Peter SmytheA Different Kind of Word Preacher

“Mac! Mac! Hey, wake up! What in the world happened to you? You’re a mess - look your tie is undone, your herringbone is all scratched up, your hair’s disheveled and your papers are scattered all over the place. Did you get mugged or something?”

“Where am I?”

“You’re at PSM. I came in this morning early to get started on the blog and found you here looking like the bad end of Ultimate Fight Night. Aren’t you supposed to be at that big theological shindig downtown?”

“Yeah … I was there, but … I . . .”

“Let me get you some coffee and cleaned up and you can tell me what happened.”

__________________

“Okay, now you’ve got a cup of Illy. Tell me what happened to you.”

“Well, I remember going downtown. I got to the convention center and there were so many people - all those theologians and Bible scholars that we’re used to seeing. This year, since they had so many register, they decided to have two break-out sessions to start the convention instead of the regular welcoming meeting. One of the sessions was called “Ephesians 4.9 - It’s All About Incarnation.” Well, after that last escapade, I thought that maybe I should go to the other one. It was called, “1 Corinthians 2.8 - Ruling on the Rulers.” I really hadn’t looked at 1 Corinthians 2.8 in a while so I thought that’d be fine.”

“So you got to the session?”

“Well, yeah, I got in there and I don’t know … maybe it was just me … it seemed as if … ”

“What? Seemed as if what?”

“Well, it just seemed as if people were talking about me. I don’t know. Maybe I was just a little paranoid from that key thing. Anyway, I decided that I’d just sit in the back and keep quiet.”

“Did you sit at the table with anybody?”

“There were some books on the table when I went to sit down, but they were gone after I went to get a cup of coffee. So, no, I remember that I was at the table alone.”

“And then what happened?”

“Hmm, I remembered that they started the session by putting 1 Corinthians 2.7 and 8 on a big video screen.”

but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory; the wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory (1 Corinthians 2.8, NASB) (emphasis supplied)

“And then what?”

“I remember that they had a long table of scholars - you know, famous guys - up there. You know, those guys were speaking at the session and I remember that the first one was John MacArthur. I remember him saying:

Which none of the princes of this age knew; for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

The phrase “the princes of this age [era] ” refers to the princes of the era in which Paul lived — the New Testament period. The princes at that time were the Jewish and Roman leaders. He says, “Let me give you an illustration of the fact that the world doesn’t know God, and that the leaders of the world have never known God by their own reason. The Jewish and Roman leaders didn’t know God, for if they had, `they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. ‘” (The phrase “the Lord of glory” proves that Jesus was God. The word “glory” encompasses all of the attributes of God. ) This is the apex of showing that man’s wisdom can’t know God.

Brilliant Romans and educated, well-known Jews schooled in the Old Testament together crucified Christ. That shows how much they really knew — they didn’t know anything! I love the way Paul calls Him “the Lord of glory” in contrast to the humiliation of crucifixion. The leaders crucified the Lord of glory. This shows how far off human wisdom was from the truth. The Romans, with all their gods and religions, didn’t know God. The Jewish people, with all their information, didn’t know God. The Roman and Jewish leaders crucified Him. (John MacArthur, The Foolishness of God - Part 4 at http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/sg1816.htm)

“What does being a brilliant, educated, and well-schooled Roman have to do with anything? Is he saying that all the dumb-luck Romans knew what was going on?”

“Well, you see, I started to have the same kind of question. I began taking out my Greek New Testament while he was speaking, but he was finished before I could find the passage.”

“Do you remember anything else about the session?”

“Yeah, I remember hearing Richard Hays. You know he’s the professor of New Testament over at Duke. Nice guy. He dresses a lot better than I do. My tie … ”

“Mac, what’d he say? Were you there for his whole sermon?”

“Yes, I was. He was just like MacArthur. So matter-of-fact. He said:

There is nothing in the present passage to suggest that “the rulers of this age” (2:8) are demonic powers. This interpretation, sometimes advocated in light of Ephesians 6:12, is difficult to support in the undisputed Pauline letters. As already noted, the mention of “rulers” in 1 Corinthians 2:6 is directly linked to 1:26-28 and entirely understandable in relation to human authority figures, just as in Romans 13:1-7. Paul’s point in 1 Corinthians 2:8 is straightforward and rhetorically telling: The human power-wielders were so completely clueless about God’s way of working that they actually crucified the Lord of glory. Why, therefore, should we now pay attention to human notions of wisdom and power? (It is sometimes argued that Paul thinks of cosmic forces operating behind and through these human rulers, but the present passage does not develop such an idea; a sermon pursuing such themes would be moving on a tangent away from the text.) Thus, the reference to the crucifixion reminds us once again of the actual counterintuitive content of God’s wisdom, Christ crucified, and at the same time continues to develop the ironic juxtaposition of God’s ways and human ways.” (Richard Hays, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, First Corinthians, at 44)

“Wow. Hays and MacArthur both saying the same thing? We referred to Hays’s theology pretty favorably on The Real Faith, but I’m not sure that we had the same kind of experience with MacArthur.”

“You’re right and maybe that’s what started to bother me.”

“Bother you? What do you mean by that?”

“While Hays was speaking, you know he cites a lot of scripture, a lot of scripture real fast. As he was talking, I started to get bothered about this idea that the rulers in 1 Corinthians 2.8 meant only earthly rulers. I mean, yeah, Jesus was physically crucified by physical men, but that’s not how I read the passage. Honestly, I couldn’t keep up with Hayes, but I seemed to be about the only one in the room having that problem. But, as he continued on, something just didn’t seem right about it.”

“Did the session end after Hays?”

“No, no, I remember Gordon Fee being the last speaker - at least the last speaker that I remember. You know Gordon is the professor of New Testament at Regent over there in Vancouver. I’d like to go up there someday.”

“Mac, hey, stay on the subject. What about Fee?”

“Well, Gordon is a charismatic so I thought maybe at least he’d present a different slant. I remember him getting up and starting out by criticizing BDAG, saying that it was just an interpreter of the Greek. I thought, yeah, technically that’s true, but … ”

“What’s BDAG?”

“That’s that big ‘ole Greek lexicon of mine. You know, that big book I take everywhere. It’s kind of like the Bible to the Bible as far as Greek is concerned. I don’t know of a decent Greek scholar who doesn’t use BDAG. You know, that’s why you always see me with it.”

“And Fee criticized it?”

“Well, I shouldn’t say criticize. You see BDAG says that the word “rulers” in 1 Corinthians 2.8 can mean demonic powers. I remember Fee talking about BDAG’s sources and pretty much hammering them. He then went through his own analysis and issued their ruling.”

“Their ruling?”

“Yep. And that’s what got me riled. Fee put it this way:

From the linguistic data alone, it would appear as if archoton in 1 Cor. 2:6-8 refers to earthly rulers, since in terms of historical usage, the earliest known instance where it refers to malevolent spiritual “rulers” (demonic powers) is from the early third century C.E., where Origen so interprets our passage in this way. It is always possible, however, that this later usage had its origin with Paul in this passage. So we must resolve the issue … by analyzing the context of 1 Corinthians 1-4, especially 2:6-16… . What becomes clear in the context is that Paul is contrasting human and divine wisdom, the latter being perceived only by those who have the Spirit (2:10-14). Since the contrast in v.14 is clearly with human beings who have not the Spirit and therefore see the divine wisdom as folly, there seems to be no good contextual reason of any kind to argue that the introduction of this set of contrasts (vv.6-8) refers to other than human rulers, who as the “chief people” of this age represent those who cannot perceive the wisdom of God in the cross. (Gordon Fee, New Testament Exegesis, Third Edition at 92)

“What becomes clear! No good contextual reason of any kind! The end of the argument!?! That burned me to tell you the truth.”

“So what happened? What did you do?”

“One of the theologians up front raised his hand to ask Fee a question about Origen or somebody. I figured that since he got to ask a question, I didn’t see any reason why I couldn’t. So I raised up my hand and when Fee looked over me I went ahead and stood up and said:

Are you telling me that if Pontius Pilate or even one of your smarty-pants rulers, if he had come to know the Pauline revelation, the revelation -

that tells us that Jesus, the second person of the Godhead, emptied Himself of his glory to become a man,

that tells us he had to die the death of a common criminal,

that tells us he had to die on a wooden cross so that he could take on the curse,

that tells us on that cross God laid upon him the sins of all of us,

that tells us he bore those sins so that we could become righteous,

that tells us we could escape everlasting damnation,

that tells us we could become righteous, not just in a legal sense, but actually born-again of God,

that tells us we could become the very sons of God, of His divine character and substance,

you’re telling me that if Pontius Pilate had understood all of this and knew that the crucifixion was the only way that mankind could ever be saved that he never, ever would have crucified the Lord thereby damning his own soul to hell along with everybody else? Is that what you are telling me?!

“Gee whiz, Mac, what happened after that?”

“I don’t remember. I remember that there was some kind of commotion while I was saying all this and then everything went black and I woke up here.”

[Note: This episode is entirely fiction, except for the “session” quotations.]

[Note: After Mac was able to gather his papers together, he left us these scriptures:

But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s. (Matt. 16:23, NASB)

This wisdom is not that which comes down from above, but is earthly, natural, demonic. (James 3.15, NASB)

with an unfinished note: ” If Jesus and James didn’t distinguish between man’s wisdom and demonic wisdom, then what … ?”