Paul As A Life-Model?

I do not write these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children.  For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.  Therefore I exhort you, be imitators of me. (1 Corinthians 4:14-16 NASB)

 I sell stuff for a living.  It's a common profession, and I am common among such laborers.  I wonder what sort of 'salesperson' Paul would make.  Consider that just prior to his admonition to 'be imitators of me' he claims that his way of life means that he is hungry, thirsty, poorly clothed, roughly treated, homeless, works hard with his hands, blesses those who revile him, endures persecution, conciliates with those who slander him, and is considered the dregs of the world, scum of the earth.  Now, imitate this...seriously?

I admit that the product I sell and those who produce it have issues.  Sometimes, it simply doesn't work.  Other times, most times, it works extremely well, but not intuitively.  But I can show a perspective customer how it works, and help them see themselves using it, liking it, and eventually needing it.  I don't do that by pointing out every broken piece, quirky nuance, and cosmetic blemish in my product.  I help them look through those to the positive.  It's just me, perhaps, but Paul doesn't seem to do that.

So how does this apostle bridge the gap between the 'horror' of his life and being able to promote it to these people he wants to follow him into it?  To discover the answer, there are a few things that need to be understood first. 

Simply put, as we have this record in English, there is a 'literary context' for both his negative description and his positive admonition.  That context is that they have been the ones speaking poorly of him and well of themselves.  The negative statements provide a contrast to their view of themselves.  Understood in this context, the negative can be seen as somewhat of a hyperbole.  It's not that these things don't happen, but they form only part of the story of his life; the part they have focused on in their criticism.

Second, there is a 'life context' in that the cultural and situational setting of Paul in that day, in the places he writes from and to form backdrop that aides in understanding.  For instance, in this letter, Paul is not advocating an itinerant lifestyle, but rather a paradigm where Jesus is Lord of all.  Paul is an itinerant because Jesus is his Lord, and told him to travel and live so.  So, Paul is advocating a framework through which to understand and relate to living in this world.  It's a 'life philosophy' where Jesus is God and Immanent Master.

Because of this Paul can juxtapose the negative elements of his lifestyle with a charge to imitate him; not the 'style of his life' but his lifestyle or paradigm.  I think this is different, but both less troubling, and more intimidating for me.  It's less troubling because I don't relish the idea of becoming homeless and persecuted right now.  There ample opportunities for me to do so, plenty of places to go to experience such things in this world, and so on.  But, they wouldn't be my first choice of mode of service to my Master.

But it is more intimidating because this same sense in which it is less 'frightening' means it is a more realistic expectation.  It's a serious charge on me to be an imitator of such a paradigm.  I freely admit that my particular paradigm is much more centered around me than my Master.  But how can I be satisfied with such knowledge when I see evidence of one that is not, and also a charge to imitate that one?  But then how can I not be intimidated by the understanding that adopting such a paradigm would require the destruction of the one I have created with me at the center?  I'm kind of attached to me, honestly, and my self-preservation instinct I use as an excuse so much of the time rebels against such an idea.  Where would I be if not in the center of my own paradigm?  I believe the answer is also 'hidden' in this chapter.

Forming the background of Paul's sarcastic assertion that the believers in Corinth are 'already become rich', already filled, become kings without Paul is the truth that these things should be expectations.  In other words, the rewards for destroying my busted self-centered paradigm and replacing it with one centered on my Master, Jesus, includes being filled, being rich, and becoming a king.  These are not things my paradigm will produce.  It can't because everyone else has the same paradigm, and I'm not skilled or motivated enough to compete with them to reign or become rich in such an environment.  Even so, I would be rich and/or reign among a bunch of self-centered people, people who would only view me in terms of how I enhance their 'center' (i.e. themselves).  That's not a secure sense of reigning or becoming rich.

The truth is that the 'riches', 'filling', and 'reigning' contained in this new paradigm are true contentedness, riches, and power.  They are secure in the One having formed stars, not my meager abilities to entice people into believing I enhance their self-centers.  So, if I ditch my paradigm for His, then I gain the peace, wealth, and authority I could never gain on my own.  And while any such gain on my own would fail eventually, this gain, founded on my Master, would last as long as Him.  Considered this way, I'd say it was really more in my favor to not be the center of my world-view.  I think the rest of this letter to the ancient church in Corinth is about how to create this paradigm around Jesus, and finally, that I can trust it.

So, yes, Paul is a life model, 'warts and all.'  But it's his paradigm through which he views and lives his life I need, not the activities it produces.  I can see I have a lot of praying to do.  Best get after it!

The Proof of Power

1Co 4:18-20
18 Now some have become arrogant, as though I were not coming to you. 19 But I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills, and I shall find out, not the words of those who are arrogant but their power. 20 For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power.
http://olivetree.com/b3/1Co.4.18.NASBStr

How do you know?  It is the basic debate question among friends and frenimies.  It drives to the essential epistemological foundation of the incredulous.  It signals the 'loser' in a formal debate, is the scariest question for followers of Jesus in 'God discussions', and marked much of the arguments of my childhood.

In these verses it is an unasked question, but is assumed.  How do the Corinthians know they are right, and Paul is wrong?  Who's to say he has authority, wisdom, and insight to instruct them, and not these teachers who came after him? Well, Paul proposes a comparison of power.

Like the conversation Jesus had on the road to Emmaus, I'd like to know what a test of power looked like.  How does Paul propose to find out their power?  Even more though, how does the Kingdom of God consist in power?  Is he referring to 'gifts of the Spirit'?  Is he referring to the ability to endure persecution?  What does kingdom power look like?

The real tradgedy in asking such questions is that I have to ask.  You may read this and assume I will get to the answer but I don't.  I don't know.  I feel terrible to say that, but I don't think I've experienced something that I would call the power of the kingdom of God.  I've experienced the presence of God, and that is powerful.  I've experienced the rescue of my life by God; and that is a demonstration of His power, the Power of His Kingdom.  Salvation opens our lives, but what about after that?

I don't think that is what Paul has in mind here.  On the otherhand, I don't think he has in mind a challenge on Mount Carmel either.  I suppose they could compare the numbers of believers they brought to Jesus, or the number of baptisms I  the past year.   Maybe he intends to have a healing service and see who heals more people.

I honestly don't think it's any of those.  I'm still not sure what it looked like if it happened, nor what Paul had in mind as he wrote this, but I'm fairly confident it wasn't the options in the above paragraph.  That bothers me because Paul thought it was either obvious not to need explanation, or using a scare ploy by not explaining (make them wonder).  In either case he knows what something like this looks like and I don't.  Shouldn't we?

Shouldn't a demonstration of Kingdom Power be a regular thing for us?  We're the people of the Kingdom, so Kingdom Power should be a norm, not an unexpected thing.  We shouldn't be baffled by what such power looks like, we should be nodding our heads in agreement as we read this passage.  It's also not sufficient that we have an idea or a guess, or an interpretation of this power, we should KNOW.

But I don't.  I'll admit it.  I don't know what Paul had in mind, what kingdom power looks like, what such a challenge looked like.  And that bothers me.  Maybe it shouldn't but I think it should.  I want to know what Kingdom Power looks like, feels like, and sounds like.  I want to see it in action, demonstrating that the Kingdom of God has come.  Is it too late for me?

The Camouflage of Sarcasm

1Co 4:8-13
8 You are already filled, you have already become rich, you have become kings without us; and indeed, I wish that you had become kings so that we also might reign with you. 9 For, I think, God has exhibited us apostles last of all, as men condemned to death; because we have become a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men. 10 We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are prudent in Christ; we are weak, but you are strong; you are distinguished, but we are without honor. 11 To this present hour we are both hungry and thirsty, and are poorly clothed, and are roughly treated, and are homeless; 12 and we toil, working with our own hands; when we are reviled, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure; 13 when we are slandered, we try to conciliate; we have become as the scum of the world, the dregs of all things, even until now.
http://olivetree.com/b3/1Co.4.8.NASBStr

Sarcasm is one of the many skills I'd rather not have.  It can be skillfully used to make a point, as Paul does here.  But I am more inclined to use it in more hurtful, spiteful, and malicious ways than for teaching the Truths of God to His human creatures.

In this verse Paul uses it really well to contrast their views of him and themselves with God's view of both him and them. It's humorous, dramatic, pointed, and clear.  It's truth wrapped in humor used to do surgery on your heart.

Paul uses a perfect tense (action complete in the past and still effective in the present) in verse 8, making the statements sound straight forward, but his 'wish' at the end reveals his literary 'trick' for what it is.  Of course they haven't been filled, made rich, or become king; such people would not act as they act, nor need the correction of Paul. 

By switching to referring to apostles, Paul continues his humorous poke by contrasting now their view of him versus their view of themselves. Yet the transition is itself free from sarcasm.  He truly sees himself and those like him as last among believers, or perhaps last in the timeline of the faithful ones used by God.  Either way, they are used to declare to angels and men that death holds no power over such people.

Then, again he switches to truth in verse 11, illustrating the foolishness of their views of themselves, and how they are to respond to insults and rough treatment.  His point is in providing them a model of behavior and perspective not just to make them ashamed of how they have been.  Sure, he uses sarcasm, but he is sparingly sprinkling his teaching with it, not making it his primary method or tool.

The truth of Paul's teaching is that we should all respond to difficulty this way.  I don't.   I whine, moan, get angry, pout, treat others mean, am vengeful, and generally immature and childish.  That may overstate my case, but at various times, in response to various difficulties, I will respond in one or more of these poor childish ways.

Perhaps we all do, but I know I do.  Maybe Paul wrote 2,000 years ago, but I find this is necessary for me today.  Perhaps his sarcasm resonates with me  or maybe it's the obvious behavior pattern I see so clearly in myself.  Whatever it is, this passage for believers in the Roman world 2,000 ago still hammers me with the same humorous scalpel.  Of course, like then, there's not much in the way of anesthesia is ever used.

What Has Been Written

1Co 4:6-7 6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other. 7 For who regards you as superior? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it? http://olivetree.com/b3/1Co.4.6.NASBStr

I am a huge proponent of reading Scripture, and doing so submissively. Wht I mean by that is to read Scripture submitting myself to what I read. It's something I have to consciously attempt to do; I'm very impressed with my own views, I have to work to submit those to my Master's views. I wish it came naturally. I wish it were as easy to see in myself as it is to see in others.

The fact that Paul ties pride to this problem here is neither an accident nor unique to problems in the church in Corinth.  My difficulty submitting myself to what has been written is a direct result of my own pride.  What's interesting to me is how he puts it, 'not to exceed what is written', which an interesting way to approach Scripture.

Many people in and outside the community of faith in Jesus consider Scripture to be old, of another culture, and therefore out of touch with modern issues and problems.  Therefore the need to 'exceed what is written' is considered a necessity by many.  So, they add things to their faith in Jesus, they add practices to their worship, and they add perspectives from modern sources to their world view; the Bible just doesn't address so many of these 'modern' issues.

I do this when my 'interpretations' of Scripture become like Scripture, and disagreements become personal insults.  I've crossed a line at that point.  What my Master inspired to be written, He intended for reproof, correction, and for more.  What is recorded is the self-revelation of my Master to His human creatures.  He inspired what we need to know Him and have a relationship with Him.  If it accomplishes this, how can it be lacking?

The problems begin when I remove submission from my practice.  Then what I read is more about me than Him.  This passage is about correcting the pride and arrogance that pits one believer against another instead of submitting in humility to our Savior, and then to each other.  It's not about a method of interpretation,  even though one may be assumed behind the statement.  It's not about the believers in Corinth.  It is about how they, and therefore all of us, relate to our Savior.  Because if I can treat my brother in Christ with contempt or disdain, how am I not treating my Savior the same way?  If I treat my fellow believer as if they are fools compared to me, how am I not treating my Savior in the same way?  Did He not make us both?  Aren't we both servants of the same Master?

So my response needs to be submission; first to my Master, then to Scripture, then to my fellow servants.  So I learn not to exceed what my Master has inspired, learn to submit myself, limit myself to that.  Rather than what I want Scripture to say, I allow it to say what my Master inspires.  Then I am learning, and more likely able to teach.  But even that isn't,  can't be, the point.  The point must be the work of my Master in me, and through that work, in the lives of those around me.

Who's To Judge?

Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men's hearts; and then each man's praise will come to him from God. (1 Corinthians 4:5 NASB)

One area of confusion within church and living out faith in Jesus is the idea of judging other believers.  In my opinion from my observations, here's what I think is going on:

• Christians state to each other and to non-believers that we are not to judge each other at all.
• In general practice, believers compare themselves to others in matters of faith, practice, belief, intelligence, and acceptability before God.
• In general practice, believers only reveal their judgements to people they believe will agree with their 'judgment' or in anger with anyone.

This is a huge generalization, and my observations are limited to my own church experiences in the few churches with which I've been a part.  I have myself been guilty of these statements and behaviors, and I have witnessed people from old, young, ministers, professional clergy, the educated and uneducated alike behaving in this way.

Part of the problem is that there are contrary Scriptures which claim that we will know each other by our 'fruit', i.e. our Christ-like behavior.  In fact, in the very next chapter of 1 Corinthians, Paul states that he has, with the believers there in Corinth, already passed judgement on one of their own.  Other passages state that believes are to be wary of 'false teachers' and so on.  How can we do that if we don't judge others?  If we do these things, aren't we violating the clear admonitions above?

One of the problems involved with this issue is the language barrier between English and Greek.  Unfortunately this is exacerbated by cultural differences between modern American culture and first century Roman/Greek/Jewish culture.  But there is also the problem that Paul actually does mix his terminology with these statements, where in both prohibition and promotion he will use 'legal' terms for 'judgement'.

The answer to reconciling these separate concepts is to examine the context; literary and historical/cultural.  So, here's my interpretation, and probably a gross oversimplification of Paul's intent here:

• In chapter 4, Paul has church members and their 'assessment' of him in view.
• In chapter 5, Paul has church members and their 'acceptance' of sin in view.

The problems start when we find the terminology is pretty much the same.  I labeled what they do to him as 'assessment' but he uses the term 'judgment' as in the legal term as well.  I used the term 'acceptance' but he again uses 'judgment' there.  So, since the difference isn't the terminology, it must be found in the objects.

The 'assessment' of Paul in chapter 4 has to do with his 'fitness' to teach, how 'wise' he is, how well he led, and so on.  It wasn't dealing with a sin or some unscriptural teaching on his part.  The 'acceptance' of the church member in chapter 5 has to do with a clear violation of Scriptural teaching.

I'm going to revisit this again with chapter 5 and 6 later, but I wanted to first put forth the problematic seeming contradiction first.  Partly because it causes confusion, and mostly because I believe 'we're doing it wrong' when it comes to 'judgmentalism'.  I was the target of a religious groups judgmental attitude, and it had nothing to do with sin.  I'm no longer a vocational minister, and would no longer consider such a position because of their treatment.  So I have an emotional stake in this, I freely admit that.  Perhaps I still have some resentment that I need to surrender to my Master, even after all these years (it's only been 15 after all).

But I also believe the church does need to address sin within the body.  This usually falls on the pastor to preach at or address.  But while that may be necessary, it also falls to the responsibility of the believers at large to confront and address sin found among them.  This is dangerous ground because the point to the exercise, as Jesus describes it in Matthew 18, is the restoration of the 'offender', not their 'destruction'.  Like I said, we're not doing it right.  And we don't do it well.  But I also believe we can both do it, and do it well.  We just need to think through what we're doing and why.  So, who's to judge? I believe we are...sometimes.