Transcription
Tonight, we want to look at the passage in 1 Corinthians, uh, chapters 1 to 4. That is, that's the larger context in which we're going to be, uh, looking. But we want especially to zero in on the answer that Paul gives to the problem that begins in verse 18. Now, before we begin to look at the answer, you remember from the things that we've suggested that it's very important for us to have, uh, ourselves situated in the context and listen to what is going on. And as best we can, to try to reconstruct their problem on the basis of the answers. And so, we're going to spend a few moments trying to do that.
You notice in chapter 1, verses 10 and 11, Paul says, "I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you all be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. What I mean is that each of you says, 'I belong to Paul,' or 'I belong to Apollos,' 'I belong to Cephas,' or 'I belong to Christ.'" Now, that's the statement of the problem. But there are other passages along the way which are also going to help us. But before we do that, I just want you to take quick note of chapter 3, verse 5. Verse four, "For when one says, 'I belong to Paul,' and another, 'I belong to Apollos,' are you not merely men? What then is Apollos? What is Paul?" Now, it's clear, you see, that whatever goes in between that, this text is still picking up the problem that has been mentioned over there in chapter 1:10 to 12.
Now, look at the end of chapter 3 and beginning at verse 21. "So let no one boast of men, for all things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas." So, this clearly tells us that we're also dealing with the problem here at the end of chapter 3. Now, look at chapter 4:6. Paul says, "I have applied all of this to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brethren," which means that chapter 4 is also dealing with this problem in some way. Now, all of that to say that chapters 1 to 4, therefore, compose a unit, and all that goes on in chapters 1 to 4 are an answer on the part of the Apostle Paul to this problem that has occurred in the church in Corinth.
Now, the question before us is, what is the nature of the problem so that we can understand more clearly what the answer is? In verses 10 and 11, Paul states the nature of the problem twice positively and twice negatively. He says, first, that you all say the same thing, and secondly, that you all be, the Greek word means restored, that you all be restored into the same mind and have the same opinion. Now, that's positively. Then, negatively, he says that there be no divisions among you, and that he hears there are quarrels among them. Now, those last two are the clues. There are divisions, and the word "division" can simply mean merely differences of opinion. But it's quite clear that in this text, it is not merely difference of opinion, but there is hostility involved. That is, Paul says there is, there is strife or quarreling. Now, those same words, that is, that same word "strife" or "quarreling" occurs in combination with another word, "jealousy" or "envy," or over in 3:3. For Paul says, "While there is jealousy and strife," and it's exactly the same word, "are you not, uh, at this point, acting like very ordinary human beings?"
Now, in verse 12, this strife, whatever it is, is being carried on apparently in the name of their leaders. They have, in fact, raised slogans. Their slogans are, "I am of Paul," that means I am a follower of Paul, or we are Paul's people, we belong to Paul. That's their slogan. "I am of Paul." Another one says, "I am of Apollos." Another one says, "I am of Cephas." And another, "I am of Christ." And these apparently represent parties in the church, which might be of some interest for us to try to figure out. But since that would be speculation, we're more concerned with not what were the parties, but what caused this to come about that around these leaders there would be this rallying and this strife in the process.
Now, there are some other direct statements that go along with this that are also of some significance to us, especially the one we've just looked at in chapter 3:3 and 4. Paul says, "You are yet acting like men who are merely fleshly." And I don't want to try to interpret that at this moment. Uh, we're going to have to do that in one of our sessions, uh, tomorrow. But you are, are merely acting like, merely human, mere human beings. For where there is jealousy and strife, are you not merely in the flesh? And then you've got that, that combined with, "I am of Paul," and "I am of Apollos." Then in 3:21, Paul says, "So let no one boast in man." And then in 4:6, and obviously there's something going on, "they let no one boast in men." That is, that's a part of the problem. They're making their boast in some way with regard to man.
Now, in 4:6, we have yet another statement, uh, that seems to be a direct statement related to the problem. Paul says he has applied all of this to their, uh, to Paul and Apollos for their sakes, that he says at the end of the verse, "that none of you may be puffed up for one over against the other." Now, here you have that kind of hostility that is related to their leaders, puffed up in favor of one over against the other. Now, take that plus the statements that we find in the answer in verses 3:5 to 9 and 4:1 to 2, as to how they are to regard their leaders as merely servants, and therefore there is no sense in being puffed up with one servant over against another servant. You see, uh, that is, when you take the, the passages that deal with the leaders as being merely servants, then we have to reckon with the fact that the strife is directly related in some way or another to these teachers.
Now, precisely how it is related to their teachers is not clear. I'm convinced that there is, in fact, a kind of anti-Pauline sentiment that is at least a part of it. That is, to be puffed up in favor of one over against the other, the other in this instance is certainly the Apostle Paul, on the part of some. That is, some are taking a very anti-Paul position in the church. Now, we can be sure of that because of the things that are said in chapter 4 about Paul's being judged before the time. They are not merely preferring Apollos to Paul, they are downright opposed to Paul in the process, as chapter 4 makes abundantly clear. But, and this is a very important but, Paul in no way hints at any point in this passage that the trouble might be in the leaders themselves. That is, he does not suggest at any point that it is, uh, who is at fault, or that it is Cephas who was at fault. That is not in any way suggested. In fact, in chapter 16:2, we would have precisely the opposite thing suggested, where Paul says, "As for our brother Apollos, I strongly urged him to visit you." Now, I can't imagine the Apostle Paul urging a visit from Apollos upon this church under any circumstances, but it certainly wouldn't be true and under circumstances in which Apollos was himself responsible for the problems. That is, the problem therefore erupted inside the congregation, the community, apart from the leaders themselves having anything to do with it. That is, Apollos didn't come in and make himself, uh, you know, friendly to the folk in such a way that they became opposed to the Apostle Paul. It's something that grew inherently intrinsic within the congregation.
Now, uh, there are yet some other elements, however, that are going to help us perhaps to put all of this together. And one of these is this little passage in 3:21 that we just noted a few moments ago. Paul says, "So let no one boast in men." The word "boast" is a very important word in Pauline theology. It's a word that in English, uh, has all the connotations of taking on a stance of a bragger or being conceited or that kind of thing. But that's because we have some difficulty translating into English a good word. We don't have a good word in English for this Greek word that we translate "boast." The word means not simply to boast in, but it means to place one's confidence in. It means to put the kind of confidence or trust in one's salvation, almost. It means, Paul says, "If a person will boast," he says at the end of chapter 1, "let him boast in the Lord." That is, if one is going to put confidence in someone, put confidence in God and what God has done. So, apparently, there has been something related to this boasting on the part of, on the part of their leaders, uh, that, um, is, uh, glorying or something in their leaders.
Now, uh, it's the same thing is suggested, I think, in chapter 2:5. Paul says that he preached the way he did in order that your faith might not be in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. So that they wouldn't put their confidence in Paul, but in the gospel itself that Paul preached. And similarly, in verse 3:18, Paul says, "If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool in order that he might be wise." Now, since chapter 3:18 to 23 sum up the argument up to that point, and since it includes both division over men and this concern about misunderstanding of wisdom, it seems to me that here lies the real clue to the problem in the church. That is, it isn't merely a personality cult. We like Paul, we like Apollos. But let no one boast in men, or let not your faith be in the wisdom of man. Uh, if any man thinks that he is wise, let him become a fool that he might become truly wise. And then go back and recount the number of times that the little motif of wisdom and being wise recurs all through this section. And once one does that, you become immediately, it becomes immediately clear that chapter 1, verse 18, all the way through 2:16, which at first blush seems to be a kind of digression, that is, in chapter 1:10 to 12, Paul says, uh, you know, there's division among you, Paul, Apollos, Cephas, etc. Now, we want you all to speak the same thing, to have the same mind, to be in fellowship in the community of faith. Then it doesn't, until we finally get to chapter 3, verses 4 and 5, we pick that up again. Now, what in the world is he doing in the meantime? What's going on between the, uh, you know, uh, the division, the statement of the problem of division in chapter 1:10 to 12, and is finally coming around in chapter 3 to say, "Stop it"? Why doesn't he just say, "Stop it"? Since that's obviously the problem, you know, don't do it. Now, he's going to finally say, "Don't do it," but to get there, he starts and goes through this what looks like a long digression that starts in 1:18 and goes all the way through chapter 2, that talks about the wisdom of the cross, which is the foolishness of God over against this, you know, the, the wisdom of man. And all of this, what in the world has that to do with the problem of rallying around Paul, Apollos, and Cephas? Well, it probably has everything to do with it. That is, it is not a digression. It is, in fact, right at the heart of the answer to the problem of division in Corinth.
What then is the problem? Well, first of all, we've already stated, and it's clear, there is strife in the church, a strife that has surfaced with the leaders as the reference points, and there are clearly real factions that are developing in the church, and there's some semi-Pauline sentiment in some of this faction. But, and here's the crucial point, in some way, this faction, this dividing into groups over Paul, Apollos, and Cephas, is also related to a confusion of Christianity with *sophia*. *Sophia*, the Greek word for wisdom, the word that many times simply means philosophy. It means not philosophy in the Western sense, now, that comes from Plato, Aristotle, and on, but philosophy in the ordinary sense of the human endeavor to understand what makes the world tick and what makes man what he is, and all of those kinds of concerns that are the human grasp and understanding of one's being, being.
Now, in some way or another, there has been this confusion of the Christian faith with *sophia*. In fact, I'm convinced that some people in the church think that the Christian faith is, in fact, a new *sophia*. There is the Cynic *sophia*, there is the Stoic *sophia*, there is the Epicurean *sophia*, and now we have the Christian *sophia*. It is merely another expression of wisdom. If some have found their answers in the mystery cults, if some have found their answers in the traditional gods, if some have found their answers in the various expressions of *sophia*, there are a group of people who now have found their answers in the Christian *sophia*, the Christian wisdom, and they are turning Christianity into simply another philosophy.
Now, if this is true, and I'm convinced that it is true, then what has happened is that, first of all, they have totally misunderstood the nature of the Christian faith. They have experienced the Christian faith, but in their, in their moving on, in their attempt to understand the Christian faith, they have reverted to a total misunderstanding of the Christian faith. And secondly, they have a misguided perception of the role of the teachers with regard to the Christian faith. If you're talking about *sophia*, then the teacher is a most important factor, because *sophia* is related to how eloquent and how wise a given human teacher is. That is, everything is contingent upon this human being. And therefore, one says, "I am of Paul," "I am of Apollos." Here is where *sophia* finds its great expression. But this is a total misunderstanding, a total misperception as to the role of the teachers in the Christian faith.
Now, what Paul sees, therefore, in our section, he sees what their strife and divisions are saying theologically. That is, by turning the Christian faith into a new kind of *sophia* and misunderstanding the role of the teacher in this, what they think now is *sophia*, they have said in effect that the gospel is something like wisdom. In effect, it is a new expression of wisdom, and therefore salvation has, is something that men have something to do with. And of course, that's the great problem. If, in fact, Christianity is a merely another expression of human wisdom, then salvation rests upon man, upon what man is doing, and upon what man is saying, and not upon God himself. Notice how Paul says that in 1:17, "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with eloquent wisdom." Because if preaching the gospel has something to do with eloquent wisdom, then the cross is going to be nullified, and everything for Paul rests upon the fact that what God did, he did in the cross, and he's going to come to show how that simply negates their, the whole ground upon which they're standing.
Now, in chapter 1:18 through chapter 2:5, Paul responds, therefore, to this misunderstanding of the Christian faith. "No," he says to them, "salvation is not something that comes from wisdom, or is something that Paul or Apollos or Cephas has something to do with. Salvation is God's thing, and it is God's thing from beginning to end. It is his power at work in the world. God originated it, God gave it content, and God alone is the one that makes it, is the one who makes it effectual." Now, he argues this on the basis of three things: things, the content of the preaching, namely the cross itself. That's the first paragraph, 1:18 to 2:5. Secondly, their own existence argues for it, chapters 1:26-31. And then finally, Paul's preaching is a clear demonstration of it, chapter 2:1-5. What he's saying is this: their own experience of salvation, which they have already experienced when Paul was present among them, that he's calling them back to and reminding them, their own experience of salvation totally contradicts what they're now saying and doing. The paragraphs, if I can put the paragraphs in rhetorical questions, go something like this: If Christianity is another wisdom, then your own existence is now at stake. That is, your Christian existence. Because if it is really an expression of human wisdom, wisdom, who in the name of wisdom, Paul asks, would have chosen the cross and a crucified Messiah as the way of redeeming man? Nobody in his right mind. In fact, the cross is the strongest apologetic that we have for the validity and the reality and the truth of our faith. Nobody would have chosen the cross. It is too stupid, except that that's the way God chose. But he chose it precisely because from our perspective, it has stupidity, and therefore no human being would have done it. It completely eliminates man's foundations.
Now, that's the text we're going to look at in the rest of our time. But before we do that, the second paragraph in verses 26-31 says, "Who in the name of wisdom would have chosen you to become the new people of God?" Now, if you want to be devastated, there it is. If, if it's based on wisdom, if it's predicated on human wisdom, then who would have chosen you? Look to yourselves. None of the kinds of people that we would have chosen, had we been going about doing it in in a human way, would have, are among you, or at least not many. Lady Huntington, who used to always remind us in English text, "saved by an M." It doesn't say "not any noble," "not any wealthy," but "not many." So she's saved by that "M" between the "any" and the "many." Uh, but nonetheless, who would have chosen you? There's not many of the kind in which we're going to structure something that has to do with human wisdom. If you think Christianity has to do with human wisdom, just look to yourselves. You know, you're the clearest example that it's got to be something God is doing and not something man is doing. Now, if you don't like that answer, you got to hang in there because your existence is at stake. You see, this is the whole point he's making.
And then finally, in chapter 2:1-5, he says, "Who in the name of wisdom would have come among you the way I did?" That is, remember the way I preached it? It didn't come the way you're thinking at all. In fact, that's undoubtedly why some are anti-Paul. Precisely because he didn't come preaching in human eloquence and in the words of *sophia* and wisdom. He simply preached the cross.
But now the Corinthians have a specific kind of problem that we're going to mention from time to time. Excuse me, they have what I call a theology of glory as over against a theology of the cross. Now, there's all kinds of problems that are going on in Corinth, but absolutely at the heart of all of them is a theological problem. They have what some have come to call a kind of over-realized eschatology. And I'll explain what that means. They have come to believe that since we are now children of the king, since we already have come to know, you know, God as Lord and we are his children, we already are living in the end, you know, we have already taken on the existence of the end time. Now, look how many, look how many problems in Corinth are related to that. They deny the bodily resurrection. Who needs it? We're already living in the glory of the end time. They deny, they, they either deny or overdo sexual intercourse. And on either terms, at least especially on the denial expression of it, celibacy, who needs marriage? We're living in the end times. Why do they like to speak in tongues? Because this is the language of angels. They like to speak the language of angels because it's a reflection of already being in the end times. They're already living in the heavenly existence and speaking the tongues and the language of angels, and they like that. They have this over-realized eschatology.
Paul says in 4:8, in fact, he says it devastatingly. He says, "Oh, already you've come to rule. Oh, would to God that you would really come to rule so that we too, we apostles, might come to rule with you." Now, the point is that he says this precisely because that's where they are. They think of themselves as already coming to rule. Now, in the process of that kind of theology, what it's going to do is eliminate the cross. Now, Paul's not going to end, you know, this letter isn't going to be the end of this problem. Second Corinthians just takes this whole problem up in it, in its totality. The whole problem in 2 Corinthians is the wrestling between the theology of glory and the theology of the cross. The theology of glory that says, uh, you know, a disciple of Jesus Christ has no sickness, no suffering, no misfortunes, nothing goes wrong because he's living in the end, he's already belonging to the glory of the end. And the Apostle Paul has to remind them, look, the real marks of what it means to be a Christian is to be found precisely in the suffering of the cross. That's where God did his thing. It isn't escaping the suffering of the cross, but it's producing the life of Christ within the suffering of the cross. That is the clearest example and demonstration of discipleship.
Now, there's all kinds of people, especially in the contemporary charismatic movement, who have no use for Second Corinthians at all. That is, if they do, they don't read it carefully. They just pick out that passage here and there that they like, because 2 Corinthians is a devastation to the point of view that says, "Serve God and get rich," or "Serve God and always be well," or "Serve God and get rid of all your problems." That is simply not a biblical point of view. Serve God and you might die. That's the biblical point of view. But it's okay, you're free to die now because you don't belong to yourself. You're a child of the king, and therefore, if you die, it doesn't matter. If you live, you win. If you die, you win. So you'll win in either case. So it doesn't matter anymore. That's the Pauline point of view and the biblical one, precisely because at the heart of everything for the Apostle Paul is the cross. But the Corinthians have moved beyond the cross. Who needs it? Was okay for him, but now we're already realizing all of the benefits, meaning the benefits in terms of a total glory.
Now, what Paul does then to set up this problem is in chapter 1:18 to 2:5. He makes this great contrast between the cross and *sophia*. Something that he already started in verse 17. Now, in the process of this argument, Paul says the preaching, or the message, message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. If you will, he divides all humanity into two basic groups. There are those who are perishing, and those who are being saved. And the, you, you're placed in one group or the other precisely on how you respond to the message of the cross. The message of the cross to those who are, who are, yeah, foolish, but those who are perishing, it is an expression of foolishness. But to those who are being saved, and you notice that the contrast now is not wisdom, but the contrast is power. It's an interesting little flip there. You know, you expect to those who are being saved, the preaching of the cross, I mean, to those who are perishing, the preaching of the cross is foolishness. But to those who are being saved, you expect the preaching of the cross is wisdom. Now, but it's not. What he says at this point, he says it's the power of God unto salvation, because that's where the action is. That's the point of it all. How did you come into your Christian existence? You came into that existence by the power of God, which found its demonstration in the proclamation of the cross as God's way of bringing it off.
Now, Paul says that preaching of the cross is, in fact, to a whole half, or, you know, a whole group of mankind, it is foolishness. Well, he says in verse 19, God has already prepared us for that, hasn't he? "It is written, 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart.'" Now, that happens to be a very important passage, and I'm pressed for time tonight to get everything that I want to say in, but I would just, in passing, remind you of how thoroughgoing an Old Testament idea that is. And notice, for example, the kinds of passages that occur in Isaiah chapter 40. Oh, let's pick it up at, uh, about verse 12. "Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand and marked off the heavens with a span and enclosed the dust of the earth in a measure and weighed the mountains in scales and the hills in a balance? Who," he asks, "has directed the Spirit of the Lord, or as his counselor, who has instructed him?" Then this question, "Whom did he consult for enlightenment, and who taught him the path of justice and taught him knowledge and showed him the way of understanding?"
Now, this is a message that is being spoken to a people who are in exile and need the word of promise in a time of devastation, and they're questioning God and his power because of the devastation. And the prophet is saying, "Now, wait a minute, you who are questioning God, are you the ones that gave God instruction? Where did he turn for his wisdom? Did he turn to you? Are you the one that God is going to seek out when he needs some explanation as to how to run his universe?" Now, none of us would ever be bold enough to say that we just, only we just act it. We would never be bold enough to say, "Well, God should get in touch with me so that he can get, you know," we just simply live out our lives that way. That is our great idolatry. We have this idea that God really can't quite understand what he's doing, so he'd better consult some of us who are so smart to find out what he should be doing. Now, one of the devastating things that the scripture reminds us over and over is that he can get along without us. I know that for some, some of you, that may not sound like a very good idea and may not sound like it's a very truthful thing that he can really get along without you. But as a matter of fact, he can. He doesn't need you, and he doesn't need me. And that's a kind of an important theological truth to learn at some point along the way in one's life. It should happen the very first day you step before the cross. God doesn't need you, and he doesn't need me. In his grace, he has chosen to use even you and even me, but he doesn't need our counsel. He doesn't need our wisdom. It's a thoroughgoing motif. Remember old Job? After he's all of those words, remember how it starts in chapter 38? "Who is this that darkens counsel with words without knowledge?" Boy, devastated. "Where were you, Job, when God did all the things that he was about?"
Now, that's been promised. Paul says God is going to destroy the wisdom of the wise and the cleverness of the clever, he will thwart. And it's precisely because it has to be that way. It is, if it were otherwise, as sure as I'm here, man's great sin would continue. And man's great sin is is idolatry. Idolatry, you understand, is not simply making images. That is, making images of wood and stone and metal. Idolatry means to fashion God in any image. And the vast majority of mankind has, in fact, I think that every human being has finally fallen prey to idolatry. That is, we have, in some way, turned and worshiped the creature over against the Creator. God created man in his own image, and man has been forever trying to return the compliment. We are in the process of trying to recreate God in our image, and then we fall down and worship ourselves. And that's the great sin of mankind, and it's a broken stick, it won't hold up.
Now, Paul then says in verse 20, 21, "In the wisdom of God," Paul says, "in the wisdom of God, God did not allow that the world should know him through wisdom," precisely for the reasons we've given. But what did please God was through the foolishness of what we preach to save those who believe. And right here, Paul begins a magnificent set of contrasts. Verses 22 to 25, he divides the world into basically two groups of people. Now, these are the Ws that are perishing, but this is the whole world can finally be divided into these two groups. There are, on the one hand, the Jews, and then there are the Greeks. Now, these are real. That is, these represent real divisions, literal divisions of mankind from the Pauline perspective, Jews and Greeks. But in verse 22, he says two things about, he says something about these two groups that clearly mark them off. That is, he is not so much concerned here about Jews meaning those of the circumcision or those of the Jewish race. He's not so much concerned about Greeks meaning simply Greeks. It's obvious because he interchanges it with the word Gentiles at one point in the text, that he means all those that are non-Jews. But he's not so much concerned about the uncircumcised as over against the circumcised. He's concerned at one point, and that is, how do they go about structuring their view of the deity? What are they looking for in God? The Jews, Paul says, demand signs, and the Greeks, Paul says, seek wisdom.
Now, by and large, that basically divides mankind. There are those whose view of God demands signs. That is, they have what I call a power model. God is the one who has all the power. That was true historically for Jesus. "Show us a sign," and then we'll believe. And what they meant by that is, do something spectacular enough, different enough, that we will recognize it as something that is true, truly and genuinely a work of God, and not a work of man or the work of demons. Do the big thing, show us a sign, perform a miracle, give me power, and I'll believe. Now, that's where a lot of human beings are. If there's a God up there, out there somewhere, then show me some visible proof. Let me see God at work. I'll believe if I can see a sign. Show me power. That's what I want. I want a demonstration that God really is. I should say, in passing, that many times God really condescends to that, you understand. But those who come to faith in God on the basis of signs had better get their faith based on the right thing, because a person who believes God on the basis of signs is headed for trouble. If he believes on the basis of signs alone, he is a sure catch for spiritual neurosis, because his God is going to be a God of the gaps, a God who fills in all of that which is unexplained. "God did it." If he can't understand it, "God did it." Or he is a God only of the extraordinary. If there's something that goes wrong, I got to have God operate, do something big, and then there comes a time when God doesn't hop to his bidding, and then he's through with God. That's the kind of God he is. He's not going to jump when I, you know, yell, or he's not going to play when I, you know, strum the tune. Uh, then I've had it with God.
Now, you understand that there are churches that are filled with that kind of neurotic, whose God is a God of the extraordinary only, who cannot see God at work in the ordinary, who cannot see God at work in life, in in the created order. All can see is what's extraordinary. "Show me a sign, I'll believe." And then there are the Greeks, and they seek wisdom. The God that they demand is a God who is the ultimate expression of intelligence, smarts. I should say also, in passing, that if God isn't, isn't in fact a God of all power and a God of all wisdom, then I'm going to have my difficulties with him too, you understand. But the point is that it's how we're seeking signs and what we're seeking in wisdom that becomes the C, the crucial thing in this whole text.
Now, Paul says the Jews seek signs, the Greeks seek wisdom. And so what do we give them? Well, since God is a God of power, we'll give them signs, right? And since God is a God of wisdom, we'll give them wisdom, right? Now, that's only the way we do evangelism in the 20th century, but that's not the way Paul did. He says, "To those who are seeking signs, we'll give them the sign. To those seeking wisdom, we'll give them wisdom." And what does he say happens when he does that? To those who are seeking signs, it says they stumble over the cross. And to those seeking wisdom, they laugh.
Now, there are good reasons for that. The Jew who is seeking signs, can you imagine anything more intolerably an expression of weakness than a God who has no more power than to get caught into the, into the mess of getting hung up on a cross? I mean, I've got problems enough of my own. He who needs a God who is so weak and so powerless in the experience of his own creatures that he can't, you know, he can't get out of his problem? Who needs a God whose ultimate power is expressed in such weakness? Have you never stood before the cross and heard that crowd cry, "If you're the Son of God, come down from the cross, and then we'll believe"? You know, show us a sign, then we'll believe. I read that text, and my sinful nature just comes right up to the top. If ever there's a time that God ought to do something, if ever there's a time that God ought to step on the scene and show them who's who, he ought to come down from that cross and bash their little heads. What right have they to try to treat the Eternal God in that way? And he hangs there, just plain hangs there, and lets them do it. Now, I've got enough troubles. I don't know. I don't need a God who's got that kind of trouble. Besides all of that, my Bible's against it. The Bible says that anybody who hangs on a tree has been cursed by, by God. So here we are, seeking signs, and Paul gives the ultimate expression of weakness, the cross. So you're, you're some kind of a nut.
And to those seeking wisdom, you mean to tell me, you know, you know, people who died on a cross? It was reserved for just two classes of people: runaway slaves and people that didn't have any rights in law at all, and non-citizen insurrectionists. Now, Jesus died as a state criminal, you understand that, don't you? He died as a state criminal. There's no other possibility for him to be on the cross. They just didn't hang any old thief on the cross. He died in place of Barabbas, who was a thief in the process of insurrection. That's what that Greek word means. He was a rioter. It means he was an insurrectionist. Jesus was taking his place and died as "the King of the Jews," which was a Roman stab in the Jewish back, that said, "This is what happens to any Messianic pretender who thinks that he's king." And he died as an insurrectionist. And we used to have capital punishment most places in the United States. I come from a state where the capital punishment was by hanging. Can you imagine a group of people, uh, who would gather around? Let's take, let's take this to Massachusetts. This was not the form of, I don't think, I don't know there. But in any case, the Boston Common is such a great place to do this. Let's go to the Boston Common and get a group of us together and find the last man that died as a state criminal in the state of Massachusetts, and go around the common and say, "Hey, have you heard the good news? God has brought forgiveness of sins through so-and-so, who died as a criminal back there in the state penitentiary so many years ago?" And then we begin to sing in the gallows, in the gallows, I, you know, glory towering over the steeps of time. Now, look at you, and what kind of a nut are you? And you understand that the preaching of the cross to the first-century Greek had that kind of impact. We've got crosses around our chains, you know, chains around our necks and lapels and on our church steeples. We've lost the scandal, the folly. But to the first-century person who's seeking wisdom, the ultimate expression of foolishness. You mean to tell me that God had something to do with that peasant from nobody's ville in Galilee, that that somehow he was bringing forgiveness, you know, through him? You got to be out of your gourd, you know, folly.
Now, I would like to suggest to you, if I can move that out of the first step now into the third, that the preaching of the cross is still where the action has to be, and that people are still going to stumble over it, and they're still going to cry out "foolishness," but they're going to do so precisely because the cross alone is the only place that is so fully perceptive as to the real problem in human life. That is, the real reason for throwing up the smoke screen of scandal and foolishness is because the cross has such a beautiful way of putting its finger on us and saying, "Thou art here." And here. Now, men still detest the cross. Why? Well, for two reasons. The first reason that man cannot handle the cross is that the message of the cross, cross, when properly preached, declares that man is a sinner. The preaching of the cross comes face to face with the human being and says, "You, sir, are wrong. Dead wrong. All wrong. You are a sinner." In fact, faced with the choice of the cross, you've got one of two choices: either God is right and you're wrong, or else you're right and God is wrong. I mean, that's the only options you've got. And there are few of us who are bold enough to say the first, but we can hardly handle the second, or the, the other way around. That is, we can hardly handle the, the, the reality that I'm wrong. I mean, do you know anybody that likes to be wrong? Do you like to be wrong? You love it, don't you? You know, people go around and say, "Hey, I'm wrong! Heard the good news! I was wrong today." Dead. You know, in the United States, we have institutions for people like that. We call that abnormal behavior. And precisely because that's what it is, given the standard of our sinfulness.
When my daughter, who is now a senior in high school, was about 6 years old, we lived in a house in Southern California, and, uh, uh, we had a, we had been given a rug. And in this house, our daughter and our youngest son, who was three at that time, shared a bedroom, and they had the rug in their bedroom because it was the only room in the house that the rug fitted. And one year at Christmas, some friends, I guess, gave our kids some watercolors. You already know where the story is going, don't you? And as a typical parent, I said, "Thou shalt not." And as a typical sinful kid, what went on in their minds when I said, "Thou shalt not," is that, "God, it must be something good, otherwise Dad wouldn't be against it." You know, that's the way we have toward. If God said no, it must be he's against my fun. So let's find out what's fun. You know? So sure enough, one day I'm walking down the hall, and I hear, and, and I'm perverse too, I hear this this noise, and what's going on in my mind is too much fun to be good. And I burst in on them. Boy, I'll tell you, watercolors everywhere. Now, parents are dumb, but take heart, because someday some of you will be parents, and you'll be dumb too. You can't learn from your own parents, you got to learn from your own mistakes. And here they are, just all over. And I asked the typical dumb parental question, "Who did this?" Boy, oh boy, oh boy. And you know, they didn't even bat an eye. I mean, they didn't even, he did it, she did it. I reflected on that at some time later, theologically, and I said, "Yeah, I remember the garden. Remember the garden? Adam, where are you? She did it. Eve, where are you? The serpent did it." See, at the heart of our sinfulness is our unwillingness to admit that I too am a sinner. If I admit that, I lose, lose my, what I was talking about last night, you see. I lose my life. I'm at stake in that moment. That's why, to finish this story, when I finally came to the, you know, to the realization that it was the, it was the daughter who had got the thing going, she said the final devastating theological thing. She said, "Okay, Daddy, but he did it too." Even in my guilt, I can only admit my guilt as long as I include you somehow in it. I am not quite so bad if somehow you are also bad. We're all in this together. Don't blame me, God. The cross comes right down in the front of our lives and says, "You, sir, you, ma'am, you, you're a sinner. You need help." Who, me? Scandalous. Fly. Precisely because it is so penetrating in our, in its diagnosis of who we are.
The second reason we don't like the cross is that it tells us the only way we can get right with God is by a free gift, by grace. I say, what's wrong with gifts? I like gifts. Well, sure you do, in a certain way, but not always. Not when you're at stake. Gifts, as long as it's material, just watch us operate. If you have the choice to invite friends over for dinner or to be invited over for dinner, which choice do you make? You bring people into your house. Why? Because it always gives you one-upmanship. You know, I've got one over on them. And you have to go because that means I got to get back at them. You know, it's precisely the problem with legalism. We can't really believe that God would just simply accept us the way we are. So what do we do? We, we, we, you know, tell God that he can't really be trusted. And so, in the process of not really trusting God, I got to get back at him. I got to give him my works, just in case. You know, you can't get back at him. It's free. It's a gift, and it's all of grace.
Now, how, and this is what we're not told, how is the cross wisdom? And how is it power? Paul says that the cross is God's power to those who are seeking signs. It turns out to be God's wisdom for those who are seeking signs, to seeking wisdom. How is that so? Well, in the few minutes that I have left, I'm going to see if I can give it a try. I'm not arguing that this is what Paul himself says, or that this is what he said, but I've tried to figure out how in the world is the cross wisdom and how is it power. And it seems to me it goes must go something like this. What man was faced with in his creature was rebellion. Now, I know you've got your theology square, and you're aware of that. I want to remind you, however, and this is particularly true sometimes among, uh, whammers, they need to hear that the, the sinner is not only a rebel, but he's pitiable in his rebellion. If we lose that sense of compassion and pity for the man who is a rebel, you know, something goes. But he's a rebel.
Now, if I can try to think and talk God talk for a moment, what is God faced with in a rebel? He's faced with not only getting the rebel to run up a white flag and surrender, but what he's trying to do is to get the rebel to change sides and like it, you know, and want to do it. Now, that's the real problem. That is, the problem with man's sin isn't simply to get us to knuckle under. He could do that, you know. Want to know what God is like? Line up, you know, a certain number of, uh, of, uh, praying mantises or something. Divide, you know, 100 of them. Put 90 over here and put 10 over there and say, "You want to know what man's like? Those 10 had better watch out and better, you know, better step too, because they might get it too." I mean, God could have done that to us. Watch out. He could put us in chains and overcome us, you understand. He could get us on his side. He could have made things so miserable for us, there is no other way except the finally, "Okay, God, I give in. I'm yours." But what he has is a rebel in chains, not a free son. How is he going to get that rebel to change sides and want to do it? You know how he did it? At one point in human history, when things got pretty miserable, the Eternal God himself stepped onto the stage on planet Earth, and he came and walked among us. And he came and lived out a truly human life among us. But in the process of that, he was also at the same time revealing God and showing us what God is really like. And somehow or another, he stood so over against us that we couldn't tolerate it. I mean, here was one of whom we couldn't say, "He did it too." And it angered us. Through our whole world into turmoil. If he's right, our blue blankets go. We can't tolerate that presence. And so, in one awful, pent-up moment of hatred in human history, man, the creature, took the Eternal God and said to God, "Out of my life! I don't want you in my life! Out of my life, you God!" And they throw him on a cross, and he let him do it. He let him do it. And then, you know what he did? He took that last moment of ours in our hatred and in our anger and in our sin, and in his own divine wisdom, he used it as his way of turning the tables on us and offering us forgiveness.
Now, friends, what are you going to do with a God who loves like that? You can't kill him anymore. You've already tried that. The only option you've got is to run. And you better run hard, because he's going to come after you. A God who loves like that is going to pursue you, and he's going to chase you, and he's going to come after you, and he's going to beat on your door, and he's going to beat on your life until finally he beats it down and bursts into your life and embraces you and makes you his own. The power of the cross and the wisdom of the cross is precisely that only through this kind of weakness is the ultimate power expressed that gets us over onto his side and gets us to want to be there. It is the wisdom of the cross because it comes through the power of the transforming power of forgiveness. And once he's got us, he's got us forever. And that's why the cross stands at the absolute heart of our gospel, and nothing else will work. Okay.