Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope
Would you care to comment on 1 Cor 11:19, For there must also be factions among you, in order that those who are approved may have become evident among you.
In particular, address “who are approved.”
|
Don,
First, while I will eventually address this verse, I probably will not address "who are approved" in quite the way you want, although I do not think you will be disappointed.
Paul’s reference to his gifts as “irrevocable” in Rom 11:29 is an important statement. God does not give to take away. But on the other hand, we often have those who come with their own proclamation of a “gift of God” with the expectation that others will simply listen.
You are correct that within all of scripture, at some level, there is a requirement to discern among teachers, evangelists, or more rightly so-called teachers and evangelists, etc. Among those that are “so-called” are both the real deal, the frauds, and probably levels in between — those who do have a calling but have undertaken to expand their influence beyond their calling. The church was never to simply take the good with the bad and not worry about it. But in 1 Cor 3, Paul is not talking about the believers’ responsibility, but that of those who teach — who build.
When you mention 1 Cor 11:19, I find this verse to be a sort of mystery. Paul has just finished talking about men and women both as in submission to each other, and with some (at least) hint of positional superiority of men. I will not begin to take those issues apart here, even if I were able to do so. Then he starts talking about the kind of chaos that occurs at their Lord’s table meetings. Since there is some merging of a time of meal and the actual observance of the Lord’s table as we know it, it seems that Paul chides them for their inequity and lack of brotherly love for the former, then clarifies what the latter is intended to portray.
In the early part of this talk on their “table” he write two verses that speak of “divisions among you.” In the second of these two, when he says, “there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God's approval” it is not clear if he is saying that this is rightly so, or if he is stating the obvious fact that their internal divisions are part of their own seeking to claim that this or that faction is right and superior to the others. Is Paul really saying that this rightly “must be” for God to demonstrate who is correct, or is he stating that that is what the Corinthans, whom he has already chastised for their internal divisions, are trying to to accomplish on their own? With these two terse sentences and no further explanation, it is hard to say. Instead, Paul goes right on to discuss how they run roughshod over each other. Since we typically take these as all being part of one paragraph, is it possible that rather than commending the Corinthians for getting to the bottom of their differences, he is simply stating that they think that one group essentially overpowering another, even in getting plenty to eat, is somehow proof of their superior position.
So Paul begins 1 Corinthians by pointing out the lack of superiority of one teacher over another. He has here just finished putting man in woman “in place” under God’s authority rather than man’s, and he is about to level the playing field on the gifts and even how the meetings should be run, with a centerpiece of doing all things in love.
In this context, I wonder if we have taken 11:19 out of context by making it talk about something that is essentially not what Paul is really talking about at that point. I wonder if it is really talking about there being purpose for divisions to prove what God approves. Or is he pointing back at their divisions that he has already condemned and indicating that here at the Lord’s table the problem once again rears its ugly head with some supposed purpose of seeking God’s approval. Was this verse talking about gaining God’s approval or about pointing to misguided purposes in the way they held their table meetings.
I do not pretend to say that this is the “right” way to look at this verse. But when I put it back into its context, I have a difficult time returning to the understanding that has been put forth for so many years by so many people and with which I essentially “grew up.” I have some reason to believe that we may have created something that is not there because we have ignored the context.
I appreciate your efforts to harmonize the various aspects of scripture. I believe this must be done. But while doing that, we must never gloss over the differences in the various passages that tell of the multifaceted truths. I agree that what we do with wood v gold is important even for the lowliest of believers. But 1 Cor 3 is specifically saying something about the responsibility that those who would be the teachers, elders, evangelists, etc., take on when they set out in those roles. I do not diminish everyone’s responsibility, but if we simply turn these verses to talk to us all without understanding the purpose for which they were written, we have not rightly divided the word of truth. There was a purpose for these verses and it was not to tell me — one of the simple members at IBC — that I have this increased responsibility. It was specifically to those who teach me, who turn our journey in certain directions. You may rightly apply it to me anyway. But that is not what Paul was doing.