Skip to main content

1 Corinthians 12:1-11

You can read the text here.

The next topic Paul tackles, still with an eye towards unity, is spiritual gifts. The opening is a bit enigmatic, but at the core Paul wants to make clear the basic dichotomy of the Christian life compared to their former lives as pagans. It's about where one stands in relation to Jesus, whether one submits to his lordship or rejects it. The gifts given by the Spirit will be similarly identifiable, they will be Christomorphic.[1] Also, to set the stage for later discussion, Paul makes clear that their God is a living God who can speak for himself. He does not need humans to speak for him and hence possessing showy speaking gifts does not make one more necessary or of higher status.[2] In a nutshell, do the "gifts" one possesses point towards Jesus or towards oneself?

God has given the church a variety of gifts. They all have the same source, the Spirit, and the same giver, God. He activates them as he sees fit. There is no indication in the text that in the ensuing list of gifts that Paul has in mind offices or that individuals necessarily permanently possess these gifts. God gives them to whom he will when he will for as long as he will, with one purpose in mind, the common good.

Paul then marches through a variety of gifts.[3] These appear to be a sampling of the gifts given by the Spirit. Given upcoming chapters some of them were selected due to their (over)prominence at Corinth.  The Spirit certainly can work through God's people in natural ways just as much as supernatural. One of Paul's main concerns seems to be minimizing the importance of tongues, hence its position at the bottom of the list. There is extensive debate on the precise nature of tongues. The two most likely options are that it refers to human languages that the speaker does not know, or, more likely in my opinion, the language of the unconscious, and only intelligible to God (and to one to whom he grants the ability to interpret).[4]

Paul concludes reminding them that there is only one source for all of these gifts, the Spirit of God who gives as he will. All gifts are then presumably necessary and no one is superior to another on the basis of the gifts they possess.

----------------------------------------------------

[1] To use Thiselton's phrase.

[2] See the extended discussion in Thiselton.

[3] I am not going to spend time detailing each. Thiselton's commentary is very thorough in that regard and I point you there. One thing to keep in mind when thinking about these gifts is that they are not necessarily supernatural in the way they work, even if granted supernaturally.

[4] Ciampa and Rosner take the former position and Thiselton the latter.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Calvinist than Calvin?

I'm working on a paper on the topic of divine sovereignty and human freedom. Occasionally on this topic (or the subtopic of election) you will hear people through out the barb at strong Calvinists that they're 'being more Calvinist than Calvin.' After having read Calvin carefully on the issue I don't think that there's any validity to that charge. I don't see a material difference here between Calvin and say John Piper. Here are several quotes from the Institutes to prove my point. 'All events are governed by God's secret plan.' I.xvi.2 'Governing heaven and earth by his providence, he also so regulates all things that nothing takes place without his deliberation.' I.xvi.3 'Nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by him.' I.xvi.3 Calvin explicitly rejects a limited providence, 'one that by a general motion revolves and drives the system of the universe, with its several parts, but which does not specifc

Galatians 2:11-14: The circumcision group

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (TNIV) There's an important issue that we need to wrestle with in this passage, and it's the question of whether or not the people from James and the circumcision group are the same group. I am not inclined to think that they are. The ensuing discussion is drawn from Longenecker's commentary pp 73-5

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat