- “For Christ did not send me to baptize …” The issue about baptism in this context is not baptism itself, of course, but the notion that those baptised become your followers (which gave rise to the divisions in the church). It doesn’t matter whether it arose from baptism or from some other issue (this person brought me to Christ, I respect this leader, I embrace his teachings, I belong to this denomination, etc.), none of us are sent by Christ to make a name for ourselves or to amass followers. Do you think this is a clear indictment of denominations, “modern-day apostles”, Christian “heroes”, or even a set of theological perspectives (e.g. calvinism, charismatic movement)? How about you—do you have a “us” and “them” view of the Christian landscape?
I think so. It is easy to use a shorthand “calvinism” or “charismatic” or “brethren” but when we allow these frameworks to define our Christian beliefs and practice we get into trouble. As I have said before, none of us can claim to be 100% right or wrong, which means that our beliefs and practices are forever evolving as we grow and learn from God. We must allow ourselves room to be flexible and room to challenge preconceived notions.
Haha… I can be pretty opinionated (because I think it is important to take a position and allow it to throw light on other perspectives) but I think I am open to give room for both competing ideas as well as human weakness and stubbornness.
- “ … but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.” Interestingly Paul even eschews “wisdom and eloquence” (in other words the ability to attract people and lend an air of authority) so as not to distract from the power of the cross of Christ. In the light of the modern church’s emphasis on ways to attract and keep the interest of their audience, what do you think about Paul’s approach? Can such a raw and simple approach even find an audience, much less save?
I don’t think we want to appear stupid or uncouth (and I don’t think that’s what Paul means) but at the same time we must understand and appreciate the cross of Christ enough so we don’t apologise for it. We don’t apologise for God and we don’t apologise for his authority and sovereignty.
The paths we choose to gain attention must be consonant in character with the broad qualities of the Gospel: a clown helping Sunday School children understand what God had done through Jesus may express friendliness and “commonness” while a 10,000 dollar per table fundraiser-cum-famous-preacher-from-mega-church may exude power and elitism even if you are raising funds for a charitable cause. Should a church rub shoulders with the rich and powerful in their environment? I think not; individuals may, of course, but not when God is represented.
I don’t think it is wrong to care about the packaging of the Gospel although, as I said before, it must not be out of character with what is inside. What would be wrong is when your actions betray that you are “selling” something inferior and you need to distract your “target” from the actual contents and sell an idea, an emotion, wishful thinking. Rather, the packaging may draw a person to the product but our delight is in what the Gospel delivers (see 2 Corinthians 4).
Can the raw Gospel find a response in the hearts of man? I think the power of the Gospel is not in the “packaging” but in the faith and conviction of the messenger. All that is needed is clarity. At the end of the day the transaction between man and God is spiritual and that conversation and negotiation is surely direct and intimate.
- For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.” Paul clearly wants to rest on the power of God and take away power from worldly ways of influence: such as using clever speeches and arguments, or worldly figures of renown and influence (like professors, super rich people, popular social figures, etc.) Why would Paul choose to not adorn the Gospel message with perspectives and ideas that will lend strength and authority to the message? Does such an approach make sense? What would it mean to you to accept Paul’s view?
The moment we place the authority of God under other authorities (science proves the existence of God; the display of power in healing and miracles validates the claims of Jesus; logical arguments and explanations compel us to embrace Christianity; the character and example of my favourite Sunday School teacher was why I opened my heart to Jesus) we weaken it and misrepresent God. They may remove obstacles and perhaps even motivate us to approach God but ultimately salvation is a transaction between man and God.
God’s existence and his character and actions, does not require us to deny the discoveries of science; nor is he incapable or unwilling of overcoming the laws of nature that science has uncovered; nor does he compel us to live and behave illogically and incompatibly with social norms; nor is there no evidence of the veracity and efficacy of his Gospel—all these are important but not compelling. Ultimately we are compelled to respond to God for who he is, for who we are, for what he has done and for what we need. This is faith.
If, at the end of the day it comes down to faith for a man to respond to his God then it is vital that I pray and lean on the Holy Spirit. To be able to communicate the intelligence of the Gospel is useful but for faith to be born, prayer and the Holy Spirit is vital.
- “Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.” It is very clear that in the outworking of the mission of Jesus none of the usual “experts and people of power and influence” were used. The king entered Jerusalem on a donkey (see Luke 19)! Even the Twelve were “unschooled, ordinary men”. Do you think this sets out a pattern for us to follow (as Paul is implying here) or should we use everything in our arsenal to achieve God’s goals?
I don’t think God rejects those who may be wise in the world—Paul is one such person—but they must be humble before God. Paul was humbled by God and maintained that humility before God subsequently. I’m not sure about “using everything in our arsenal” but I would think that it is important to achieve God’s goals in God’s ways. You can use your wealth to attract people to the church but that would harm God’s reputation.
- “Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” In other words, we do what God calls to do rather than dance to the tune that the people set so that those who turn to God rightly acknowledge God’s authority, power and wisdom. Do you think this is right? Does this change anything in your view of your task to share the Gospel? What if nobody is interested to even listen to you?
Yes. The way of the world is to pander to the crowd to achieve success. This makes the crowd “god”. Scripture tells me that there will always be people who know their need of the Gospel. These will be people who are drawn to us because we are to them like Christ—gentle, humble, kind, helpful. They will listen and respond.
- “For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.” Do you believe this? How will it affect how you share your faith with your family, friends and colleagues?
In a manner of speaking, yes. God is never foolish or weak but we may consider his ways so. I find that I am often apologetic about sharing my faith, mostly, I think, because talking about religion is considered ill-mannered, argumentative and unmindful of other people’s beliefs and feelings. It is difficult to find a way to overcome this. I suppose I can just put my faith “out there” in a “take it or leave it” manner and move on (to avoid arguments and foisting on others something that they are too polite to refuse) but with so much misunderstanding and misinformation, this is often detrimental. I wish for a good and honest conversation and discussion but this is often difficult to achieve. It is quite a dilemma.