Thank you. I am still feeling my way around, trying to understand how to write for a highly-literate, technical -- and skeptical -- crowd. I've been away from the faith almost as long as I've been in it, and I see things from both sides. There are super-simple versions of the ABCs, and they are effective for the audiences that they are. There are serious critical thinkers here, and it feels like something more is needed.
I think there might be a certain irony in that the "simple" ABCs appear to be derived from the Romans Road, and Paul's writing in Romans is about as detailed and technical as it gets! While the essential meaning comes across in translation, much else is lost.
Nevertheless, "many words" or even persuasive words are not the way to reach people. We can't actually bring about what needs to happen -- only God can. I am learning to write from 'You take it from here'.
Some apologists might take exception to what I am saying. But... There is a verse in the opening of 1 Corinthians that I found somewhat puzzling until studying it while working with a Greek-level commentary and coming to realize what it is saying about this. And a few of those apologists seem now to have lost their way.
1Cor. 1:17 (Mounce) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be rendered ineffective.
The last part of the verse can be difficult to translate. Bill Mounce's "not with eloquent wisdom" is οὐκ ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου. Paul Gardner translates it literally as "not with wisdom of speech". οὐκ ἐν is straightforward, "not with". σοφίᾳ is the noun "sophia", with meanings like "skill" and "wisdom", but as dative (indirect object) because ἐν ("with" in this context) takes a dative. λόγου is "word" or "speech", but in the singular genitive (possessive). So, "not with wisdom of speech".
Already we have two different valid translations of the same four words, thanks to semantic range. That's just the beginning. We also have Mounce's "lest the cross of Christ be rendered ineffective" to Gardner's "lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect", ἵνα μὴ κενωθῇ ὁ σταυρὸς τοῦ Χριστοῦ. At least those are close. And then there's v. 18.
This is way beyond me. I'll let Gardner take it from here. Deep dive, hold tight.
--------
It is worth noting that “not in wisdom of speech” modifies “to preach.” It is therefore part of Christ’s commission and not simply part of Paul’s preferred way of speaking. So Paul indicates that the way of expression itself affects the success or otherwise of a proper reception of the message of the gospel. Thus Paul says “lest the cross…be emptied” (ἵνα μὴ κενωθῇ). If the gospel is communicated “in wisdom of speech,” then not only is its content lost but its very power is lost. Thus, as we move to v. 18, we see that “the word of the cross” changes lives because in it God is at work in power to effect the calling of people to worship the Lord Christ.
What, then, does “with wisdom of speech” (ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου) mean? One problem, as many have noted, is that both the words “wisdom” (σοφία) and “word” (λόγος) have wide ranges of meaning. “Word” (λόγος) can mean anything from a word to a speech or statement and so on. Indeed, Paul has already used the word to describe a grace-gift of the Spirit in 1:5, though it is clear that is not what he has in mind here because the one is commended and the other is scorned.
“Wisdom” (σοφία) can be used to describe intelligence. When used in a biblical context, wisdom is often seen to be that which God gives to his people so they come to understand his will, but it also has a deliberately practical bent to it. In other words, the wise person is one who not only knows the will of God but does it. This is particularly seen in Old Testament wisdom literature and specially in the many aphorisms of the Book of Proverbs. However, in 1:22 it becomes clear that the sort of wisdom to which Paul refers here is especially in the domain of the Greeks. For them wisdom involved impressive thinking and philosophical enquiry. It concerned the realm of ideas. But there was much more to it, for part of being a “wise person” was being able to communicate and argue with fine standards of rhetoric. There is some evidence that occasionally the rhetoric of an argument, its sophistication of presentation, became more important than the content itself. No doubt the clever rhetoric was aimed at convincing people of a particular position or belief, but the ability to persuade through the argument, structure, and form of the oratory or writing was in itself highly prized. This in turn fed into the constant desire in Hellenistic society for status and being highly regarded by all. Bruce Winter has argued that Paul was facing a community in Corinth where the philosophy and attitudes of the Sophists held special sway. They were known for their ability in oratory that would “secure a public following and attract students to their schools.”
Looking now at what Paul says in this passage and how he contrasts this “wisdom of speech” with the “word of the cross” (v. 18) and the “wisdom of God” (v. 21), we see that Paul is arguing that the gospel itself simply turns the way that the world views wisdom on its head. The cross of Christ, understood as the “gospel”—the full revelation of God in Christ—carries within itself the ultimate “wisdom,” that is, the mind and plan of God for this world. It also carries within itself the “power of God” (v. 18). Human teachers and preachers are but the vessels that carry God’s powerful message. Clever rhetoric will simply serve to obscure the power of God’s word. To elevate the manner of delivery is to give a profile to the one who preaches, and this is not the focus of the gospel. Conversely, to elevate the content (the “wisdom of God”), which is the plan of God in Jesus Christ, inevitably diminishes the human voice that brings the message. Therefore, in sending Paul to preach the gospel, Christ gave him a task that, as with John the Baptist before him, would mean that he would always be decreasing while Christ would always be increasing (John 3:30). No doubt Paul would have joined with John in saying, as Christ was exalted, “This joy of mine is now complete” (John 3:29 ESV).
The emptying of the power of the gospel would have occurred when delivered through “wisdom of speech.” Instead of the gospel being heard and understood by all—from the educated to the uneducated, the elite of society to the dregs of society—it would have only been appreciated by the elite, those brought up to understand sophistic rhetoric and philosophy. In modern terms, it would have been like saying that the gospel can only be heard in a university town from a highly sophisticated professor! In every way, Paul is saying, the calling to evangelize involves turning the world’s values upside down.
With the themes of “wisdom” and of the “cross” having been introduced, this verse now links directly into the section that follows. The “cross of Christ” (ὁ σταυρὸς τοῦ Χριστοῦ) becomes a shorthand for the content of the preached gospel.
--------
The discussion continues with a side-section titled "In Depth: The Gospel". I've already quoted too much, so I'm stopping here.
The essence seems to be "keep it simple" (you should appreciate that -- Simple Christianity), but not simplistic, and "God does the calling". That's what I am groping around for, keeping the latter in mind so as to not be tempted to exclude what must be said, even if it might turn some away. Simple, huh?
[Gardner, Paul, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: 1 Corinthians, pp. 86-87, Zondervan, 2020]
Exactly. While we can and sometimes should "get intellectual" about Christianity, God's grace is not for intellectuals. In fact, he's clear in the parable of the wedding feast in Luke 22 that you're more likely to "get it" if you aren't one of society's elites. What we often forget is that people don't enter the Kingdom of Heaven based on fancy argument. They do it because the Holy Spirit engages with them in a way that only God knows. The best any of us can do is be faithful about engaging and telling somebody about the Gospel, but the Gospel itself if powered by the Holy Spirit.
Yes, plugging away in the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a good way to understand the straight and narrow path which hopefully is ever upward toward our salvation. We may stumble and fall but with faith in God and reading the scriptures we can regain our momentum.
I've noticed the same in the stacks that I read. It gets frustrating after awhile because, as you say, the writers see the problems but they are clueless as to THE answer, which is surrender to God through Jesus. There is one where I occasionally weigh in to suggest what you've laid out here so well, but mostly no one engages much. I figure I'm planting seeds and that God won't let any effort on his behalf go to waste. Keep sending the message out into the ether.
I have that same sense of planting seeds but if so, these seeds seem to grow slower than garlic. We have some of that growing in pots out back, and they have some months to go still.
I determined to proceed slowly at first, having myself been in a similar place within the scientific crowd until about six years ago, thereby recognizing clearly what we're up against. But then this year I unexpectedly found myself leading a small group study where that approach wouldn't work, and I began looking for ways to be more direct in my writing as well. That reflected in the stats -- they tanked -- but I saw a similar trend in other blogs that I follow and I'm not sure what to make of it.
Writing this piece, it became very clear to me that those destined to listen will listen -- no need to go slow, although the response might well take time, and other contacts might be needed -- and those who will not will not.
This reminds me of Rev. 13:9-10.
"If anyone has ears to hear, let him listen.
If anyone is to be taken captive,
into captivity he goes.
If anyone is to be killed with a sword,
with a sword he will be killed.
This calls for endurance and faithfulness from the saints."
There's that "endurance" thing again. This passage in turn recalls Jeremiah 15:2 and 43:11. It's amazing how much of the New Testament is really the Old Testament repeated. But at the same time, it sounds frighteningly contemporary. The swords are smaller now, though. Nano-scale, some of them. Of course what immediately follows this passage is "the mark of the beast." How appropriate. To the doubters I would suggest listening now.
The only seeds I fret about taking too long to grow are those in my family that I love best. All the others that I broadcast (and I really could do more of this) I figure God will see to. Really, I should have this attitude toward my family, too, but I have a hard time with this, still being a work in progress myself.
As far as your stats dropping off along with other writers not evangelizing I think it's to do with the deadening effects of dread. Unregenerate people can tell very well that something is seriously askew, and maybe it's them sliding into fatalism? They can't seem to grasp the answer (Christ) and no other viable solution is forthcoming. So most will probably just go with the beast system without too much resistance. They'll say it's not ideal, but what can be done, etc. I'm not a determinist, theistic or otherwise, so believe these souls are being blinded by the enemy, not that they aren't elect, and that the most powerful thing we can do is pray like their lives depend on it. We won't know the outcome until Jesus has brought the kingdom and someone comes up and thanks us for our prayers on their behalf, or an overheard comment brought them to their senses, or whatever.
We must just keep on keeping about the Master's business as best we can.
No family here, but yes, all that, Ἀμήν. Only child here, apparently sterile from birth (pharmaceutical hit most likely), and no favorable opportunity for adoption. One 'loaned' child for 7 years a few decades ago, rescued from the foster system; no contact now. So these folks here kind of become like my kids, and I do pray for them. My small group, large group, and others at church, likewise.
And now that church appears to be at risk, with some of the long-timers leaving and income declining. I don't know the causes. Oh the times in which we live. All I know is God's got it, again as in times past like these. I sure don't.
Nice. Well done.
Thank you. I am still feeling my way around, trying to understand how to write for a highly-literate, technical -- and skeptical -- crowd. I've been away from the faith almost as long as I've been in it, and I see things from both sides. There are super-simple versions of the ABCs, and they are effective for the audiences that they are. There are serious critical thinkers here, and it feels like something more is needed.
I think there might be a certain irony in that the "simple" ABCs appear to be derived from the Romans Road, and Paul's writing in Romans is about as detailed and technical as it gets! While the essential meaning comes across in translation, much else is lost.
Nevertheless, "many words" or even persuasive words are not the way to reach people. We can't actually bring about what needs to happen -- only God can. I am learning to write from 'You take it from here'.
Some apologists might take exception to what I am saying. But... There is a verse in the opening of 1 Corinthians that I found somewhat puzzling until studying it while working with a Greek-level commentary and coming to realize what it is saying about this. And a few of those apologists seem now to have lost their way.
1Cor. 1:17 (Mounce) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be rendered ineffective.
The last part of the verse can be difficult to translate. Bill Mounce's "not with eloquent wisdom" is οὐκ ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου. Paul Gardner translates it literally as "not with wisdom of speech". οὐκ ἐν is straightforward, "not with". σοφίᾳ is the noun "sophia", with meanings like "skill" and "wisdom", but as dative (indirect object) because ἐν ("with" in this context) takes a dative. λόγου is "word" or "speech", but in the singular genitive (possessive). So, "not with wisdom of speech".
Already we have two different valid translations of the same four words, thanks to semantic range. That's just the beginning. We also have Mounce's "lest the cross of Christ be rendered ineffective" to Gardner's "lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect", ἵνα μὴ κενωθῇ ὁ σταυρὸς τοῦ Χριστοῦ. At least those are close. And then there's v. 18.
This is way beyond me. I'll let Gardner take it from here. Deep dive, hold tight.
--------
It is worth noting that “not in wisdom of speech” modifies “to preach.” It is therefore part of Christ’s commission and not simply part of Paul’s preferred way of speaking. So Paul indicates that the way of expression itself affects the success or otherwise of a proper reception of the message of the gospel. Thus Paul says “lest the cross…be emptied” (ἵνα μὴ κενωθῇ). If the gospel is communicated “in wisdom of speech,” then not only is its content lost but its very power is lost. Thus, as we move to v. 18, we see that “the word of the cross” changes lives because in it God is at work in power to effect the calling of people to worship the Lord Christ.
What, then, does “with wisdom of speech” (ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου) mean? One problem, as many have noted, is that both the words “wisdom” (σοφία) and “word” (λόγος) have wide ranges of meaning. “Word” (λόγος) can mean anything from a word to a speech or statement and so on. Indeed, Paul has already used the word to describe a grace-gift of the Spirit in 1:5, though it is clear that is not what he has in mind here because the one is commended and the other is scorned.
“Wisdom” (σοφία) can be used to describe intelligence. When used in a biblical context, wisdom is often seen to be that which God gives to his people so they come to understand his will, but it also has a deliberately practical bent to it. In other words, the wise person is one who not only knows the will of God but does it. This is particularly seen in Old Testament wisdom literature and specially in the many aphorisms of the Book of Proverbs. However, in 1:22 it becomes clear that the sort of wisdom to which Paul refers here is especially in the domain of the Greeks. For them wisdom involved impressive thinking and philosophical enquiry. It concerned the realm of ideas. But there was much more to it, for part of being a “wise person” was being able to communicate and argue with fine standards of rhetoric. There is some evidence that occasionally the rhetoric of an argument, its sophistication of presentation, became more important than the content itself. No doubt the clever rhetoric was aimed at convincing people of a particular position or belief, but the ability to persuade through the argument, structure, and form of the oratory or writing was in itself highly prized. This in turn fed into the constant desire in Hellenistic society for status and being highly regarded by all. Bruce Winter has argued that Paul was facing a community in Corinth where the philosophy and attitudes of the Sophists held special sway. They were known for their ability in oratory that would “secure a public following and attract students to their schools.”
Looking now at what Paul says in this passage and how he contrasts this “wisdom of speech” with the “word of the cross” (v. 18) and the “wisdom of God” (v. 21), we see that Paul is arguing that the gospel itself simply turns the way that the world views wisdom on its head. The cross of Christ, understood as the “gospel”—the full revelation of God in Christ—carries within itself the ultimate “wisdom,” that is, the mind and plan of God for this world. It also carries within itself the “power of God” (v. 18). Human teachers and preachers are but the vessels that carry God’s powerful message. Clever rhetoric will simply serve to obscure the power of God’s word. To elevate the manner of delivery is to give a profile to the one who preaches, and this is not the focus of the gospel. Conversely, to elevate the content (the “wisdom of God”), which is the plan of God in Jesus Christ, inevitably diminishes the human voice that brings the message. Therefore, in sending Paul to preach the gospel, Christ gave him a task that, as with John the Baptist before him, would mean that he would always be decreasing while Christ would always be increasing (John 3:30). No doubt Paul would have joined with John in saying, as Christ was exalted, “This joy of mine is now complete” (John 3:29 ESV).
The emptying of the power of the gospel would have occurred when delivered through “wisdom of speech.” Instead of the gospel being heard and understood by all—from the educated to the uneducated, the elite of society to the dregs of society—it would have only been appreciated by the elite, those brought up to understand sophistic rhetoric and philosophy. In modern terms, it would have been like saying that the gospel can only be heard in a university town from a highly sophisticated professor! In every way, Paul is saying, the calling to evangelize involves turning the world’s values upside down.
With the themes of “wisdom” and of the “cross” having been introduced, this verse now links directly into the section that follows. The “cross of Christ” (ὁ σταυρὸς τοῦ Χριστοῦ) becomes a shorthand for the content of the preached gospel.
--------
The discussion continues with a side-section titled "In Depth: The Gospel". I've already quoted too much, so I'm stopping here.
The essence seems to be "keep it simple" (you should appreciate that -- Simple Christianity), but not simplistic, and "God does the calling". That's what I am groping around for, keeping the latter in mind so as to not be tempted to exclude what must be said, even if it might turn some away. Simple, huh?
[Gardner, Paul, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: 1 Corinthians, pp. 86-87, Zondervan, 2020]
Exactly. While we can and sometimes should "get intellectual" about Christianity, God's grace is not for intellectuals. In fact, he's clear in the parable of the wedding feast in Luke 22 that you're more likely to "get it" if you aren't one of society's elites. What we often forget is that people don't enter the Kingdom of Heaven based on fancy argument. They do it because the Holy Spirit engages with them in a way that only God knows. The best any of us can do is be faithful about engaging and telling somebody about the Gospel, but the Gospel itself if powered by the Holy Spirit.
Yes, plugging away in the Gospel of Jesus Christ is a good way to understand the straight and narrow path which hopefully is ever upward toward our salvation. We may stumble and fall but with faith in God and reading the scriptures we can regain our momentum.
I've noticed the same in the stacks that I read. It gets frustrating after awhile because, as you say, the writers see the problems but they are clueless as to THE answer, which is surrender to God through Jesus. There is one where I occasionally weigh in to suggest what you've laid out here so well, but mostly no one engages much. I figure I'm planting seeds and that God won't let any effort on his behalf go to waste. Keep sending the message out into the ether.
I have that same sense of planting seeds but if so, these seeds seem to grow slower than garlic. We have some of that growing in pots out back, and they have some months to go still.
I determined to proceed slowly at first, having myself been in a similar place within the scientific crowd until about six years ago, thereby recognizing clearly what we're up against. But then this year I unexpectedly found myself leading a small group study where that approach wouldn't work, and I began looking for ways to be more direct in my writing as well. That reflected in the stats -- they tanked -- but I saw a similar trend in other blogs that I follow and I'm not sure what to make of it.
Writing this piece, it became very clear to me that those destined to listen will listen -- no need to go slow, although the response might well take time, and other contacts might be needed -- and those who will not will not.
This reminds me of Rev. 13:9-10.
"If anyone has ears to hear, let him listen.
If anyone is to be taken captive,
into captivity he goes.
If anyone is to be killed with a sword,
with a sword he will be killed.
This calls for endurance and faithfulness from the saints."
There's that "endurance" thing again. This passage in turn recalls Jeremiah 15:2 and 43:11. It's amazing how much of the New Testament is really the Old Testament repeated. But at the same time, it sounds frighteningly contemporary. The swords are smaller now, though. Nano-scale, some of them. Of course what immediately follows this passage is "the mark of the beast." How appropriate. To the doubters I would suggest listening now.
So we keep plugging away.
The only seeds I fret about taking too long to grow are those in my family that I love best. All the others that I broadcast (and I really could do more of this) I figure God will see to. Really, I should have this attitude toward my family, too, but I have a hard time with this, still being a work in progress myself.
As far as your stats dropping off along with other writers not evangelizing I think it's to do with the deadening effects of dread. Unregenerate people can tell very well that something is seriously askew, and maybe it's them sliding into fatalism? They can't seem to grasp the answer (Christ) and no other viable solution is forthcoming. So most will probably just go with the beast system without too much resistance. They'll say it's not ideal, but what can be done, etc. I'm not a determinist, theistic or otherwise, so believe these souls are being blinded by the enemy, not that they aren't elect, and that the most powerful thing we can do is pray like their lives depend on it. We won't know the outcome until Jesus has brought the kingdom and someone comes up and thanks us for our prayers on their behalf, or an overheard comment brought them to their senses, or whatever.
We must just keep on keeping about the Master's business as best we can.
No family here, but yes, all that, Ἀμήν. Only child here, apparently sterile from birth (pharmaceutical hit most likely), and no favorable opportunity for adoption. One 'loaned' child for 7 years a few decades ago, rescued from the foster system; no contact now. So these folks here kind of become like my kids, and I do pray for them. My small group, large group, and others at church, likewise.
And now that church appears to be at risk, with some of the long-timers leaving and income declining. I don't know the causes. Oh the times in which we live. All I know is God's got it, again as in times past like these. I sure don't.
God's got it, and us. Amen!