time being if you don’t know the Good News, let the reality of sin tear you apart so that when the Good News is shared, you might see it as truly Good News.

The Already and the Not Yet (Part II)
1 Corinthians 1:4-7 and 1 John 2:8
Jimmy Snowden
Sovereign Grace Fellowship: Boscawen, NH

Introduction

This morning we are going to be continuing the discussion we began last week regarding the already/not yet tension of our lives as Christians. Last week I set out to answer one question (stated in two ways);

“In what sense can our salvation be both present and future? To what degree and in what way is our future salvation realized in the present?”

The fact is that the Christian life has an entirely future oriented stance. Our hope is still yet a future reality. This is why Christianity is spoken of in terms of faith and hope.[1] I have already labored to prove from the Scriptures the forward-looking nature of the Christian life. This, of course, brings up many questions about the nature of our faith. To what degree and in what way is our future salvation realized in the present? We know that the salvation won for us by God through His Son is something that we presently enjoy. But how much of our future salvation is realized in the present?

Theologians have answered this question by speaking of the already/not yet tension. In other words, they suggest that the blessings of the cross are already being poured out on the people of God and yet they are not yet being poured out in the fullest sense of the word, and will not be until the second coming of Jesus. We are caught between the already and the not yet. Jesus has died and risen from the grave, securing our salvation, the Spirit has been given that this salvation might be enjoyed by the people of God, but our final salvation will not take place until Jesus comes back to usher in His kingdom. In other words, although the blessings of the age to come are already being realized in our present age, they are not yet being realized in their fullest, consummate form.

Last week we looked at how the already/not yet tension radically shapes our view of our personal salvation. We saw that there is an already/not yet aspect to our salvation, redemption, adoption, freedom from sin, heavenly dwelling, and even eternal life. This morning we will be continuing our discussion regarding this already/not yet tension, but we will be looking at it with a different lens. Instead of looking at how this perspective radically shapes and informs our present personal salvation we will looking at how this perspective radically shapes and informs our understanding of God’s Kingdom.

I know that I have already shared many of the truths with you that I will be sharing this morning; however I think it will be helpful to review them with the purpose of seeing how they contribute to this overarching already/not yet emphasis in the Scriptures. This is necessary because the already/not yet emphasis is no mere passing thought in the mind of God. This is what fundamentally characterizes the age in which we live. In other words, this is a foundational worldview for the Christian. There are certain doctrines (teachings) in the bible which are important and yet not foundational, such as limited atonement or the mode of baptism. Although it is important that a believer acquire a biblical view of the scope of the atonement (that is, whether one has an Arminian, Ameraldian, or Calvinistic view of the atonement), where a believer actually falls on these sorts of issues will not greatly affect their overall view of biblical doctrine. Other doctrines, on the other hand, are extremely foundational, affecting (to at least one degree or another) a believer’s understanding of almost every other doctrine in the bible.

I run the risk of redundancy by doing what I am doing this morning, but it is important that you see that this already/not yet tension pervades the entire New Testament. This perspective is not something that shows up here and there. The already/not yet tension is the characteristic shape of our lives as Christians on this earth. My hope this morning is that this doctrine find a large place in your understanding of God’s Kingdom, His cosmic mission, and in your understanding of the Christian life.

1 John 2:8

Before surveying the biblical field for evidence of the already/not yet tension in regard to God’s Kingdom, I want to draw your attention to 1 John 2:8. This passage so very clearly communicates the already/not yet aspect of God’s present day activity in the world in a few short words. Take a look at it with me.

Yet I am writing a new command, which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining.

Notice how John characterizes the shape of God’s redemptive activity for this present age. There are two foundation realities to God’s Kingdom in our present age: 1.” the darkness is passing away” and 2. “the true light is already shining.” First of all, the darkness is ‘passing away’. John does not say that the darkness has passed away or that it will pass away. He speaks of it as a process. The darkness is in the process of passing away. It has not passed away in the fullest sense of the word, and yet it is being pushed out. The age of this world is already being overcome by the Kingdom of Christ and yet it is not yet fully overcome. Second, we see that the true light is ‘already shining’. The true light, which is Jesus in all of His glory, is already shining. As His already-shining light shines it dispels the darkness, and yet the darkness is not yet finally gone.

What do you see when you look around; the true light or darkness? Both! John is truly communicating an overlap. The age of darkness and the age of light are coexisting in this world. Our experience testifies to this very reality, does it not? This in no way means that light and darkness are friends, but it does mean that we live in an age of transition. Our world is characterized by both darkness and light. The darkness in the process of passing away and the true light is in the process of completely overtaking the darkness. For the time being we are stuck between the already and the not yet. The darkness is already being pushed out and yet it is not yet fully pushed out; the true light is already shining and yet it has not yet fully overcome the darkness.

Illustrating Our Present Reality

We live in an age of transition. There have been a few illustrations that have been helpful to communicate the transitionary nature of our present age. First, it can be likened to the transitionary period common to our modern day presidential elections. After the votes were counted in November of 2008, Barak Obama was named the ‘President-Elect of the United States’. It was not until January 20, 2010, however, that Obama was officially sworn in as the ‘President of the United States of America’. For a short three month period the nation underwent a transition of power. Although the victory was in the bag for Obama-the votes had already been counted-there was a three month transition before he actually took office as president. Bush was still the official President throughout this time, and yet he knew that his term as President was all but over. This three month period is oftentimes viewed as a time of vulnerability because there is no clear leader; the presiding President has no time to affect any real change (and thus is often times referred to as a ’sitting duck’) and the President-elect is not yet officially in office. Sometimes the transition is smooth (as it was in 2008) and other times the transition is fraught with conflict.

This is an imperfect picture of the age in which we are presently in. I am in no way suggesting that either Bush or Obama are a picture of either Satan or Jesus (this illustration would work for any historic President/President-elect transition). The reason why it is hard to see the similarity between the two operations (that is, between the transitionary nature of this present age in God’s redemptive activity and the transitionary nature of the presidency) is because God’s time table is much larger than that of our modern day elections. The transitionary interval in modern day elections is only a matter of three months, with God it is a matter of millennia upon millennia (upon possibly millennia, etc.). However, we must remember that “with the Lord one day is like 1,000 years, and 1,000 years is like one day” (2 Peter 3:8). Jesus has the victory in the bag-the votes have been counted, as it were-and yet we live in a day and age of transition. The age of transition may seem excruciatingly (faith-shakinly even-see 2 Peter 3) long to us short-lived mortals, but to our eternal God the time between his ascension and second coming is a mere breath.

Another helpful illustration is that of a rescue on the sea. A boat capsizes leaving a straggler clinging to a lifesaver. A rescue boat comes along and pulls the stranded passenger out of the tumultuous sea. In one sense the person has been rescued; however, we must remember that the rescued passenger is still in the middle of the vast sea. He may be in a lifeboat but his feet are not yet on dry ground. Even though land may be seen on the horizon, he still feels the waves of the unpredictable sea crash against the side of the boat; he still feels the mist spray off the bow of the boat as it dips up and down with the swelling of the water. The man has been rescued and yet the lifeboat has not yet made it to shore. There is no questioning the ability of the lifeboat to make it to shore and yet that is his greatest anticipation. This is true of us as well. God has bought our salvation, securing it through His Son’s death on the cross. When we place our faith in Jesus as our only hope we are saved. And yet, although we are in the boat, although our future salvation is secured, we have not yet reached dry ground. Our eschatological salvation is in the bag and yet we are still in the life boat making our way to the shore.[2]

These are just a few of the illustrations that have been used to describe the already/not yet tension in regard to a believer’s personal salvation and in regard to the already/not yet tension in regard to the Kingdom of God and reign of Jesus Christ. Consider what Gordon D. Fee has to say to this issue.

“Very early, beginning with Peter’s sermon in Acts 3, the early Christians came to realize that Jesus had not come to usher in the ‘final’ end but the ‘beginning’ of the end, as it were. Thus they came to see that with Jesus’ death and resurrection, and with the coming of the Spirit, the blessings and benefits of the future had already come. In a sense, therefore, the end had already come. But in another sense the end had not yet fully come. Thus it was already but not yet.

The early believers, therefore, learned to be a truly eschatological people. They lived between the times-that is, between the beginning of the end and the consummation of the end.”[3]

As we did last week, I want to take a large sampling of passages to simply reinforce the fact that we live sandwiched between the already and the not yet. This morning, however, we will only be considering passages which speak to the already/not yet nature of the Kingdom of God/the reign of Christ. Consider these passages with me.

The Kingdom

The Scriptures clearly teach that although the Kingdom of God, which is really synonymous with the reign of God, was inaugurated[4] upon the death, burial, resurrection and ascension of Christ, His Kingdom will not be consummated[5] until the second coming.

Already

Luke 17:20-21; ”Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God will come, He answered them, “The kingdom of God is not coming with something observable; no one will say, ‘Look here!’ or ‘There!’ For you see, the kingdom of God is among you.”

1 John 2:8; “Yet I am writing you a new command, which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining.”

Matthew 6:10; “Your kingdom come–Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

Not Yet

1 John 2:8; “Yet I am writing you a new command, which is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining.”

Matthew 6:10; “Your kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”

Revelation 12:10; Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say: The salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Messiah have now come, because the accuser of our brothers has been thrown out: the one who accuses them before our God day and night.

The Kingdom of God is already among us, the true light is already shining, and yet we are to pray that God would make his heavenly kingdom a present reality on this earth. We know that the light has not yet fully overtaken the darkness and we know that there is great need to pray for the Kingdom to come because God’s will is by and large not being done on this earth. We pray for the Kingdom to come because we know that God can make it come-because it has already been inaugurated. However, Revelation 12, which is speaking of a future day, gives clear evidence that God’s Kingdom will only be consummated at the second coming of Jesus. There is a very clear already/not yet reality to the Kingdom of God.[6]

Jesus’ Reign

Although the Scriptures clearly communicate the fact that Jesus already reigns as King, the Scriptures also teach that Jesus is not yet ruling in the fullest sense of the word. Consider the already/not aspect of the reign of Jesus with me.

Already

Acts 2:32-35; “God has resurrected this Jesus. We are all witnesses of this. Therefore, since He has been exalted to the right hand of God and has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit, He has poured out what you both see and hear. For it was not David who ascended into the heavens, but he himself says: ‘The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand until I make your enemies Your footstool.’”

Hebrews 1:4-14; “…”

Not Yet

Acts 2:23-35;  “For it was not David who ascended into the heavens, but he himself says: ‘The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand until I make your enemies Your footstool.’”

Revelation 19:6; “Hallelujah-because our Lord God, the Almighty, has begun to reign!”

There is a clear sense in these verses that although Jesus began to reign upon His ascension to the right hand of God, He has not yet fully established His reign. Notice two things.  First, when Jesus took a seat at the Father’s right hand, He began His reign as King. F.F. Bruce explains the significance of Jesus’ sitting down at the right hand of the Father. He says, “… it refers to the king’s enthronement, and carries with it the promise of victory over all his enemies.”[7] In other words, Jesus sat down at the right hand of the Father that He might begin to rule as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Jesus’ present reign, then, is a time of gathering. He is establishing His rule incrementally-gathering His enemies for the day of Judgment-when he will establish His Lordship in their final destruction. The word ‘until’ in Acts 2:35 communicates the fact that all of God’s enemies have not yet been brought into subjection to Him. The tension between the already and the not yet is communicated in this one verse. Second, notice the phrase, “has begun to reign” in Revelation 19:6. This shout of acclamation comes after Jesus has begun to finally establish His Lordship over all of the enemies of God. Jesus has just defeated Babylon (whatever Babylon might be a reference to) and Jesus’ demolishing of Babylon confirms the fact that His final victory over sin, Satan, and death is right around the corner. We find this final victory recorded just a few short verses later in Revelation 20. The shout of acclamation in Revelation 19 is the cry of victory because the much anticipated destruction of all the enemies of God is at hand. Thus, although Jesus is already in the process of gathering all of His enemies, He has not yet established final victory over His enemies and will not until He comes back in all of His glory.[8]

Jesus’ Defeat of Satan

The Scriptures clearly teach that although Jesus already dealt Satan a death blow (from which he will not recover) on the cross of Calvary, Satan has not yet been finally judged. Consider the following passages with me.

Already

Hebrews 2:15-16; “Now since the children have flesh and blood in common, he also shared in these, so that through His death He might destroy the one holding the power of death-that is, the Devil-and free those who were held in slavery all their lives by the fear of death.

Not Yet

Satan is referred to as ‘the god of this age” (2 Corinthians 4:4), “the ruler of this world” (John 12:31), “the prince of the power of the air, the spirit now working in the disobedient” (Ephesians 2:2), and John says of Satan, “the whole world is under the sway of the evil one (1 John 5:19).

1 Peter 5:8; “Be sober! Be on the alert! Your adversary the Devil is prowling around like a roaring lion, looking for anyone he can devour.”

Revelation 20:10; “The Devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet are, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.”

Jesus, through His death and resurrection, gained clear and certain victory over Satan. Jesus, the seed of the woman, did bruise the head of the serpent on the cross (Genesis 3:15). Jesus has dealt Satan a death blow; his final defeat is sure, and yet he fights on. Ken Blue has made a helpful parallel between the dying attempts of destruction by Satan in these last days and Hitler in the last days of WWII when he knew that defeat was soon around the corner. Blue says,

“In God’s war with evil, ‘D-Day’ occurred with the death and resurrection of Christ. Ultimate victory is now assured; yet the fight rages on till ‘V-E Day,’ the glorious return of Christ. Between these times, the Church presses the battle against the evil which remains in the world. Blood is still shed in these battles, and some of the blood will be ours, but we are assured that the ultimate victory of the past will be fully realized in the future.”[9]

Or consider the infamous hymn penned by Martin Luther A Mighty Fortress is Our God (quoting the first three verses only).

A Mighty Fortress is Our God

A mighty fortress is our God,
A bulwark never failing.
Our helper He amid the flood
Of mortal ills prevailing.
For still our ancient foe
Doth seek to work us woe.
His craft and power are great,
And, armed with cruel hate,
On earth is not his equal.

Did we in our own strength confide,
Our striving would be losing,
Were not the right man on our side,
The man of God’s own choosing.
Dost ask who that may be?
Christ Jesus, it is He.
Lord Sabboth, his name,
From age to age the same,
And He must win the battle.

And though this world, with devils filled,
Should threaten to undo us,
We will not fear, for God hath willed
His truth to triumph through us.
The Prince of Darkness grim,
We tremble not for him.
His rage we can endure,
For lo, his doom is sure.
One little word shall fell him.

Satan’s was dealt a death blow on the cross and yet he fights with vigor, which is why we must “resist him”. Nonetheless, as clearly seen by Revelation 20:10, Jesus will win final victory over him at His glorious return, which is why Luther can triumphantly say, ‘For lo, his doom is sure.’ Satan has already been defeated-Jesus’ final victory over Him is already in the bag-and yet he has not yet been finally defeated. There is a clear already/not yet aspect to Jesus’ victory over the accuser of the brethren.

Jesus’ Defeat of Death

Just as with His defeat over Satan, Jesus’ defeat over death has been secured but will only be finalized at His second coming. Consider these verses with me.

Already

Acts 2:24; “God raised Him up, ending the pains of death, because it was not possible for Him to be held by it.”

Hebrews 2:14-15; “Now since the children have flesh and blood in common, He also shared in these, so that through His death He might destroy the one holding the power of death-that is, the Devil-and free those who were held in slavery all their lives by the fear of death.”

Not Yet

1 Corinthians 15:24-26; “Then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when He abolishes all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He puts all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy to be abolished is death.”

Revelation 20:13-14; “Then the sea gave up its dead, and Death and Hades gave up their dead; all were judged according to their works. Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.”

Jesus has already imploded the grave (evidenced by the resurrection)-it was not powerful enough to hold him-and yet death is the last enemy to be defeated, and it will not be defeated until Jesus throws it into the lake of fire at the very end of the age.[10] Jesus’ final victory over death is still a future event and yet He has already set us free from the fear of death. This is why He can promise eternal life to those who come to Him in faith and repentance. And yet, all those who are promised eternal life will have to pass through the death of our mortal bodies. As Jesus says in John 11:25-26; “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in Me, even if he dies, will live. Everyone who lives and believes in me will never die-ever. Do you believe this?”  There is clear tension in Jesus’ words here. And why? Because we live between the already and the not yet.

Conclusion

Well, I trust that this has been helpful. Christianity in our present age is caught between the already and the not yet. We live in the time between the times-the time between the decisive victory, when our salvation was secured by the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, and the time of His glorious appearing when He will bring final salvation to those who are waiting for Him (Hebrews 9:27-28).

I hope I have given sufficient proof to show that this is no mere footnote in the Bible; this already/not yet perspective unmistakably permeates every nook and cranny of the New Testament. This is no mere isolated doctrine; it is the very characterization of the shape and posture of the Christian life in this present age.

Once again, how does this help us? It helps us by giving us a hopeful and yet realistic perspective not only in regard to what God can and wants to do in our midst but what He intends to do in our midst (and in our world). So many Christians live lives of defeat because they do not realize that the blessings of the future age are to at least one degree or another already-present realities, actualized by the Spirit of God. Others live lives of depression because they are not biblically informed about God’s intentions for this present age-they have ‘pie in the sky’ ideas about God’s work in this present world, as if it were His goal to completely rid this earth of all evil. And when God fails to live up to their expectations, they are thrust down in depression, suspicious of His presence in their lives. I in no way want to put God in a box and yet I want to be biblically informed about what God has said that He will do on this earth. It is not His intention to create a utopia on this earth. He wants His people to know that life is going to be a mixed bag, full of ups and downs and in-betweens. Sometimes the church will grow like a weed, at other times it will digress, and still at other times it will stay the course. God has no intention on bringing heaven to earth in any complete fashion, and yet God has every desire to see His Kingdom advance.

There is hope for the hopeless and yet our ultimate hope ought to rest in what God is going to do in the future. Never underestimate God but always take Him at His word. If you are down in the dumps wondering where God is at, take heart in knowing that He is in the business of redeeming and restoring and reconciling and saving even now. If you are on the mountain top and are rejoicing in God’s present activity in your life, never lose sight of the fact that the joy of His coming Kingdom will outweigh anything you have ever experienced on this earth. We must never lose heart when, from our perspective, it seems that all has been lost to the enemy (whether in church life, or in your marriage, or in your family, or at your job, or wherever), but we also must never sink our feet into the clay of this earth as if anything happening on this earthly sphere were the ‘end all be all’

God has big plans for what He is going to do through us and for us on this earth, and yet He will give us enough unrest and pain and rejection and sorrow and disappointment so that we never forget that the bulk of what He has for us is not to be found until Jesus comes in all of His glory. The main message: be encouraged but don’t sink your heels into the clay of this earth too far. Life on this earth is bittersweet in every sense of the word. For the Christian, sweetness will triumph, but bitterness (not in the sinful sense of the word) will accompany Christian experience until the day we die.[11]

[1] See Romans 8:18-25 and Hebrews 11:1 for a biblical understanding of the future-oriented nature of ‘hope’ and ‘faith.’

[2] I got this illustration from Anthony C. Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text; The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 99. Thisselton laid forth another illustration that was quite helpful. He says, “Christians are like people who were once in the cold, freezing to death, but now have been transferred into a warm room. The forces of its heat will decisively overcome the forces of the cold; but in the present both sets of forces are active. Some limbs are already warm; but others have still to thaw out completely. The forces of heat are decisive, but are not yet the only operative forces. The decisive event has occurred, but the process which it set in motion takes time to reach completion.” Ibid.

[3] Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All its Worth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 146-47. I attribute the above quote to Fee because they state in the Preface of the book that Fee wrote Chapters 1-4, 6-8, and 13. This quote is found in Chapter 7.

[4] To inaugurate means to “to make a formal beginning of; initiate; commence; begin.” See www.dictionary.com

[5] To consummate means to “to bring to completion or fruition;” “to realize or achieve; fulfill.” See www.dictionary.com

[6] George Eldon Ladd, in his landmark work A Theology of the New Testament, has much to say about the already/not yet tension in regard to the Kingdom of God. See George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993). Although Ladd does not mention specifically the already/not yet tension in this quote, what he does have to say about the Kingdom of God is well worthy of consideration. “Jesus’ teachings about the Son of Man and the Kingdom of God are closely analogous in certain aspects of their structure. We have seen that the Kingdom of God is the perfect realization of the glorious reign of God that will be experienced only with the inauguration of the Age to Come. In advance of the manifestation of the Kingdom in glory, however, this same Kindgom of God, his kingly reign, has manifested itself among men and women in an unexpected form. The Kingdom is to work secretly among them. While the evil age continues, the Kingdom of God has begun to work in a form almost unnoticed by the world. Its presence can be recognized only by those who have spiritual perception to see it. This is the mystery of the Kingdom: the divine secret that in the ministry of Jesus has for the first time been disclosed to human beings. The future apocalyptic, glorious Kingdom has come secretly among them in advance of its open manifestation.

So it is with the Son of Man. Jesus will be the heavenly, glorious Son of Man coming with the clouds to judge people and  to bring the glorious Kingdom. However, in advance of this apocalyptic manifestation as the Son of Man, Jesus is the Son of Man living among them incognito, whose ministry is not to reign in glory but in humiliation to suffer and to die for them. The future, heavenly Son of Man is already present among women and men but in a form they hardly expected. There is indeed a messianic secret even as there is a mystery of the Kingdom of God.” Ibid., 156.

[7] F.F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1990), 63.

[8] Consider the following comment by David F. Wells as he explains the already/not yet nature of the reign of King Jesus. “Christ’s rule is contested in the sense that while evil is even now under his sovereign rule, and even though its doom has been declared, and even though its back has already been broken at the cross, it has not yet been taken to the scaffold. The church, therefore, has to be wary as long as it is in this world. It cannot become triumphalistic. It must seek the protection of God’s armor (Eph. 6:10-18), grace, and power. We have not yet come to the final moment of conquest when Christ ‘delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power’ (1 Cor. 15:24). Only then will all of created reality that has been fractured and broken by the intrusions of satanic disorder be eternally cleansed.” David F. Wells, The Courage to be Protestant: Truth-lovers, Marketers, and Emergents in the Postmodern World (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2008),  204.

He then goes on to explain how this meets us where we are at; “Christian hope is not about wishing things will get better. It is not about hoping that emptiness will go away, meaning return, and life will be stripped of its uncertainties, aches, and anxieties. Nor does it have anything to do with techniques for improving fallen human life, be those therapeutic, spiritual, or even religious. Hope has to do with the knowledge of ‘the age to come.’ This redemption is already penetrating ‘this age.’ The sin, death, and meaninglessness of the one age are being transformed by the righteousness, life, and meaning of the other. What has emptied out life, what has scarred and blackened it, is being displaced by what is rejuvenating and transforming it. More than that, hope is hope because it knows it has become part of a realm, a kingdom, that endures. It knows that evil is doomed, that it will be banished. This kind of hope has left behind it the ship of ‘this age,’ which is sinking. And if this other realm, this place where Christ is even now ruling, did not exist, Christians would be ‘of all people most to be pitied’ (1 Cor. 15:19).” Ibid., 206.

[9] See Ken Blue, “D-Day Before V-E Day” in Perspectives On the World Christian Movement: A Reader; Edited by Ralph D. Winter and Steven C. Hawthorne. 3^rd ed. (Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1999), 72.

[10] Consider the following quote by Ladd concerning the resurrection in light of the already/not yet tension of the New Testament age.  ”While the resurrection of the dead remains an event at the last day, in the resurrection of Christ this eschatological event has already begun to be unfolded. The ‘halfway’ point is passed. The early church found itself living in a tension between realization and expectation-between ‘already’ and ‘not yet.’ The age of fulfillment has come; the day of consummation stands yet in the future.” Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, 368.

[11] I highly recommend Ariel J. Vanderhorst’s short blog post Learn to Live with Pain, Then Go One Better. The tension between the already and the not yet is not discussed in explicit terms, but the effects of this tension in our everyday lives is. http://bittersweetblue.blogspot.com/2007/11/learn-to-live-with-pain-then-go-one.html.

Click here to watch this sermon on video.

Click here to listen to this sermon (right click  on ‘Click here’ and choose ‘Save link as’ to download).

Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship, Boscawen, NH Sunday, June 13, 2010.

The Already and the Not Yet
1 Corinthians 1:7
Jimmy Snowden
Sovereign Grace Fellowship: Boscawen, NH

Introduction

This morning’s sermon will be much more theological in nature than normal.[1] I am well aware that the emphasis of last week’s message is subject to great misunderstanding and abuse. Last week I emphasized the entirely future-oriented nature of our hope as Christians. This morning it is my desire to do a study on what God (in His word) has to say about our salvation won through Christ. More specifically I am going to be discussing how much of our salvation is a present reality and how much of it is a future hope. Here, then, is my game plan for this morning’s sermon; I am going to recap what was taught last week, we will then review the main theological point that was made last week from 1 Corinthians 1:5-7, and then we will see what the rest of the New Testament has to say on the subject. In short, this morning I will be speaking about the already/not yet tension in the New Testament regarding our salvation in Christ.

Recap

In order to quickly exercise your memory in regard to what was preached last week I have boiled everything that was communicated last week down into one statement: The Christian life is characterized by two things: Spirit-empowered ministry and waiting. This is exactly what Paul states in 1 Corinthians 1:5-7. He said, and I am paraphrasing, that God, as an expression of His grace, made the Corinthians rich in regard to the grace gifts/spiritual gifts as they wait for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Waiting, eagerly waiting, is the posture of the Christian life. But the waiting of the Christian life is not like that experienced in an airport terminal (in other words, it results in neither snoring nor the twiddling of thumbs), but rather like that of a college freshman who studies with all due diligence as he waits for the day on which he will receive his diploma. Christianity is correctly identified as an eschatological faith-a forward looking faith. After all, the object of our hope as Christians is the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ from heaven.

As I stated last week, while our hope finds its basis in the finished work of Jesus Christ, the object of our hope involves the final appearing and full salvation brought to us at the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. God purchased our salvation through the death of His Son on the cross, but our salvation will not be finally complete until the ‘day of the Lord Jesus Christ’. Thus, the cross is the basis, the surety, of our hope, but Jesus Himself, His return, is the object of our hope. Just look at Paul’s words in 2 Timothy 4:8.

In the future, there is reserved for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give me on that day, and not only to me, but to all those who have loved His appearing.

This came from the lips of Paul at the very end of his ministry. His hope was still a forward looking reality. This is why Peter could talk about our salvation as a future event–as a “salvation ready to be revealed in the last time” (1 Peter 1:5). Paul even goes so far to say, “If we have placed our hope in Christ for this life only, we should be pitied more than anyone” (1 Corinthians 15:19). So the Christian life is rightly identified as a life of hope. It is a life which looks forward to our final, eschatological salvation that God will bring to pass at the second coming of Christ.

Already/Not Yet Tension

With all of this in mind, however, we must not lose sight of the fact that we do presently enjoy many of the blessings won for us on the cross of Calvary. Certainly, salvation in the fullest sense of the word is still yet a future reality for us (as communicated by the many passages cited last week-see especially Romans 8:18-25), and yet we know that our salvation is also a present reality. In fact, last week I said that our salvation in Christ can be seen in three dimensions: 1. I was saved when I first repented of my sins and believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, 2. I am presently being saved from sin, and 3. I await the final salvation that is to come at the second coming of Jesus. This morning I want to answer one question (I will state the same question in two ways so that the question is clear);

In what sense can our salvation be both present and future? To what degree and in what way is our future salvation realized in the present?

In an attempt to answer this question I want to point you to a few passages which speak of our salvation as both a present reality and a future hope. In other words, there is an already and a not yet aspect to our salvation in Christ. Theologians call it the already/not yet tension. I am going to take you through a whole host of passages to show you the reality of this already/not yet tension and then I will lay forth one or two applications of this theology for our lives today.

Salvation

Throughout the New Testament, salvation is spoken of both as a present reality that we already possess and a future hope that we anticipate. Just look at a few passages with me.

Already

Ephesians 2:8; “By grace you are saved through faith”

2 Corinthians 6:2; “For he says, In an acceptable time, I heard you, and in the day of salvation, I helped you. Look, now is the acceptable time; look now is the day of salvation.”

Not Yet

Romans 13:11; “Besides this, knowing the time, it is already the hour for you to wake up from sleep, for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed.”

Hebrews 9:27-28; And just as it is appointed for people to die once-and after this, judgment-so also the Messiah, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for Him.

There is a clear tension in regard to the salvation that we have in Christ-we already possess it but our salvation is not yet brought to its consummate, completed stage. Although we are already saved, we are closer to our final salvation, than when we first believed.

Redemption

Redemption is spoken of both as a present reality that we already possess and a future hope that we anticipate throughout the Scriptures as well. Just look at a few passages with me.

Already

Galatians 1:7-8: “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace that He lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding.”

Not Yet

Ephesians 4:30; “And don’t grieve the Holy Spirit, who sealed you for the day of redemption.”

Romans 8:23; “And not only that, but we ourselves who have the Spirit as the firstfruits-we also groan within ourselves, eagerly awaiting for adoption, the redemption of our bodies.”

Our redemption is realized in the now already, but it has not yet been brought to its fullest, completed realization in the lives of the people of God. Paul in Ephesians 4:30 speaks of “the day of redemption.” This is a clear reference to the second coming. The day of Jesus’ return is referred to as ‘the day of redemption’ because it is the day in which He will bring our already-purchased redemption to its fullest fulfillment.

Adoption

Adoption is also spoken of both as a present reality that we already possess-we have already been made sons of God-and a future hope that we anticipate throughout the Scripture. Consider the following passages with me.

Already

Galatians 4:4-6 “But when the completion of the time came, God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba, Father!’”

Romans 8:15-16: “For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption, by whom we cry out, ‘Abba, Father!’ The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

Not Yet

Romans 8:23; “And not only that, but we ourselves who have the Spirit as the firstfruits-we also groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for adoption, the redemption of our bodies.

We have already been adopted as God’s children in Christ, “but we are not yet God’s children in the way we one day will be-possessing full inheritance, enjoying perfect holiness in resurrected bodies, and glorified”[2] (emphasis mine). Both Galatians 4 and Romans 8 communicate the fact that we are already ‘children of God’ and yet we await our final adoption as sons.

Freedom From Sin

The Scriptures teach in many places that the Christian has already been set free from the condemnation of sin, the guilt of sin, and the domination of sin in our lives and yet the Scriptures teach that the Christian is not yet fully set free from the reality and presence of sin, and will not be until Jesus returns.

Already

Colossians 1:13-14; “He has rescued us from the domain of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of the Son He loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Romans 6:2; “How can we who died to sin still live in it?

Romans 6:6-7, 11; “For we know that our old self was crucified with Him in order that sin’s dominion over the body may be abolished, so that we may no longer be enslaved to sin, since a person who has died is freed from sin’s claims… So, you too consider yourselves dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

Not Yet

Romans 6:12; “Therefore, do not let sin reign in your mortal body, so that you obey its desires.

Galatians 5:16-17; “I say then, walk by the Spirit and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh. For the flesh desires what is against the Spirit, and the Spirit desires what is against the flesh; these are opposed to each other, so that you don’t do what you want.”

1 John 1:8; “If we say, ‘We have no sin,’ we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

This set of passages indicates the truth that although our sins have already been forgiven-the condemnation of sin having been removed (Romans 8:1)-and although we have been set free from the guilt and bondage of sin, we have not yet been liberated from sin in toto. We still struggle with sin on a regular basis until we die, and we will not be finally liberated from the presence of sin until Jesus returns. We already died to sin and yet the one who claims to ‘have no sin’ (1 John 1:8) is self deceived. We will all battle the flesh until we die and yet we have already been set free from the dominion of sin. Romans 6 is just dripping with the tension of the already/not yet reality of our Christian existence.

Heavenly Dwelling

The Scriptures clearly teach that our heavenly dwelling is an already present reality but that there is a not yet aspect to our heavenly dwelling as well.

Already

Ephesians 2:6; “He also raised us up with Him and seated us with Him in the heavens, in Christ Jesus”

Colossians 3:1; “So if you have been raised with the Messiah, seek what is above, where the Messiah is, seated at the right hand of God.”

Not Yet

Colossians 3:2-4; “Set your minds on what is above, not on what is on the earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with the Messiah in God. When the Messiah, who is your life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory.”

Hebrews 11:13-16; “These all died in faith without having received the promises, but they saw them from a distance, greeted them, and confessed that they were foreigners and temporary residents on the earth. Now those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. If they had been remembering that land they came from, they would have had opportunity to return. But they now aspire to a better land-a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He has prepared a city for them.”

Because of our union with Christ we are truly seated with Him in the heavenly realms. This is the reality of our present day Christian existence. We were buried with Him in baptism, raised with Him in his resurrection and here we see that we also ascended with Him when He rose on high. Wherever He goes we go because we are ‘in Him.” This is a spiritual reality, but it is a true reality. Paul even suggests that our lives should reflect our present heavenly dwelling. He exhorts the Colossians to seek the things above. And why? Because that is where they are-they have been raised with Him and are sitting in the heavenlies with Him. He wants them to get their ’seeking’ in line with their present position in Christ.

If I were to move to New Hampshire from Missouri (as I did) I would not seek for a job or a house in Texas! If I were to move to New Hampshire I would seek for a house and a job in New Hampshire. And why? Because that is where I am. Paul uses the same logic in Colossians 3:1. If we have been raised with Christ to the right hand of God, we should seek the things above, because that is where we are at. And yet, we know that our heavenly dwelling is only a spiritual reality at this point. We still have to be exhorted to not seek the things on this earth because this earth is our present physical home (see John 17:14-16). We are temporary residents here on this earth.  We are caught between the already and the not yet. We are already citizens of heaven and yet our full possession of heaven is a future hope. It is a matter of faith and hope. The mere presence of the negative command to not set your minds on “what is on earth” in Colossians 3:2 is evidence itself that although we have been raised up with Christ, our lives are so much so tied to this earthly dwelling that there is a tendency for us to lose sight of our already attained citizenship in heaven. The fact that Paul describes our life in Christ as something hidden which will be revealed when Jesus returns (Colossians 3:3-4) also points to the already/not yet aspect of our heavenly dwelling. The author of the letter to the Hebrews also clearly communicates the idea that although our citizenship is in heaven, we are still “seeking a homeland”-we are identified as “temporary residents” of this earth. Let me put it to you this way, we are less like vagabonds without a home, and more like vacationers who are temporarily in a foreign land.

Peter T. O’Brien, commenting on Ephesians 2:6 says, “…the fact that believers conduct their lives in this world and have not yet experienced salvation in all its fullness but look forward to God’s lavishing the full abundance of his grace upon them in the coming age (2:7) shows that the eschatology of Ephesians is not wholly realized but has a future dimension to it as well.”[3] Thus we are caught between the already and the not yet.

Eternal life/knowing Christ

The Scriptures also communicate that there is an already/not yet aspect to the promise of eternal life.

Already

1 John 5:11; “And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life and this life is in His Son.

John 17:3; This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and the One you have sent-Jesus Christ.

Not Yet

1 Corinthians 15:50-54; Brothers, I tell you this: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, and corruption cannot inherit incorruption. Listen! I am telling you a mystery: We will not all fall asleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we will be changed. Because this corruptible must be clothed with incorruptibility and this mortal must be clothed with immortality. Now when this corruptible is clothed with incorruptibility and this mortal is clothed with immortality…”

Romans 2:5-8; “But because of your hardness of heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath, when God’s righteous judgment is revealed. He will repay each one according to his works: eternal life to those who by patiently doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but wrath and indignation to those who are self-seeking and disobey the truth, but are obeying unrighteousness…”

The first two passages clearly teach that eternal life begins at the time of conversion-the second passage (John 17:3) evidences the truth that eternal life is wrapped up in knowing God; however, the latter two passages communicate the fact that eternal life will only be fully realized when immortality is granted to the believer at the second coming of Christ. Some have way overdone the already aspect of John 17:3, suggesting that we already have eternal life because we already know Christ. We must remember, though, that we do not yet know Christ as intimately as we will when He comes at the last day. Look at 1 John 2:2-3;

1 John 3:2; “Dear friends, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet been revealed. We know that we will see Him as He is. And everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself just as He is pure.

There is a limited ability for believers to know Christ in this present age. In the coming age we will all be changed, rid of sin, and we will see Christ as He is. We can know Christ in part in this present reality, but our knowledge of Him will not be complete until we are changed (see also 1 Corinthians 13:8-13). Thus there is a clear already/not yet tension in regard to this promise of eternal life. We possess eternal life now-we know Christ now-but we await the gift of incorruptibility and immortality. Until then, our experience of eternal life will only be partially realized. We can be 100% certain that we will be rewarded eternal life when Jesus comes back (as communicated in Romans 2) because the gift of eternal life was secured by the death of Jesus, and yet eternal life will not be realized in its totality until we both see Him as He is and when immortality is bestowed at the second coming.

Relevance for our Lives

Getting a handle on the theology of the already/not yet tension of the life of the Christian is of utmost importance. There is not one aspect of the Christian life nor of Christian doctrine that is not effected by a correct understanding of the already/not yet tension in biblical Christianity. It effects how we view our relationship with sin, how we view God’s present working in our lives, in our families, in our churches, and in the world. What can we expect from God? What is God’s intention for our lives, for our church, for the government, for this world? All of the answers to these questions are shaped by your view of the already/not yet tension.

It seems that Christians have the tendency to fall off either side of the road; they either believe that all of the blessings of the cross are realized in full in the here and now (this is referred to by theologians as an ‘over-realized eschatology’) or they believe that none of the blessings won for us on Calvary will be realized in the here and now but will only be revealed in heaven (this is referred to by theologians as an ‘under-realized eschatology’). Christians are, of course, all over the map in regard to what degree and in what way the blessings won for us in Christ are realized in the present.

How much of our future salvation is realized in the present? Health, wealth, and prosperity preachers look for the present fulfillment of promises that God has primarily meant to be fulfilled in the future. Others, such as many of our reformed brethren, underemphasize the intention of God to grant us real victory over the sin in our lives in the present. We will never experience the fullness of the future heavenly reality in this life. The bulk of the promises given to us in the Gospel are future oriented and yet God has intended for these blessings to be at least partially realized in this present age.

While some Christians believe that sinless perfection is an attainable goal, others feel as if the Christian life is by nature a life of defeat. Both of these extremes must be put to death. Both are equally absurd. We live in an age of tension, in ‘the time between the times’. The eschatological blessings of the cross are being realized in the present, but they will not be fully realized until the coming of Jesus. This should save us from despair, on the one hand, as we can have much hope that God intends to pour out in at least one measure or another many of the untold blessings bought at Calvary, and it should save us from depression, on the other hand, as we understand that it is not God’s purpose to create spiritual utopias on this earth. This saves us from the danger of expecting God to fulfill promises that He has never made (that is, promises that He has never intended to fulfill in toto in this life), guarding us from the depression of unmet expectations, and yet it keeps us from underestimating His power and work in the present, guarding us from the grips of drudgery, defeat, and despair.

Get on board with God’s plan-it is not His plan to fully rid this world of the effects of the fall; however it is His plan to rid the world of the effects of the fall to a certain extent. We must never underestimate what God can do, but we must always be biblically realistic about what God has planned to do. We must never underestimate the work of the Spirit in our lives, but we must also never presume that it is ever His goal to perfect us in this life. We must never put Him in a box, but we must always take Him at His word-as He has spoken in Scripture.

Expect hardship-life is not a cake walk-expect church to be an uphill battle; expect the Christian life to be a battle. And yet, anticipate the mighty work of God as the blessings won for us by Jesus on the cross flow to us even now. This theological perspective, and I believe it is biblical, ought to leave one in what Gordon D. Fee refers to as the “radical middle.”[4] There is much tension here. One the one hand we realize that we cannot over-anticipate the work of God in our midst and yet we realize that His intention is not to create a heavenly utopia on this earth. I will close with a quote from Fee.

“He [Paul] ‘theologizes’ about the Christian life in a way that makes him neither triumphalist nor defeatist, but realist. To recapture the Pauline experience and understanding is the key to our finding our way into the ‘radical middle,’ where we expect neither too much nor too little. Here we will know life and vitality, attractive life and vitality, in our personal lives and in the community of faith. Here we will constantly have the veil removed so that we might behold God’s own glory in the face of Christ, so that we are constantly being renewed into his likeness. Here we will regularly expect, and see, both working of miracles and the fellowship of his sufferings, without sensing frustration in either direction.”[5]

[1] Theology is merely ‘the study of God.’ However, theologians (those who do theology, that is) have made a distinction between what is termed ‘theology proper’ and ’systematic theology’.  Theology proper is the study of the character of God specifically. Systematic theology is a more general term used to designate the study of what the Scriptures on the whole have to say about any given topic. So when I say that this morning’s sermon will be more theological in nature I am saying that this morning is going to be an attempt at doing systematic theology. In other words, a sermon which is more theological in nature is merely a sermon which focuses on what the Scriptures on the whole have to say about any given biblical subject. I generally do my best to stick to the thought flow of the specific passage in view. But I am not even going to attempt to make the main point of 1 Corinthians 1:7, as understood in its context, the main focus of this morning’s sermon. The whole point of this morning’s sermon is to see what the word of God has to say about the already/not yet tension as revealed in Scripture on the whole (and we will be narrowing our focus to passages in the New Testament).

[2] Douglas J. Moo, Romans; The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 267.

[3] Peter T. O’Brien, The Letter to the Ephesians, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1999), 172.

[4] Gordon D. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence; The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994), 8.

[5] Ibid.

Click here to watch this sermon on video.

Click here to listen to this sermon (right click  on ‘Click here’ and choose ‘Save link as’ to download).

Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship, Boscawen, NH Sunday, June 6, 2010.

‘As You Wait’
1 Corinthians 1:4-9
Jimmy Snowden
Sovereign Grace Fellowship/Boscawen, NH

Introduction

This morning we are going to be looking at 1 Corinthians 1:4-9 again. However, this week we will be focusing our attention primarily on vss. 5-7. Before moving along I want to remind you of what was emphasized last week. Last week we saw that Paul thanked God for the Corinthians for three precise reasons. Each of these reasons pointed to the activity of God grace to the Corinthians in spite of their great waywardness. First, Paul thanked God for the Corinthians “because of God’s grace given to you in Christ” (vs. 4). Notice that Paul does not thank God for the Corinthians because of their superior spirituality. This is quite the statement. He is saying, ‘I thank God for you because He has not dealt with you according to your sins.’ That is, after all, what grace is; it is when God gives us what we don’t deserve. Or to put it another way, Paul was saying, “I thank God for you because you evidence forth to the world how His grace is more than abundant to save and transform even the worst of sinners.”

Second, Paul thanked God for the Corinthians because of the evidences of His present working in their midst (vss. 5-7). See the divine activity in vs. 5; “by Him you were made rich in everything.” Their giftedness did not point to their own great imitable godliness, but rather to the bountiful grace of God. These gifts that God bestowed on the Corinthians evidenced His present working of grace in their midst. Third, Paul thanked God for the Corinthians because of his faithfulness to keep the Corinthians until the day of our Lord Jesus Christ (vss. 8-9). Once again, notice the divine activity. The Corinthian’s final perseverance in the faith is a work of God’s faithful grace. Paul does not express confidence in the Corinthians ability to keep themselves in the faith, but rather attributes their perseverance in the faith ultimately to the faithfulness of God. Last week we saw that Paul thanked God for the Corinthians because he was confident that God’s grace was more than abundant to get them in the door, make them thrive while they were in the door, and keep them in the door until the day of Jesus Christ.

Getting the Flow of 1:5-7

This morning we are going to be focusing our attention on 1:5-7. Before diving in I want you to get a sense of the flow of Paul’s argument in vss. 5-7. Notice three things. First, observe the word ‘that’ in vs. 5. The word ‘that’ suggests that Paul speaks of God’s making them rich in regard to the grace gifts as an evidence of His grace to them in Christ. The word ‘that’ (hoti) intimately ties vs. 5 with vs. 4. By leaving hoti out of their translation, the NLT has lost the intimate connection between God’s bountiful giving (of the grace-gifts) to the Corinthians and God’s grace given to them in Christ Jesus. The word ‘that’, however, points to the fact that Paul saw the Corinthian’s giftedness as an expression of God’s grace given to them in Christ. Second, notice that Paul, in the second half of vs. 5, extrapolates what he means when he says that God made them rich ‘in everything’. What does Paul mean when he says that God made them rich ‘in everything’? Does this mean that God made them monetarily rich or land rich? Of course not! Paul explains exactly what he means when he says that God made them rich ‘in everything’ in the second half of vs. 5. As an explanation he says, “in all speaking and all knowledge.” In other words, God has made them rich in everything, that is “in all speaking and all knowledge.” ‘Speaking’ is most probably a reference to the gift of tongues/languages that God had given them, as evidenced in chapters 12-14. It most likely also refers to their ability to communicate the truths of God’s word through preaching and teaching (as seen in 1 Corinthians 12-14 as well). The Corinthians had been given various sorts of speaking gifts from the Lord. ‘Knowledge’ most likely refers to both theological knowledge (see 1 Corinthians 8:1-13) and spiritual knowledge given through the Spirit for the building up of the body (see Chapters 12-14).

Third, notice that the presence of these gifts were given by God to confirm the progress of the Gospel in their midst (vs. 6-7). Paul clearly associates the presence of these divinely bestowed gifts as God’s way of confirming the truth and reality of the Gospel to them, and of its effectiveness in their midst. Their richness in the gifts points to the fact that God was alive and well in their midst-it was God’s way of evidencing His possession of them in Christ (and, yes, the gifts still work to this end). As I stated last week, the translation ’spiritual gift’ is rather unfortunate. The word translated as ’spiritual gift’ is charisma. This word is related to the word translated as ‘grace’ in vs. 3 and vs. 4, charis. This is why the majority of commentators prefer ‘grace gift’ (or something similar) as a translation of charisma over against ’spiritual gift.’ Paul will employ a word for ’spiritual gift’ in chapters 12-14 (pneumatikos), but in this context (that is, in 1 Corinthians 1:4-9) Paul is clearly communicating the fact that their giftedness is owing wholly to God’s grace given to them. These gifts that God has bestowed upon them are ‘grace-gifts’ first of all because they did not earn them and second of all because they are tools that God uses to administer His grace in its various forms.[1]

Let’s sum up where we have come. We have seen that God’s bounty to the Corinthians in regard to the ‘grace gifts’ is an expression of His grace to them in Christ, and work to establish the truth and reality of the Gospel in their midst-these gifts validate the success of the Gospel among them.

As You Wait

I want you to notice how Paul speaks of their existence as gifted believers in vs. 7. What is the direction of their lives? Look at this verse 7 with me.

so that you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ.

God has made them rich in everything so that they will not lack any spiritual gift as they eagerly wait for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Notice the forward looking nature of the Christian life. Paul reminds the Corinthians that these grace gifts have been given to them for a season. These grace gifts that God has so richly bestowed on the Corinthians have been given during a time of waiting. Christianity is by nature a forward looking religion. The Corinthians were not given these gifts as permanent structures. The gifts are given to God’s people while we eagerly wait for His second coming. There is so much here that is worthy of application-based reflection. However, before getting there it will be profitable to look at 1 Corinthians 13 to solidify the fact that the gifts are temporary fixtures of the Christian life. Turn with me to 1 Corinthians 13:8-13. Keep in mind before we read this portion of 1 Corinthians that Paul is here, in chapters 12-14, rebuking the Corinthians for their misuse and abuse of the spiritual gifts/grace gifts. They were using the gifts as a way of building themselves up instead of using them as a way of lovingly and selflessly building up each other. They were using the gifts as the supreme standard for judging spirituality. Paul suggests that love is the true test of Spirituality and that even the greatest use of the gifts apart from love are useless in the sight of God (see vss. 1-3). With this in mind let’s take a look at our passage.

8 Love never ends. But as for prophesies, they will come to an end; as for languages, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end. 9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10 But when the perfect comes, the partial will come to an end. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put aside childish things. 12 For now we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. Now in part, but then I will know fully, as I am fully known. 13 Now these three remain: faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is love.

There is so much going on in this section. Notice, however, the temporary nature of the spiritual gifts: prophesies, languages (tongues), and knowledge will all come to an end, but love never will. Prophesies, languages, and knowledge are all a reference to the different spiritual gifts mentioned in chapter 12:27-30 and 13:1-2. He says in vs. 10 that “when the perfect comes, the partial will come to an end.” He is here saying that when Jesus comes back and we are all brought to glory we will no longer be in need of the Spiritual gifts. Many have tried to suggest that ‘the perfect’ has already come. Those who take such a position posit that ‘the perfect’ is a reference to the closing of the New Testament canon (that is, they suggest that ‘the perfect’ is a reference to the time in church history when the New Testament in its entirety was recognized and thus established by the early church councils). This position, though, is quite unlikely. It certainly is possible, but it is an embarrassingly large stretch. It is my contention that one could only arrive at such a position if he/she has a prior held theological system that is being forced down the throat of this passage. “The perfect” rather is a reference to the “day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 1:8). In fact, 1 Corinthians 13:8-13 and 1 Corinthians 1:5-8 are clearly speaking to the same issue-the temporary nature of the grace gifts/spiritual gifts.

When the perfect comes there will be no need for the gifts because we will all be rid of sin, we will all have glorified bodies, and we will see Him as He is! We will not need our Bibles because we will be face-to-face with the glorified Word-made-flesh. All that will remain is faith, hope, and love. Paul is communicating the same idea here in 1:7; he is communicating the fact that the spiritual gifts are temporary fixtures in the larger picture of redemptive history.

He speaks of the Christian life as a life of “waiting”-a life of eager waiting. Really, waiting is the posture of biblical Christianity. But it is not the sort of waiting that you may be thinking. There really are two types of waiting. Consider the difference between the two following types of waiting. 1. A man sits in his terminal at the airport snoring as he sleepingly waits for the flight attendant to call all the passengers to board the plane. 2. A college freshman diligently studies and prepares for weekly exams as he eagerly waits for graduation day. The Christian form of waiting is the second sort of waiting. The one waiting results in the twiddling of thumbs while the other results in active anticipation.

Paul’s words suggest that the Christian life reflects this second type of waiting. Do you remember what he said? He thanks God for the Corinthians because of God’s grace given to them in Christ. He communicates the idea that this grace expresses itself to the Corinthians through God’s making them rich in regard to all speaking and knowledge so that they might not lack any spiritual gift as they wait for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. By His grace He bestows grace-gifts so that we might be busy as we eagerly await the coming of Jesus.

In other words, God gives us the grace gifts/spiritual gifts so that we might be empowered and equipped to busy ourselves with the ministry of kingdom expansion and body building as we wait for His return. This is the whole purpose of the giving of the gifts-to empower us so that we might minister to one another as we wait. Just as a college student eagerly waits for the day of graduation with intensity, hitting the books, so we eagerly wait the return of Christ with intensity, ministering to one another with the gifts given us by God.

One commentator suggested that our lives as Christians ought to resemble that of an athlete. Just as a runner in the 200 meter dash leans forward to go faster and be the first across the finish line, so we ought to be leaning forward, anticipating, eagerly waiting, for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ.[2] The whole Christian life is characterized as a life of waiting. This is not the only passage that communicates this idea. Look at some other passages from the New Testament with me.

Romans 8:18-25: 18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is going to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation eagerly waits with anticipation for God’s sons to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility-not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it-in the hope 21 that the creation itself will also be set free from the bondage of corruption into the glorious freedom of God’s children. 22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together with labor pains until now. 23 And not only that, but we ourselves who have the Spirit as the firstfruits-we also groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for adoption, the redemption of our bodies. 24 Now in this hope we were saved, yet hope that is seen is not hope, because who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with patience.

Philippians 3:19-21: 19 They are focused on earthly things, 20 but our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ. 21 He will transform the body of our humble condition into the likeness of His glorious body, by the power that enables Him to subject everything to Himself.

1 Thessalonians 1:9-10: 9 For they themselves report about us what kind of reception we had from you: how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, 10 and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead-Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath.

There are other passages which we could look to,[3] but this at least provides a basis for understanding that Paul’s emphasis here in 1 Corinthians 1:7 is not just a passing, thoughtless comment. This for Paul is at the very heart of the Christian faith. The Christian faith is correctly referred to as an eschatological faith. In other words, the Christian faith is a faith which is forward looking. While our hope finds basis in the finished work of Jesus Christ, the object of our hope involves the final appearing and full salvation brought to us at the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. God purchased our salvation through the death of His Son on the cross, but our salvation will not be finally complete until the ‘day of the Lord Jesus Christ’. Thus, the cross is the basis, the surety of our hope, but Jesus Himself, His return, is the object of our hope.

This is so very clearly seen in so many passages (not to mention one of the passages we have already looked at). Christian salvation in many ways has a three stage aspect to it: I was saved when I first repented of my sins and believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, I am being saved in the present as Jesus continues to forgive my many continued sins, and Jesus will bring final salvation on the day of His return.[4] It is interesting how many passages speak of salvation as a future event. Look at 1 Peter 1:3-9, 13 with me.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. According to His great mercy, He has given us a new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 and into an inheritance that is imperishable, uncorrupted, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, 5 who are being protected by God’s power through faith for a salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. 6 You rejoice in this, though now for a short time you have had to be distressed by various trials 7 so that the genuineness of your faith-more valuable than gold, which perishes though refined by fire-may result in praise, glory, and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ. 8 You love Him, though you have not seen Him. And though not seeing Him now, you believe in Him and rejoice with inexpressible and glorious joy, 9 because you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls… 13 Therefore, get your minds ready for action, being self-disciplined, and set your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Salvation is something to be hoped for. Our final salvation is sure-it was bought with the blood of Jesus-but its complete and final stage is still yet in the future. This is why Paul can say, “If we have placed our hope in Christ for this life only, we should be pitied more than anyone.” (1 Corinthians 15:19). The Christian life is a life of hope. Pay close attention again to what Paul says in Romans 8:24-25.

24 Now in this hope we were saved, yet hope that is seen is not hope, because who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with patience.

You cannot hope for something that you already have or it wouldn’t be hope. Suppose I were to come up to you with a hot dog in my hand. Suppose I take a bite out of it and then say, while chewing, “Boy I hope I get to eat a hot dog today.” Would that not be ridiculous? How can you hope for a hot dog that you are already eating? The Christian faith is a faith that both looks backward and forward. We look backwards at what secures our future hope, the cross, and this gives us reason to both rest in the present and anticipate the future.

Thus it is can be said that we are to ‘live in the moment but not for the moment.’ This is exactly what Paul communicates in 1 Corinthians 1:7. We are to live every moment for the glory of God. We are to make the most of every opportunity (Colossians 4:5). We are to put all of our energy into both advancing the Gospel and into building up the body of Christ. We are to live in the moment as those who have been made rich by God in everything. However, we are not to live for the moment. We minister ‘as we wait’ for Jesus’ return. We are to live for the Kingdom to come. We are to store up our treasures there. Every activity is to be done “as we wait for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The coming Kingdom therefore is the goal, the focal point, of all of our activity on this earth. Consider what John Piper says about the Christian’s relationship with the Jesus’ second coming:

“loving the appearing of the Lord is not an optional Christian act that may earn more rewards. It is what true Christian faith does: it loves Christ and longs for the Bridegroom to come. Saving faith says, ‘Thy Kingdom Come! Come back, O precious Bridegroom. Come, reign as King. Come, vindication your people. Come, marry your bride.’”[5]

I do not say this as a rebuke to anyone without adding myself into the equation. But I must ask; why do we not pray for the second coming-for the revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ? Have we created for ourselves mini kingdoms on this earth that have choked out and competed with our passion for the coming Kingdom of Christ? This forward-looking, glory-seeking posture is what made early Christianity what it was. Once again, for Paul the much-anticipated second coming of Jesus was at the very heart of the Gospel he preached.

If someone was to come up to you and ask; “So… you are a Christian. Tell me, what do you do as a Christians?” Would you be able to respond, “I wait.” Does waiting for the revelation of Jesus characterize your life as such? If not, your Christianity is seriously lacking-your Christianity is sickly-your Christianity is biblically misguided. So often our Christianity only focuses on the past (what Jesus did) and the present (how we can live for Jesus) but deemphasizes the future, eschatological fulfillment of Jesus’ righteous rule as Lord. Don’t get me wrong, we need to be grounded in Jesus’ death, burial, resurrection, and ascension and we need to be focused on the tasks given us by God at hand, but we must never lose sight of the fact that the object of our faith was the future return of Jesus. If this was not the object of Paul’s faith how could he have said what he said in Philippians 1:21?

21 For me, living is Christ and dying is gain. 22 Now if I live on in the flesh, this means fruitful work for me; and I don’t know which one I should choose. 23 I am pressured by both. I  have the desire to depart and be with Christ-which is far better-24 but to remain in the flesh is more necessary for you. 25 Since I am persuaded of this, I know that I will remain and continue with all of you for the advancement and joy in the faith.

How could Paul have felt such a struggle if the object of his hope was not future. Is this not also the whole force of Hebrews 11? The point of Hebrews 11-the chapter known as the ‘Hall of Faith’ is to point to the fact that true faith believes God for things which are not yet at this moment possessed. The author of the Letter to the Hebrews encourages his readers to consider such a great list of Old Testament saints who apprehended by faith the future-oriented promises of God.

Paul emphasizes the past (vs. 4) the present (vss. 5-7a) and the future (vss. 5:7-9) grace of God. The Corinthians have been saved, they are being saved, but they are awaiting their final, completed salvation.

Conclusion

The Christian faith is a faith of hope. But hope that is not grounded in anything is false. Our hope, however, is a hope grounded in the historical death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The death of Jesus is the surety of our future, eschatological salvation. Although our future salvation is yet to come, it is sure. Our salvation is in the bag. What is our guarantee? The cross and the resurrection! The cross is the basis of our hope; it was by His death on the cross that Jesus purchased our final, eschatological salvation.

Suppose I was to go on vacation to Florida. In planning my trip I take into account the fact that I am going to have to get a hotel for the length of my visit. Before heading to the airport I go online and book a room for myself in a Holiday Inn. I pay for the room ahead of time and print out a receipt. If you were to come up to me and say, “Jimmy, where are you going to stay when you get to Florida?” I would tell you that the Holiday Inn is holding a room for me. If you then asked me how I could be so confident that the Holiday Inn would hold a room for me, I would break out my receipt and thus provide you proof that I had already purchased my room.

Well, this is the same sort of a role that the death, burial, and resurrection accounts in the Gospels play. They are proof that our salvation has been purchased. Our final salvation is sure. Jesus “was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Romans 4:25). While he was on the cross He cried out, “It is finished.” (John 19:30). The Father then raised Him from the grave to provide evidential proof that His Son’s sacrifice was accepted and sufficient to atone for the sins of the world. The death, burial, and resurrection are our receipt, guaranteeing God’s commitment to our final salvation. Thus, we have a faith which is grounded in the past, active in the present, and fixed on the future advent of Jesus.

[1] See D.A. Carson, Showing the Spirit: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14 (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1987), 20. For a fuller discussion on this topic see last week’s sermon; http://www.biblecreed.com/media/1%20Corinthians%201v3-9.pdf

[2] N.T. Wright, Paul For Everyone: 1 Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004), 4.

[3] For example; 2 Corinthians 4:7-5:9; Galatians 5:5; 2 Peter 3:11-14; Hebrews 9:27-28 just to name a few others. We could also look at the many parables told by Jesus which point to the forward looking nature of Christianity (e.g., Matthew 13:44, 45-46, 47-50; 25:1-13, 14-30, 31-46; Luke 12:35-40; 14:15-24; 18:1-8).

[4] Wright explains this way; “God called them in the past, God equips them in the present, and God will complete the whole process in the future.” Ibid.

[5] John Piper, A Hunger For God: Desiring God Through Fasting and Prayer (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1997), 87.

Click here to watch this sermon on video.

Click here to listen to this sermon (right click  on ‘Click here’ and choose ‘Save link as’ to download).

Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship, Boscawen, NH Sunday, May 23rd, 2010.

A Godward Thanksgiving
1 Corinthians 1:3-9
Jimmy Snowden
Sovereign Grace Fellowship: Boscawen, NH

Introduction

This morning we are going to be moving on in 1 Corinthians. It is my goal to skim over the surface of 1:3 and then get an overarching understanding of 1:4-9. Before moving on, however, we must remember that Paul is writing to a messed up church. The Gospel in the church of Corinth had been removed from the center of the Christian community. Serious moral, relational, and doctrinal errors were threatening the life and vitality of the church. To give you a reminder of just how warped the church in Corinth had become consider the following list of sins which Paul called them to repent of:

1. in Chapters 1-4 he rebukes the church for dividing over leadership; 2. in Chapter 5 he rebukes the church for tolerating incest in the church; 3. in 6:1-11 he rebukes certain members of the church for suing each other; 4. in 6:12-20 he rebukes certain members of the church for engaging in prostitution; 5. in Chapters 8-10 he rebukes the theologically mature in the church for not giving up their rights for the sake of their fellow struggling brethren; 6. in Chapter 11:17-34 he rebukes the rich in the church for hoarding all the food for themselves while the poor go hungry at their Lord’s Supper feasts; 7. in Chapters 12-14 he rebukes the church for misusing their spiritual gifts by using them as a tool for self-promotion (instead of using them for building up the body in love) and for thinking themselves more superior based on their use of their spiritual gifts; 8. in Chapter 15 he sternly warns the church to straighten out their heretical view of the resurrection of the dead.

As we have discussed before, the common denominator of their many moral, relational, and doctrinal errors was their devaluing of the Gospel. Paul thus wrote with the purpose of exposing their many failures with the hopes of reestablishing the Gospel as the foundation of their life in the community of Christ. He knew that their primary problems were theological. He knew that if he could reestablish the biblical Gospel as the foundation of their church, the rest of their relational, moral, and doctrinal errors would be dealt with. The Gospel, after all, is the foundation of the life of the church.

1 Corinthians 1:3

We will not be spending much time on vs. 3. Verse 3 is a Christianized form of a standard Greco-Roman greeting as commonly found in many of the letters from the first century.[1] There is much theology compacted into this one little verse, without a doubt. However, it will be profitable for us to consider it briefly and then move along into the next section of the letter.

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

In this greeting Paul establishes the core components of the Gospel as a sort of prayer on their behalf. I want you to notice three things about this greeting. 1. Consider the significance of the word ‘grace’. ‘Grace’ is a reference to unmerited favor. When a sinner prays for ‘grace’ he is asking that God not deal with him according to his sins-that God not deal with him as he deserves to be dealt with.[2] Grace cuts at the heart of human achievement and acknowledges our status as dependent creatures. Grace and pride cannot exist in the same sentence; grace precludes (or eliminates) any grounds for boasting. It causes one to say, “I am what I am only because of what God has done for me in Jesus Christ.” The Gospel of God’s grace confirms the fact that our only hope is that God give us what we do not deserve. For Paul to greet the Corinthians by appealing to the grace that comes from God and Christ is for Paul to reestablish their commonality as undeserving sinners. Paul, then, is praying that God’s grace may meet them where they are at.

2. Paul greets them not only be appealing to the grace of God, but also by appealing to ‘peace’. In this context, peace has less to do with an inner disposition of the soul (in other words, it has nothing to do with feelings of peace or rest)[3] and more to do with an objective relational peace that God has won through Christ. It is closely paralleled with the idea of reconciliation as communicated in texts like Romans 5:8-11 and 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. This peace that God has affected is entirely relational; it has to do with the fact that God has removed the hostility between himself and sinners by removing the catalyst for such hostility, sin. And the effects of this peace eek out from our restored relationship with God to our relationships with each other in the body of Christ. This, of course, will have massive implications in 1 Corinthians. David Garland helpfully explains that “‘grace’ is the source of Christian life, and ‘peace’ is its consummation.”[4] In other words, it is God’s grace to us in Christ (through His death in our place for the remission of sin) that creates peace between us and God.

3. The Father and the Son are the source of grace (unmerited favor) and peace (right relationship), which is made clear from the second half of the verse. The grace and peace are ‘from’ the Father and the Son. Here Paul makes a clear distinction between the Father and the Son, but as is seen all throughout, for example, the Gospel of John, they are One. Jesus came to do what the Father sent Him to do. Nothing more, nothing less. Jesus perfectly reveals the character, the heart of the Father. The Father and the Son work in sync, as it were. There is no conflict between them at all. Fee explains the interworking’s of the Father and the Son; “grace and peace from God the Father are effected through our Lord Jesus Christ.”[5] Theologically speaking, it is accurate to say that each of the three persons in the Trinity have their own distinctive role to play in salvation: the Father predestines, the Son purchases, and the Spirit applies. The Father chooses who He is going to save, the Son dies and in so doing purchases those whom the Father chooses, and then the Spirit dispenses the gifts of salvation on those for whom Jesus died. In this specific passage we see that grace and peace are given by the Father and the Son as they work in sync on behalf of sinners.

Paul’s Godward Thanksgiving (1:4-9)

We have come to my favorite parts of 1 Corinthians. Without vss. 4-9, 1 Corinthians would be one of the darkest books in the New Testament. Imagine if 1 Corinthians did not contain 1:4-9. From 1:10 all the way to the end of the letter Paul lambastes the Corinthians for their worldliness. These verses have become so dear to me because they confirm to me that no Christian is beyond hope. No church, no matter how far they have fallen, is beyond grace. Notice that Paul’s emphasis in the first nine verses of 1 Corinthians-his emphasis is clear; the infinite grace of God dispensed through the Son of God, Jesus, as the foundation of our hope. Paul begins his rebuke by reminding them of the grace of God which is found in Christ; he begins by reminding them of the Gospel. Why do you suppose he did so? I have thought of three main reasons why Paul decided to begin such a hard hitting letter on such an uplifting note.

First, so that they might not take credit for reforming their own lives. Salvation is all of grace. The church is not a 12 step, self-help program. The church centers its message and life on the grace of God given in Christ Jesus. It is interesting today that when someone receives Jesus as their Lord and Savior everyone rally’s around the person with accolades. “Congraduations! I am so happy for you. It is so cool that you made the decision to give your life to Christ.” No, the Congratulations! should be directed to God, not to the individual. God should be the one being praised. Salvation is not just a time when an individual turns a new leaf. It is a time when God brings breathes new life into dead, dry bones; it is where He gives sight to the blind. Baptism is a cause for celebration for the gift of new life; a celebration of the salvation that God has won; a celebration of the fact that His grace has conquered and cleansed yet another sinner. Paul knew that the power for transformation lay not in the ability of men to reform themselves, but rather in the power of God’s grace to transform, cleanse, and forgive. Paul removes any grounds for their potential boasting in effecting change in their own lives by pointing to the fact that their relationship with God is built entirely upon His gracious dealings with them. Interesting enough, the Corinthian church responded in an at least partially favorable way to some of Paul’s rebukes in 1 Corinthians. For example, we know from 2 Corinthians 2 and 7 that they took seriously his admonition to discipline the incestuous man out of the church. For this they can take no credit. Their repentance in this area is merely another indication of the grace of God at work in their midst.

Second, Paul trusted in the power of the Gospel for transformation. When someone is struggling with sin, although there may be a time to deal with sin with a swift word of warning, we often times over look the power of the grace of God in bringing about transformation and repentance. The grace and unconditional love of God are the world’s greatest motivators to godliness. This does not mean that Paul does not exhort them strongly to deal with their sin (just read the rest of the letter), but it is interesting that Paul begins by reminding them of the grace that they have been given in Christ. Paul does this because He is confident in the power of the Gospel of God’s grace to transform.

Third, and I think most importantly, he began 1 Corinthians with an emphasis on the grace of God because he wanted to build a foundation for them that they might not despair as they continue to read the letter. Paul knew that he was writing a disturbingly strong-toned letter. He knew that there was going to be great potential for the genuine believers in Corinth to fall to a place of despair as they considered the enormity of their worldliness. Paul did not want them to despair as if they had somehow fallen beyond the reaches of the grace of God. Paul wanted to build them up in the grace of God before exposing their great sinfulness so that they might know that their need for repentance in no way means that they have somehow fallen from grace. In other words, he did not want them to lose confidence in the grace of God given to them in Christ, knowing that he was about to expose how spiritually sick they had become.

Before actually digging into the details of this thanksgiving I want you to notice the Godward nature of this thanksgiving. In other words, although Paul thanks God for the Corinthians, his thanksgiving for the Corinthians centers on God’s acts of grace on their behalf. He thanks God for them precisely because they evidence forth the infinite grace and love of God. I also want you to notice that all of God’s gracious activity on behalf of the Corinthians is mediated through His Son, Jesus.

Let us briefly consider the main parts of this section. Paul thanks God for the Corinthians for three precise reasons: 1. because of His grace given to them in Christ (1:4); 2. because of the evidence of His present working of grace in their midst (1:5-7), and 3. because of His faithfulness to keep the Corinthians until the day of the Lord Jesus Christ (1:8-9). Or to put it another way; in 1:4 Paul speaks of God’s past acts of grace to the Corinthians, in 1:5-7 he points to evidences of God’s present acts of grace among the Corinthians, and in 1:8-9 he speaks of God’s future acts of grace for the Corinthians.

First, Paul thanks God for the Corinthians because of His grace given to them in Christ.  Imagine if I were to come up to you and say, “I thank God for you because if it weren’t for you I would have never gotten to know your neighbors.” That probably wouldn’t be the most flattering thing anyone has said to you. You would probably respond, “Thanks! So you are thankful for me only because of who I am associated with? Why can’t you be thankful for me because of some quality that you see in me?” And yet this is the sort of thanksgiving that Paul issues to God in regard to the Corinthians. He says,

I always thank my God for you because of God’s grace given to you in Christ Jesus.

In other words, Paul does not thank God for the Corinthians because they are a superb bunch of folks; he doesn’t thank God for them because of their great level of maturity. Just read the rest of the letter! Paul does not here thank God for the Corinthians because of their superior spirituality or because of their imitable love for God and His people. Rather, he thanks God for the Corinthians because they are trophies of His grace. Paul makes much of the Corinthians because they evidence forth the infinite grace of God-that God’s grace can cleanse, heal, and save even the worst of sinners. Paul thanks God for the Corinthians precisely because they are living representations that God does not deal with His people according to their sins-that God does not give us what we deserve.

Second, Paul thanks God for the Corinthians because of the evidence of His present working in their midst. Paul certainly does thank God for the Corinthian’s giftedness, yet communicates at the same time that the areas in which the Corinthians are thriving gives evidence not of their great spirituality but rather of God’s goodness to them. After all, he attributes their giftedness to God’s bountiful giving in 1:6-7.

“that by Him you were made rich in everything-in all speaking and all knowledge-as the testimony about Christ was confirmed among you, so that you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for the revelation of our Lord Jesus.”

The Corinthians have no grounds for boasting in their own spirituality. Notice that they did not make themselves rich. No, they were made rich by Him! They were made rich specifically in regard to the ’spiritual gifts’ or more appropriately, the ‘grace gifts’[6] of ’speaking and knowledge.’[7] These two areas of gifting are clearly spoken of by Paul in 1 Corinthians 8 and 12-14. The Corinthians are what they are only because of the richness of God’s grace. They do not own their spiritual gifts-the gifts are not theirs’ to do what they want with. Paul communicates this very idea to the Corinthians in 4:6-7.

The purpose is that none of you will be inflated with pride in favor of one person over another. For who makes you so superior? What do you have that you did not receive? If, in fact, you did not receive it, why do you boast as if you hadn’t received it?

In attributing their spiritual bounty to the graciousness and bountiful giving of God, he precludes or eliminates any ground for boasting. The Corinthian’s were misusing the gifts that God had given them; using them as grounds for establishing superiority over each other instead of using them as a tool for building up the brethren in love (read 1 Corinthians 12-14 as one context). Even though they were misusing the gifts, the presence of the gifts, nonetheless, evidenced the fact that God was in their midst. Thus, Paul thanks God for the Corinthians because they have the fingerprints of God’s present activity in their midst all over them. The Corinthian’s giftedness was not indicative of themselves. The fact that the Corinthian’s were endowed with such a remarkable degree of gifting says much more about God, the giver of the gifts, than it does about the Corinthians themselves. All their gifting reveals is that God has been extraordinarily good to them in spite of themselves.

When I was in college I had a good friend who was a joke stealer. We would be sitting together in the cafeteria and I would tell him a joke or make up some sort of a funny or witty line. He would laugh and laugh and laugh. But almost immediately after I would tell the joke or say the witty line, he would turn around to the table behind us and blurt out what he just heard as if he were the one who had made it up. I would (pridefully, I must admit) wait for him to give credit where credit was due. But he was a joke stealer. Everyone at the table would be laughing their heads off and he would sit there all proud as if he were the one who had made it up. In my mind I would be thinking, “Hold on a second. He stole my joke!” All the people at the table thought he was so funny, and only he and I knew where the joke originated. This is exactly what the Corinthian’s were doing. They were using these gifts that God had given them to build up their own egos as if their giftedness pointed to their great godliness as opposed to the great grace and bounty of God.

I want you to notice as well that Paul was not afraid to praise God for them in this area. The majority of the Corinthian’s problems stemmed from their wrong usage of the gifts and still Paul was not afraid to thank God for His making them rich in the usage of these gifts. I think we can learn a lesson in this way from Paul: we must never 1. excuse the wrong nor 2. ignore the good in others.[8] We generally have the tendency to do one or the other, do we not? We either overlook the obvious sins of others (and usually resort to gossip instead of going the route of biblically guided, gentle, loving confrontation as laid forth in Galatians 6:1-2) or we so focus on each other’s shortcomings that we completely lose sight of how God’s grace is evident in their lives. And the interesting thing is that our greatest strengths are generally our greatest weaknesses. This was true of the Corinthians as well. As messed up as the Corinthian’s were, God was using them. He was working in their midst in spite of themselves. And Paul was not afraid to praise God for His activity in and among them. We must never discredit the evidence of the present day workings of God in the lives of his people, no matter how badly His people may be misunderstanding, misusing, or misrepresenting such gifts. Thisselton says,

“What Christians bring from their cultural backgrounds into the church has varying value. Paul respects and appreciates what he can, knowing that the transformative power of the cross transposes indifferent or ambivalent raw material into what becomes part of a genuine gift of God’s grace for good. Paul places everything before God in a posture of thankful prayer and address.”[9]

Third, Paul thanks God for the Corinthians because of His faithfulness to keep the Corinthians until the day of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Corinthian’s perseverance in the faith bears evidence to the faithfulness of God in keeping His people. Notice that Paul does not here thank God for the Corinthians because of their great ability to keep themselves in the faith. He thanks God for the Corinthians because they evidence forth the faithfulness of the God of all grace to a people who are utterly faithless. Check out 1:8-9.

He will also confirm you to the end, blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful; by Him you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Notice the divine activity in these two verses. He says absolutely nothing about their own ability to keep themselves. It is all about God’s ability to keep them. If my final salvation were in my own hands; if my being kept was completely dependent upon my ability to keep myself, I would be a goner. The only reason any of us persevere to the end is because God is a promise keeping God. We give Him reason to let go of us every day, and the only reason we are kept anyways is because He has pledged His faithfulness to us in Christ. Paul encourages the Corinthians in the faithfulness of God. Paul affirms them; you will be kept. Their final perseverance once again is not indicative of their great godliness, but rather of God’s great faithfulness to a faithless people. Just read the rest of 1 Corinthians to get an idea of how tall of an order it was for God to keep a people like the Corinthians. They are a testimony to the great faithfulness of God’s keeping grace.

I want to say something about the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints. There have been some in church history, John Wesley for example, who have taught that the Bible teaches that a Christian can lose his/her salvation. This, however, is not biblical. There are certainly passages in the bible that can at least cause one to question the validity of Wesley’s position,[10] but the overall biblical teaching is quite clear. Paul communicates that the final perseverance of the Christian is an issue of the faithfulness of God. That is to say, to suggest that a Christian may lose his/her salvation is to put a question mark over the faithfulness of God. After all, in regard to the Corinthian’s final perseverance, Paul says, “He will… confirm you to the end… God is faithful.” Perseverance is a work of God. Man certainly has a part to play (as evidenced in Philippians 2:12; Jude 21, etc.). However, God is the engine driving the efforts of men, making their ‘keeping’ efforts effective (as evidenced in Philippians 2:13 and Jude 1, 24).

Jesus communicates this very idea, the idea that the final perseverance of the saints is an issue of the faithfulness and power of God, in John 6:37-40.

Everyone the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My will, but the will of Him who sent Me. This is the will of Him who sent Me: that I should lose none of those He has given Me but should raise them up on the last day. For this is the will of My Father: that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.

For Jesus to lose any that the Father has given Him is for Jesus to fail to fulfill the will of the Father. If He loses any that come to Him in faith, He has failed to be obedient to the will of the Father. To suggest that one can lose his/her salvation is to imply that Jesus is a disobedient failure. It also seems to put a question mark over God’s unconditional love to His people. Furthermore, it seems to turn our grace based salvation into a salvation of works. What do I mean by this? Well, faith may get one in the door, but how does one stay in the door? The true Arminian who believes that a Christian can lose his salvation is forced to resort to the Roman Catholic teaching, which communicates that one must maintain his justification by faith-wrought works in order to keep himself justified. In the final analysis, if salvation were a losable thing, my ultimate hope would be in my ability or performance in keeping myself. Paul, however, makes our final perseverance in the faith an issue of the faithfulness of God. I would not say that the Wesleyan doctrine is a damning doctrine, but I would suggest that it is ultimately dangerous and worthy of contestation. We can hear the sentiment of 1 Corinthians 1:8-9 in Robert Robinson’ hymn,

Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing:

O to grace how great a debtor
Daily I’m constrained to be!
Let Thy goodness, like a fetter,
Bind my wandering heart to Thee.
Prone to wander, Lord, I feel it,
Prone to leave the God I love;
Here’s my heart, O take and seal it,
Seal it for Thy courts above.

What was the plea of the hymnist? For God to get involved! He knew that he was completely dependent upon God for his perseverance in the faith. His hope is in the goodness and faithfulness of God. Our best efforts to keep ourselves are worthless apart from Him keeping us. If my perseverance in the faith is dependent upon my ability, my discipline, my power to will, my determination, my love, I will not be kept. But if God keeps me according to the standard of His faithfulness, my final perseverance is sure! The ground of my hope is not in my own performance to keep myself, but rather in His faithful character, in the unconditional grace and love which He has extended to me in Christ Jesus.

But the point here in 1 Corinthians is to emphasize the faithfulness of God in keeping those who repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as a reason for Paul to thank God. Paul thanks God for the Corinthians because their continued perseverance in the faith is a testimony to His faithful character. Paul thanks God that His grace has been sufficient to get the Corinthians in the door, is sufficiently bearing fruit in the present, and will be sufficient to keep them ‘blameless’ until the day of Christ Jesus. The Corinthians, from the top of their heads to the soles of their feet, are walking pictures of sinners saved, used, and kept by the grace of God. What a word of encouragement to the Corinthians! They are about to stare their own ugly sinfulness in the face, but they have the news of God’s sufficient, keeping grace to combat any fears of total abandonment or judgment that might come their way. Paul surely wants them to repent of their many sins, but he also does not want the knowledge of their sin to cause them to either cease resting in the grace of God or rejoicing in the grace of God.

Conclusion

Paul thanks God for the Corinthians, building them up in the grace and love of God, before he mentions even one issue for which they need to repent. This whole thanksgiving is shot through with God’s active grace mediated through Christ. Paul’s thanksgiving for the Corinthians has everything to do with how their life in Christ redounds to the glory of God’s grace (mirroring the emphasis of “to the praise of His glorious grace” in Ephesians 1:3-14). His thanksgiving is a Godward thanksgiving as opposed to a man-centered thanksgiving. He thanks God for the Corinthians precisely “because of God’s grace given to you in Christ Jesus.” There is hope for the Corinthians because their life in Christ is from beginning to end is a work of God. Paul establishes their confidence in the grace of God before he begins to expose their multi-faceted problems. How badly do we need the Good News of God’s grace preached to us again and again and again?! Paul knew that they needed to be reminded of their standing in Christ before they could appropriately handle the strong word of rebuke that he had prepared for them.

Do not despair! Do not take your sins lightly, but do not despair! God has saved you, he is at work among you, and He will keep you to the end. You have nothing to boast in save the cross of Christ, but this cross gives you all that you need for salvation, life, and final perseverance. God has saved you, is saving you, and will keep you saved unto the end!

[1] Gordon D. Fee explains how Paul ‘Christianized’ the standard Greco-Roman letter greeting. “The traditional greeting in the Hellenistic world was charein-the infinitive of the verb ‘to rejoice,’ but in salutations meaning simply ‘Greetings!’ (see Acts 15:23; Jas. 1:1). In Paul’s hands this now becomes charis (grace), to which is added the traditional Jewish greeting shalom (’peace’). Thus, instead of ‘greetings,’ it is ‘grace to you-and peace.’” Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians; The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1987), 34.

[2] C.K. Barrett helpfully identifies grace as “God’s love active in Christ.” See C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians; Black’s New Testament Commentary (Peabody, Hendrickson Publishers, 1968, 2006), 38.

[3] This certainly is a biblical theme (for example, see Philippians 4:6-7), this is just not what Paul is talking about in this specific verse.

[4] David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians; Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 30.

[5] Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 35.

[6] BDAG defines charisma as “that which is freely and graciously given.” Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Eidted by Frederick William Denker, 3^d Ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), 1081.  Almost every commentator suggests that it is a mistake to translate this word (charisma) as “spiritual gifts”, preferring instead the translation “grace gifts” (or something similar). See Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 38; Anthony C. Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text; The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 97-98; Garland, 1 Corinthians, 31-32, 34. See especially D.A. Carson, Showing the Spirit: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14 (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1987), 19-24. Carson defines the ‘grace gifts’ as “gifts of God’s grace”. Ibid., 22. Fee sees a clear connection between the “grace” (charis) of 1:4 and the “grace gifts” (charisma) here in 1:7. “… for Paul charis (”grace”) very often is closely associated with charisma/charismata (’gift/gifts’) and in such instances refers to concrete expressions of God’s gracious activity in his people.” Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 37.

In another place Fee suggests “gracious endowment” as the best possible translation for the word charisma in 1:7. He explains; “The first occurrence of the word charisma in the Pauline corpus (v. 7) is especially instructive, since it demonstrates that the first emphasis in the word is on its root charis (’grace’), not on either the Spirit or the gifting per se. Thus, even though Paul has concrete expressions of ‘grace’ in view (in this case ’speech’ and ‘knowledge’), and even though in ch. 12 these concrete expressions are understood as the direct result of the Spirit’s activity, there seems to be no real justification for the translation ’spiritual gift’ for this word. Rather, they are ‘gracious endowments’ (where the emphasis lies on the grace involved in their being so gifted), which at times, as in this letter, are seen also as the gracious activity of the Spirit in their midst.” Gordon D. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994), 86.

[7]As one would expect, there are a plethora of different ideas as to what “speaking and knowledge” might refer to. Most commentators posit that these two gifts are represented in 1 Corinthians 8:1-13 and 1 Corinthians 12-14. In that camp would be Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 39-see also Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 87-88; Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 91-92 (although he is quick to not associate his view too closely with the super-spiritual view that Fee takes, he nonetheless points to the same groups of passages as viable cross references to what ’speaking and knowledge’ might refer to); Gary S. Shogren, 1 Corintios. Comentario Bíblico Iberoamericano (Buenos Aires: Ediciones Kairos, forthcoming), 47; Charles Hodge, A Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians; Geneva Series of Commentaries (Carlisle: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1857, 2000), 6-7; Garland, 1 Corinthians, 33-34; Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 36-37. Ben Witherington postulates that the ’speaking and knowledge’ refer not just to the realities of 1 Corinthians 8 and 12-14, but also to the ’speaking and knowledge’ of 1 Corinthians 1-4. Ben Witherington III, Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995), 87-89. Shogren offers a clear reason for rejecting Witherington’s position. He says, “Paul is in no way thankful for that pseudo-intellectual speech and knowledge. Rather Paul is thinking ahead to the charismata in chap. 12-14, true workings of God that the Corinthians have abused.” Shogren, 1 Corintios, 47.

I would agree with Shogren on this. After all, Paul slams the Corinthian’s ‘pseudo-knowledge’ by drawing a sharp contrast between it and the true knowledge of God in chapters 1-4. Paul gives no indication that the ’speaking and knowledge’ of 1 Corinthians 8 is inherently wrong (and 8:4-7 would indicate that the knowledge possessed by the Corinthian believers in chapter 8 was in every way accurate and good) with the knowledge they possessed. The problem lay, rather, in their wrongheaded claim to what they knew (accurately, I must add) to be their own Gospel given rights even when their claim on such theologically correct knowledge (of their rights) led to the real spiritual destruction of their less theologically astute brethren. There was also nothing inherently wrong with the ’speech and knowledge’ discussed in 1 Corinthians 12-14. The problem addressed in chapters 12-14 lay not in the unbiblical nature of their use of the gifts, but rather in their self-centered, self-gratifying use of the gifts. However, the ’speaking and knowledge’ in 1 Corinthians 1-4 was contested by Paul on every front and was even spoken of by Paul as contrary to the wisdom and power of God (see especially 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:16 and  4:19-20). I would posit that the ’speaking and knowledge’ in vs. 5 includes theological knowledge, preaching gifts, spiritual knowledge, and spiritual utterance.

[8] I am indebted to Gary Shogren for this insight. Shogren, 1 Corintios. 46.

[9] Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 93.

[10]1 Corinthians 15:2, Galatians 5:2-4, Colossians 1:22-23, Hebrews 6:1-6, and Hebrews 10:26-31 just to name a few.

Click here to watch this sermon on video.

Click here to listen to this sermon (right click  on ‘Click here’ and choose ‘Save link as’ to download).

Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship, Boscawen, NH Sunday, May 23rd, 2010.

Christ’s Universal/Local Church
1 Corinthians 1:2 (b)
Jimmy Snowden
Sovereign Grace Fellowship: Boscawen, NH

Introduction/Recap

This week we will be finishing up what we started last week in verse 2. Last week you will remember that we began to consider the four ways in which Paul identifies the Corinthian church. You would think, in light of the rest of this letter, that Paul would identify them in light of their many failures. But what we saw was that Paul identified the Corinthians in the same way that he identified himself in vs. 1; he identified them most chiefly in terms of their relation with Jesus. Paul identifies himself as “an apostle of Jesus Christ” in vs. 1, and then identifies the Corinthian church in four ways in vs. 2: 1. as God’s possession (”To God’s church at Corinth”), 2. as “those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus”, 3. as “saints by calling” and 4. as one among many. Paul sees the believers in Corinth primarily in terms of their relation with Christ. This is why he can call them sanctified and saints and brethren in spite of their many sins. Paul saw them through the eyes of Christ.

Implication of Sanctification from 1 Corinthians 1:2

Before moving on to the second part of 1:2 I want to lay forth one of the major implications of the fact of sanctification. Paul identifies the Corinthian church as ‘those who are sanctified.’ As discussed last week, to be sanctified in Christ means that we are ’set apart for His redemptive purposes’. Paul is not here commanding the Corinthians to become sanctified nor is he speaking of sanctification as if it were a process; rather, he speaks of sanctification as a part of their very identity. That is why he refers to them as ’saints.’ You will remember that a saint is merely a ’sanctified one’. In Christ Jesus the Christians at Corinth have been set apart from the defilement of the world for God’s use.

I explained what it means to be ’set apart’ (or sanctified) by using the illustration of expensive chinaware dishes. Women, if you were to walk into the kitchen to find your husband microwaving a plate of nachos on one of your expensive chinaware serving dishes would you not scold him? Of course you would! You would say, “What are you doing? You know that that our china is not to be used on just any occasion. These dishes are ’set apart’; they are to be used only in the most specialist of occasions.” These are sanctified dishes, holy dishes; they are set apart for a special purpose. So are we. We have been set apart (sanctified or made holy) in Christ for His use.

You see, I am not my own. I am His, and He has set me apart for His use. So often we fall into this mindset that my life is mine to do what I want with. But this cuts at the very heart of what it means to be ’sanctified in Christ Jesus.’ We are set apart for Him. Do you see yourself as a servant of Him and His glory, or do you see yourself primarily as a servant of yourself? Paul makes this implication of sanctification clear to the Corinthians in 6:19-20;

Do you not know that your body is a sanctuary of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought at a price, therefore glorify God in your body.

I am not my own; I am His. I have been bought by Him and He has set me apart for His use. We think that since we can make decisions that decisions are ours to make. But this just isn’t true. Just because you are able to choose whatever you want does not mean that you have the moral right to choose whatever you want. I am afraid that many in America have unsuccessfully attempted to marry the Gospel with the values of the American dream-we have tried to wed the American dream with the call of discipleship. The American dream calls individuals to fulfill their own dreams no matter how selfish those dreams may be while the discipleship call of Jesus centers on self-denial (Luke 9:23); the American dreams calls individuals to pursue health, wealth, and prosperity while Jesus’ call to discipleship is a call to ‘lose  his life for Me’ (Luke 9:24); the American dream is the ultimate pursuit of self-centered fulfillment while Jesus’ call of discipleship is the ultimate pursuit of selfless and sacrificial service and unconditional love (Luke 9:23-26; Philippians 2:3-11).

The two cannot and must not be wed. This does not mean that we cannot enjoy the plenty that God has given us (see 1 Timothy 4:1-5) but it does mean that we must grow in our ability to distinguish the Gospel call from the American dream and reject those aspects of the American dream that cut at the heart of Jesus’ call of discipleship. What American Christian’s generally do, though, is water down Jesus’ radical statements in order to find some sort of compatibility between the two so that the two pursuits may be seen as one and the same. This only results in a domesticated Gospel that looks good but is powerless to save or transform.

This was exactly the problem with the Corinthian church; they were trying to wed their cultural values with the values of the Gospel. This is the root of their many problems as a church and as individuals. As David E. Garland says, “The problem was not that the church was in Corinth but that too much of Corinth was in the church.”[1] They were not acting as those who had been set apart. They were holding two mutually contradictory systems together. This is why the church was in such disarray-they were not living as ’set apart’ servants of Him. They had a selfish view of things. They had the mindset of; “How can I exploit Christ and His church to advance myself” instead of having the mindset of a servant; “What, Lord, can I give or do to make Jesus famous?” Am I (are you) a contributor to the cause of Christ or a hindrance. There is a time to be served (apart from our receiving Christ’s service on our behalf we would still be in our sins-John 13:8), but there is a great deal of difference between exploiting Christ and His church for selfish ends and humbly benefiting from the ministry of others.

One Among Many

Lastly, Paul identifies them in terms of their relationship to the body of Christ at large. Look at the text with me.

To God’s church at Corinth, to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus and called as saints, with all those in every place who call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord-theirs and ours.

Paul is here reminding the Corinthians that they are not alone. They are part of something much larger than themselves. Anthony C. Thisselton explains the Corinthian church’s need to be reminded of their part in the larger body of Christ. He says, “the church in Corinth is not a self-contained autonomous entity: they are not a self-sufficient community; they are not the only pebble on the beach.”[2] We must have an understanding of our place in God’s world; Who are we as a unique expression of God’s kingdom and where we fit into the grand scheme of God’s redemptive purposes. As Derek Thomas said (at the NECEP 2010 conference in Hampstead, NH); “every Christian has two zip codes.” We have a local zip code (our place in the local body of Christ) and a universal zip code (our place in the cosmic kingdom of God).

In other words there we need to have both a macro and a micro view of things. You can imagine the difference between telescopes (macro view) and microscopes (micro view): telescopes are built to view the great expanse of God’s power displayed in the stars and galaxy’s while microscopes are built to view the great intricacy of God’s incomparable intellect displayed in atoms, molecules and microbes. So shall our view of ourselves in God’s vast kingdom be. We must not dig our heads so far into the microscope that we forget to see where we are in the context of the vast kingdom of God. This, I believe, is something that the Corinthian church struggled with.

Theologians have thus made a distinction between the universal church and the local church, or between the invisible church and the visible church. These categories are both helpful and biblical. When either one is emphasized to the neglect of the other problems are bound to come. You see Paul refer to the local (or visible) church in the first part of vs. 2 when he says, “To God’s church at Corinth”; and then he refers to universal (or invisible) church in the second half of the verse; “with all those in every place who call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord-theirs and ours.” Let’s consider both of these aspects of the church. We will discuss the universal church first and then the local church.

The Universal Church

The universal church is the Kingdom of God at large. It is comprised of every single person who has ‘called on the name of the Lord’ (1 Corinthians 1:2; Romans 10:13; Joel 2:32). Jesus speaks about the universal/invisible church in Matthew 16:18.

“I will build My church and the forces of Hades will not overpower it.”

Jesus neither has a specific local church nor any specific groups of churches in mind when He speaks of building His church. He is rather speaking of the church as the whole sum of those for whom He came to die and save. We see the universal/invisible church mentioned also in Ephesians 5:22-27.

Wives, submit to your own husbands as to the Lord, 23 for the husband is head of the wife as also Christ is head of the church. He is the Savior of the body. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so wives should submit to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as also Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her, 26 to make her holy, cleansing her in the washing of water by the word. 27 He did this to present the church in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but holy and blameless. In the same way, husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hates his own flesh, but provides and cares for it, just as Christ does for the church.

When Paul speaks of the ‘church’ here in Ephesians 5 he is clearly referring to universal church. He is not speaking of any one particular local church or network of local churches. One could say that Paul defines the church in 5:25 as the collective whole of every person for whom Jesus has died and saved. Mark Driscoll and Gary Breshears identify the universal church as “all God’s people in all times and places.”[3] At the second coming, Jesus will gather His church and all of God’s blood-bought kids will sing His praises for an eternity. Sovereign Grace Fellowship is just one small localized reflection of this massive meeting of the people of God. This massive meeting can at least be imagined in Revelation 19:6-8.

Then I heard something like the voice of a vast multitude, like the sound of cascading waters, and like the rumbling of loud thunder, saying: “Hallelujah-because our Lord God, the Almighty, has begun to reign! Let us be glad, rejoice, and give Him glory, because the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has prepared herself. She was permitted to wear fine linen, bright and pure.” For the fine linen represents the righteous acts of the saints.

There has never been anything like it. This will be the gathering of God’s saints made perfect by the blood of Christ. It will be the whole lot of God’s people, numbering in the millions upon millions upon millions, from every “tribe and language and people and nation” (Revelation 5:9)-red, yellow, black, white, men, women, businessmen, construction workers, children, camel salesman, etc. The list goes on and on and on. Every single person for whom Jesus has died and saved will be there singing the praises of Jesus.

And it will not be like the chanting and cheering at the Super Bowl. There are opposing sides at the Super Bowl. At this celebration there will be no nay-sayers. When the Patriots and the Giants go head to head there is a conflict in the cheering. Some cheer and some boo! When King Jesus gets final victory over sin, Satan, and death (which does not happen until Revelation 20, but is clearly set in motion in the Revelation 19 passage quoted above) there will only be the shout of acclamation. It will be a crowd unlike never seen before, and the crowd will be in complete passionate agreement as to the infinite worth of the Christ. With one voice all of the redeemed will passionately shout, “Jesus Christ is Lord!” (Philippians 2:11) and the Father will look on with a smile the size of the Milky Way, nodding His head in complete agreement. Revelation 19 is the church service of all church services.

Really, this is what we look forward to. We look forward to the ultimate gathering of all those for whom Jesus died and saved. What we look forward to is this great church service. Our church is only a tiny representation of this larger reality. At this church service we will see Jesus in His glorified state, and we will be surrounded by all the redeemed from every tongue, tribe and nation, and by all of God’s angels.

We must never lose sight of the fact that our little local church is not the ultimate focal point. It is a representation of this eternal church service. We must not be like the Corinthians by thinking ourselves to be the only pebble on the beach. We certainly are part of something much larger than ourselves. We must keep ourselves connected to God’s larger, cosmic redemptive activity. The ministry of our church must not be confined to our own local area. It is imperative that we partner with other churches, missionaries, and people so that we do not lose sight of God’s universal (not in the sense of universalism) purposes in Christ. God’s work in our area and in our lives is only one tiny piece of what God is up to.

Here are a few things that we can do to keep ourselves from losing sight of our place in the vast expanse of God’s kingdom: 1. get in touch with organizations like the Voice of the Martyrs (a ministry which informs the people of God in regard to how we can support and pray for persecuted Christians throughout the world), 2. financially support and commit to be faithful in  praying for and corresponding with (through mail, email, or phone) foreign missionaries and local church planters, 3. create and foster Christ-focused relationships with other Christians in other local churches, and 4. continue in prayer for God’s global mission (do this by maintaining the emphasis of the Lord’s prayer-”Our Father in heaven, Your name be honored as holy. Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” (Matthew 6:9-10)). We must never lose sight of the fact that we, the local church here in Boscawen, are only one small representation of God’s cosmic plan of redemption.

The Local Church

The local church is a representation of the universal church. This is not to say the universal church is more important than the local church. To suggest such a thing is rather absurd. While it is imperative that the local church not turn in on herself so much that she become blind to God’s ultimate, cosmic purposes, we must not go to the other extreme by dismissing the essential role that the local church plays in fulfilling God’s redemptive purposes. After all, the local church plays an irreplaceable role in the progress of the Gospel as a representation of the transforming and reconciling power of the Gospel to an on-looking world. Paul clearly speaks of the localized body at Corinth as a ‘church’ in 1:2; “To God’s church at Corinth.” Interestingly, God’s church at Corinth was a conglomeration of house churches. It is also noteworthy that Paul speaks of a church that meets in the home of Prisca and Aquila in Romans 16:5. He says,

“Greet also the church that meets in their home”.[4]

In Revelation 2-4 we see Jesus’ highly specific letters to seven different churches in Asia Minor. It is clear that each of the seven churches are completely different; they each represent a unique slice of the culture, and each have their own unique strengths and weaknesses. Jesus does not see them as being so completely connected that one generalized letter will do the trick. Each respective church needs a unique letter that speaks to their own unique set of struggles. I want to draw your attention to Driscoll’s and Breshear’s definition of the local church.

The local church is a community of regenerated believers who confess Jesus Christ as Lord. In obedience to the Scriptures they organize under qualified leadership, gather regularly for preaching and worship, observe the biblical sacraments of baptism and Communion, are unified by the Spirit, are disciplined for holiness, and scatter to fulfill the Great Commandment and the Great Commission as missionaries to the world for God’s glory and their joy.[5]

The local church is God’s representative spiritual authority in the world. The local church does not rule and advance by force, but rather through prayer, preaching/proclamation, accountability, and discipline. However the church may advance, it is clear that the local church is the medium through which Jesus seeks to build His universal church. The local church is the hub and center of God’s activity in the world. It was a local church, the church at Antioch, that sent (commissioned) Paul out on his missionary journeys (Acts 13:1-2). I am no way suggesting that the local church is infallible. However, I will say that the local church is essential. God certainly works outside of the context of the local church, but this does not mean that the local church is replaceable. Paul even communicates the fact that God set up the local church to be the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy  3:16).[6]

We live in a day and age where the biblical centrality of the local church is not taken seriously. I have been amazed over the last few years how many times I have heard Christians question the importance of the local church. I hear more and more Christians-even highly motivated, doctrinally-minded, evangelistic Christians-question the centrality of the local church in God’s New Covenant era. I have seen many Christians so overemphasize their commitment to the universal church that they dismiss the biblical mandate to submit and commit to a local body of believers. Such believers think themselves to be the spiritual cream of the crop. They see the local church as an unnecessary weight; as something which holds them back from growing to their fullest spiritual potential. Anyone who sees the people of God as a speed bump to their growth in Christ will never experience true growth. A believer who holds the church at arm’s length, jumping from church to church, letting convenience and selfish consumerism dictate, will never grow in true Christ-like character.

A solid commitment to the universal church at the expense of any sort of a commitment to the local church is generally born out of a desire to selfishly come and go undetected, as is pleasing to the flesh. It is called convenient, self-serving fellowship. It is an indication of a desire to be served with no desire to joyfully join in the oft-times grueling blessing of mutual ministry. Many in our culture have been questioning the biblical precedent of the authority of the local church (as is clearly laid out in the Pastoral Epistles); however, this is not a matter of debatable conjecture. The local church, as structured and managed according to the pattern set forth in the Scriptures, is essential to biblical Christianity.

Consider with me for a moment what sort of a place the local church plays in God’s redemptive purposes from the bible: The local Church is 1. the believer’s safeguard against heresy as is evidenced by 1 Timothy 3:15 (and the rest of the Pastoral Epistles), 2. God’s ordained plan for accountability and discipline as is evidenced by Matthew 18:15-20, 1 Corinthians 5:1-5, and 2 Corinthians 2:5-11, 3. God’s ordained plan for the final perseverance of the saints as is evidenced in Hebrews 3:12-13 and Hebrews 10:24-25, and 4. God’s representative presence in the world as is evidenced by John 17:20-23 and 2 Corinthians 3:1-3.

You cannot walk the Christian walk alone. You must be connected. If you are here this morning and you are not sacrificially committed to serving and loving unconditionally the people of God and unequivocally submitting yourself under the authority of the local church, ‘do not let the grass grow under your feet’; commit yourself today. To live a life that reflects a lack of commitment to God’s local church is to live a life of disobedience.

Conclusion

Paul identified the Corinthians both in terms of their local identity and in light of their identity in the kingdom of God at large. It is essential that we catch Paul’s vision of God’s new covenant work in the world. Paul saw the church in a two-tier sense: the universal church and the local church. Our passion for the local church should never keep us from connecting ourselves to God’s cosmic redemptive purposes in the world and to other believers in our neighboring communities; however, our passion for the universal church should never cause us to have a loose commitment to the local church. After all, the local church is the localized representation of the universal church on this earth, and it is the God-ordained launch pad for God’s cosmic Gospel mission. We must hold both without choking out the other. We, as a local church, must sacrifice for the sake of other kingdom communities, and yet we must maintain our own unique identity as a reflection of God’s highly diverse universal church.

I will close by calling your attention to a portion of one of Derek Webb’s songs, The Church.

The Church

I have come with one purpose
to capture for myself a bride
by My life she is lovely
by My death she’s justified

I have always been her husband
though many lovers she has known
so with water I will wash her
and by My word alone

so when you hear the sound of the water
you will know you’re not alone

(chorus)
’cause I haven’t come for only you
but for My people to pursue
you cannot care for Me with no regard for her
if you love Me you will love the church

Jesus and His body, in both the local and universal sense, come as a packaged deal. You cannot have Jesus without His church. To reject the people of God is to reject Christ. After all, John, in 1 John 4:20, says, “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For the person who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.”

[1] David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians; Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003), 8. Garland is citing Gordon D. Fee in this statement. Fee originally said, “Although they were the Christian church in Corinth, an inordinate amount of Corinth was yet in them.” See Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians; The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1987), 4.

[2] Anthony C. Thisselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text; The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2000), 74.

[3] Mark Driscoll and Gary Breshears, Doctrine: What Christians Should Believe (Wheaton: Crossway, 2010), 307.

[4] A similar statement to Romans 16:5 is made in 1 Corinthians 16:19

[5] Driscoll and Breshears, Doctrine, 307.

[6] Although this should not cause one to discredit the proper place of seminaries in the education of men and women for Gospel ministry, it certainly should cause us to step back and reconsider the role of seminaries when it comes to being the hub and center of biblical/theological training. Seminaries are well and good so long as they are not treated as a replacement training facility for the church. Seminaries are only beneficial in so far as they are treated as a supplement, a servant, to the ministry of the local church. That means that pastors and parents, not seminary professors, should be the primary instruments in the training up of men and women for Gospel ministry.

Click here to watch this sermon on video.

Click here to listen to this sermon (right click  on ‘Click here’ and choose ‘Save link as’ to download).

Preached at Sovereign Grace Fellowship, Boscawen, NH Sunday, May 16th, 2010.