House Church Talk - Re: Real Christians

[Glenn Frank]

Hi Dan,

Thanks for pulling all those verses about Paul's interactions after the
Athens and Corinthian incidents... It was neat to read them all in one group
like that.

For clarification, I don't think I was trying to say that Paul had given up
intellectual arguments forever. He obviously used them throughout his
ministry and his writings. But it seems that there was some kind of specific
reason that Paul would make such a dramatic shift in his way of presenting
the gospel between Athens and Corinth. It appears that in the time between
Mars hill and Corinth he willingly CHOSE to NOT go with the fancy speeches,
but rather just the simple blunt truth of the Gospel and an example of God's
power. 

Why? 

Maybe it was as I said because of his experience in Athens... Or, on the
other hand, maybe you are right...

Maybe this WAS only because Paul saw that this was where the Corinthians
were at (accepting of the simple truth and demonstration of God's power
rather than seeking the philosophical plain of Athens.)

In any case... I think it serves as an example to us (as you and others have
stated) that we can't base ministry on a formula. Paul did not choose the
same way of doing things everywhere. But there are "ministries" today who
base their whole approach on intellectual argument. And there are others
which rely only on a simple presentation of the cross... And some that say
they are only to demonstrate God's power... I think that a tunnel vision
focus on any of these individual things is not right.

So, maybe it is true as you say, he was just fitting the message to the
people he met. 

Yet... It still seems to be saying more...

>From all of Paul's epistles we know that his normal form of reasoning WAS
thought-out and logical. He reasoned with people. There is no doubt that
this was his normal and natural means of speech. (although he also points
out in some places that God's wisdom is different from man's... So it is not
always going to seem "logical" to unbelieving ears).

But still, Paul's statement to in 1Cor 2:1-5 where he tells them how he came
to them... It reads as if this was a personal battle within himself -- an
act of self control for him to restrain his personal nature of logical
arguments and speeches...

"When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior
wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. For I resolved to
know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I
came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling.  My message and
my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a
demonstration of the Spirit's power,  so that your faith might not rest on
men's wisdom, but on God's power."

It sounds like Paul was purposely trying to NOT do what came naturally to
him.. Namely, arguing and presenting a reasoned out logical explanation of
the Gospel. He was forcing himself to do it a different way for some unknown
reason.

I figure, either God told him to do it this way (differently) or he
experienced something in Athens that caused him to back away from his
typical methods... Or he saw that this is what these people needed rather
than his logical arguments...

I don't know what the reason was... but it is interesting to consider it as
we go about ministering in methods in which we are comfortable and
experienced.


Here is something interesting I found....

Acts 23:6-7 
"Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others
Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, "My brothers, I am a Pharisee, the
son of a Pharisee. I stand on trial because of my hope in the resurrection
of the dead."  When he said this, a dispute broke out between the Pharisees
and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided."

It almost seems that Paul brought up the resurrection of the dead issue on
purpose to cause a ruckus so he would not be caught in their trap. Paul knew
how to use argument to steer certain people different ways, but he also
seems to have learned to not rely on his own way with words when it was
appropriate as seen in Corinth.

It is also interesting to note that no church seems to be mentioned in
Athens... 
But one grows in Corinth (albeit a slightly dysfunctional one!)


I'm appreciating the other viewpoints everyone is making!


Glenn F.