CHAPTER FOURTEEN

 

 

14:ALL:  Regarding the “unknown tongue” = See my Bible Study:  “TONGUES, THE GIFT OF.”

 

14:34:  “women keep silence” = Here is my First Timothy 2:11-12 Note:  “woman learn in silence” = Included in this discussion should also be First Corinthians 14:34.  It is interesting to note that the Greek word for “silent” here in these two verses (11 & 12) is “hēsuchia,” which is the feminine form of “hesuchius,” which is basically the same exact Greek word that is translated “peaceable” in verse 2.  Therefore, what I’m going to say next is in context with what is being instructed here.  There (in verse 2), women where not so mush as to be “silent,” but rather “respectful, honoring, reverent, polite, courteous, well-mannered, considerate, and most of all, selfless.”

 

Can you show me one of those words above, except for “silent,” that does not, or should not also apply to a man?  So, whenever you read the Greek word “hesuchios,” I would like you to think of it as, “be reverent” with your remarks, or be “silent” and go home and discuss it with your husband later there (1Co. 14:35).  This principle that I have put forth carries through if you notice the “with all subjection” in verse 11.  It means not “usurping authority,” but being “in subjection” to it.  And that principle is brought forth in our Corinthian text by the statement, “be under obedience” to “the law” of respectfulness.  The reason is that the same Greek word “hesuchios,” is used for the translation of “silence” in it also and should be understaood as, “be reverent.”

 

In addition, staying in the context of instructions to the Corinthian Churches, according to Paul’s instruction in First Corinthians 11:5, it was all right for women to pray and prophecy in Church.  Therefore, I believe that Paul was dealing with etiquette issues of his time in First Corinthians 14:34.  The fact that the Spirit of God was poured out on women as well as men that they might prophesy, i.e., “teach,” proves that Paul was dealing with an etiquette issue.  It should also be noted that our Greek word “hesuchios” is translated as “quietness” in Second Thessalonians 3:12.  And there, the instruction applied to men as well as women (for they were being disrupt-full, i.e., “busybodies,” 2Th. 3:11).  Thus, disruption and confusion is what was and is the underlying issue for all of these instructions to the various Churches.

 

By contrast, Paul would have women be learners and not teachers, sit and hear, and learn more of Christ, and of the truth of the Gospel, and to maintain good works.  Moreover, he would have them learn in silence, and not offer to rise and speak under a pretense of having a word from the Lord, or of being under an impulse of the Spirit of the Lord.

 

As an example, if you remember Deborah’s actions, she first gave the man, Barak the son of Abinoam (see Judges, Chapter 4), his rightful place as the leader of our Lord’s armies.  But when men allow or request the talents of a women, as here Biblically shown, our God is fully behind it; for He did not leave Deborah or admonish her to act differently (being a prophet of the Lord we would have read later about such an act on our Lord’s part).

 

Throughout history, God has used women in different roles.  Particularly important is the fact that prophetesses proclaimed their messages to God’s people in public (Exo. 15:20; Jud. 4:4-16; 2Ki. 22:14-20; Acts 2:17; 21:9).  Paul himself acknowledged that a woman can pray and prophesy in Church; that women are not strictly forbidden to speak in Church (see again 1Co. 11:5).

 

The question then remains again, what did Paul mean when he stated that women should be “silent” in the Church?  We should keep several things in mind.  Note these few points.  Tensions during worship (somehow the speech of women that Paul prohibited was in some way contributing to a state of confusion) and “preaching” was not the subject (the discussion was not whether women should preach or occupy important leadership positions in Church, but about the proper attitude in Church when instruction was being given).  The discussion was that women should be instructed, not instructing.

 

In the ancient world it was impolite for students to interrupt teachers with questions that in some cases showed their ignorance of the subject and disrupted the learning experience.  Therefore, the Greek word “sigao,” used for “keep silence” in First Corinthians 14:34 was appropriate as used in the ancient world for politeness.  But “sigao” is not the Greek word here used to “silence” women.

 

 

“as also saith the Law” = As found in Numbers 30:3-13.  The basic principle is that the man is the priest, or as we might say nowadays, the head of the household.  See my Bible Study:  “WOMEN’S ORDINATION.”

 

 

CHAPTER FIFTEEN

 

 

15:1:  “the Gospel which I preached unto you” = It is acknowledged by almost all denominations (me included) that the Biblical agreed upon definition of “The Gospel” is contained in verses 3-8.

 

And after quoting verses 3-8, we have this statement:  “Christ’s resurrection is placed in the very foreground of the foundation of the Christian Church.  This is a matter of the deepest importance.  The future of the Church militant depended on the fact that the same One that was crucified should come forth from the grave, proclaiming, ‘I Am the resurrection and the life.’ [John 11:25].  The resurrection of Christ is to Christianity as the soul is to the body.  It is the sum and substance of the truth of the inspired Word.  Christ’s life is the verification of the written Word.”  12LtMs, Ms 94, 1897, paragraph 32.

 

15:3-8:  “all that which I also received” = This appears to be the first Christian “creed” ever.  This is proved by the fact that Paul introduces it with the words “delivered” and “received,” which are technical Rabbinic terms, indicating he was passing along a holy tradition.  Also, in verse 11 Paul emphasizes that the other apostles were in agreement in preaching this very same message (creed).  This means that Paul is quoting the exact report (creed) as were the other eyewitnesses -- Peter and James.  It also means that Paul had not only met some of these eyewitnesses personally (Gal. 1:18-19; 2:9), but he explains that his message concerning these facts is identical with their eyewitness testimony (1Co. 15:11; 15:14-15).

 

15:12-17:  “how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead” = Paul’s repetition (verses 12-17) implies that his readers and critics are faced with his unanswerable force of argument.  These seemed to admit that Christ was raised, but denied the resurrection of others.  This verse shows that the Sadducaical influences, and even that Sadducees, were converted members of the Pauline Christian band.  Paul therefore now stresses to the believers to put on their common sense, which they seemed to have abandoned, and he now shows that if Christ be raised, the general resurrection must follow as a sure result.

 

Greek philosophical dualism viewed material existence as evil, and as such, the doctrine was to be done away with.  Salvation was seen as the liberation of the soul from the prison-house of the body.  Apparently, this dualistic view of human nature influenced some Corinthian Christians to reject the belief in the resurrection of the body.  This is indicated by Paul’s question here.

 

Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle (who died after the death of Alexander the Great), all promoted what most likely caused this explanation of Paul to the false concepts of death promoted by these Greek philosophers.  The philosophy was that the body is corrupt and bad.  Thus, to the Corinthian mind set, they did not want to be resurrected into their old corrupt bodies.  And Paul, in his usual long-winded explanation, finally explains in verses 52-53 that we would receive “incorruptible” bodies.  This than becomes the entire purpose for this section of Paul’s letter to the Corinthians.

 

15:14 & 17:  “if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain” = This is why this argument and proof of it is used in every major discourse:  Acts 3:15; 4:10; 17:31 Romans 4:25; 5:10; 8:34; Philippians 3:10; Hebrews 7:25; 9:24; 10:12; First Peter 1:3 & 21.

 

However, miny mistakenly associate “justification” and forgiveness of their sins at Christ’s death upon the cross.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  For these verses and Romans 4:25 teach us that it was not until Christ was raised from the dead and accepted of the Father that our “justification” took place.

 

“Christ’s resurrection is placed in the very foreground of the foundation of the Christian Church.  This is a matter of the deepest importance.  The future of the Church militant depended on the fact that the same One that was crucified should come forth from the grave, proclaiming, “I Am the resurrection and the life.” [John 11:25].  The resurrection of Christ is to Christianity as the soul is to the body.  It is the sum and substance of the truth of the inspired Word. Christ’s life is the verification of the written Word.”  12LtMs, Ms 94, 1897, paragraph 32.

 

“The angels ascribe honor and glory to Christ, for even they are not secure except by looking to the sufferings of the Son of God.  It is through the efficacy of the cross that the angels of Heaven are guarded from apostasy.  Without the cross they would be no more secure against evil than were the angels before the fall of Satan.  Angelic perfection failed in Heaven. Human perfection failed in Eden, the paradise of bliss.  All who wish for security in earth or Heaven must look to the Lamb of God.  The plan of salvation, making manifest the justice and love of God, provides an eternal safeguard against defection in unfallen worlds, as well as among those who shall be redeemed by the blood of the Lamb.”  ST, December 30, 1889, paragraph 4; 5BC:1132; TA:205.

 

15:23:  “every man in his own order” = That is, that the redeemed would not proceed Christ, for He is the “firstfruits,” i.e., “First In Rank.”  And the “order” is, according to First Thessalonians 4:16-17, First, “the dead in Christ shall rise;” Second, “Then we,” that is, the alive in Christ at His Second Coming; Third, at the Third Coming the wicked will be raised (Deu. 33:2; Jud. 1:14; Zec. 14:5; 1Th. 3:13; Jude 1:14-15; Rev. 14:14-20; 20:7-15).  Therefore, this does not mean in “order” of your rewards to be given, or any such doctrine.

 

15:28:  “And when all things shall be subdued unto Him {Jesus}, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him {The Father} that put all things under Him {Jesus}, that God {The Godhead} may be all in all.”

 

“then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him” = See my explanation also in First Corinthians 11:3.  For again, this verse doesn’t refer to the “Nature” of Christ either.  Rather, once again it is only referring to His office or “position.”  We can know this for sure by looking at Luke 2:51, where we find the same Greek word, “hupotasso,” translated as “subject,” also.  The point is that no one would say that Jesus was inferior in “Nature” to Joseph and Mary from looking at Luke 2:51.  However, this would be the natural conclusion if the word “subject” refers to “nature.”  Likewise, Jesus is NOT inferior by “Nature” to the Father, since He is God.

 

15:29:  “baptized for the dead” = That it is not possible, (although some teach) to be baptized for the dead is apparent from the many Scriptures which declare that each individual man must personally believe in Christ and confess his own sins, (repent and obey) in order to profit by baptism and be saved (Eze. 18:20-24; John 3:16; Acts 2:38; 8:36-37; 1Jo. 1:9).  Even the most righteous of men can “deliver but their own souls” (Eze. 14:14, 16; especially see Psa. 49:7; 119:109; Job 13:14) only while they are alive.  Also, an important event, death, marks the close of human probation (Ecc. 9:4-6 & 10; Isa. 38:18 & 19).  “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:”  Hebrews 9:27.

 

Consequently, the exact meaning of Paul here is not a new teaching, but what he is attempting to do is reason with the Corinthian believers who were teaching that there is no resurrection at all:  “what shall they do which are baptized for the dead [HERE COMES HIS POINT], if the dead rise not at all?”  He could also be making a “pun” at the silly people who would do such a thing.

 

Paul’s main point then becomes clear later on in the discourse (verses 51-54) expressing the fact that there is a resurrection, which was his main point and the context of the discourse.  The conclusion would be, Why would these false teachers, who did not even believe that there is to be a resurrection of the dead, would want to be baptized for the dead, if the dead will never rise anyway?

 

Another plausible option would be that the word “baptized” is used here as it is in Matthew 20:22-23; Mark 10:39; Luke 12:50, in the sense of being overwhelmed with calamities, trials, and sufferings, which applies mainly to agonizing over the righteous dead brothers and sisters and the hope (uncertainty) of their resurrection.  The word “baptized” here, as used by Paul, could also mean, or be taken in the sense of washing, cleansing, and purifying, as in Hebrews 9:10; and in that sense, that the dead were carefully washed and purified when buried with the hope of the resurrection.

 

Paul could also mean, “to be baptized as dead,” being baptized into Christ, and buried with Him in baptism, and that by their immersion they were regarded as dead to sin, but alive in Christ.

 

By contrast, to believe that Paul would give countenance to a custom so senseless and so contrary to Scripture, or that he would make it the foundation of a new doctrine does not accord with the strain and purpose of his argument for a resurrection from the state of being dead; which is really the subject and context previous to this verse.  If this custom, here referred to, was his design to incorporate it into the Church as a new doctrine, he would have most likely had more to say about it here and in other places, and it would have led him to say something like, “What will become of them for whom others have been baptized?  Are we to believe that they have perished?”

 

15:35-44:  “seed” = By means of analogy of the “seed” sown, Paul explains the continuity and discontinuity that exist between our present physical body and the future resurrected/translated body.  The continuity is established by the connection between the seed and the new plant that sprouts out of it.  The discontinuity is seen in the difference between the seed that is sown and the new plant that comes from it.  What Paul is saying here is that as God gives a body to each kind of seed that is sown, so He will give a new body to each person who is buried.  The fact that deceased bodies are buried like a seed in the ground, may have suggested to Paul the analogy of the seed.  But if the seed is an apple seed, it will produce an apple tree.  So, as a man’s seed is a man, so a man will be produced.

 

15:42 & 50:  “corruption” = Here is my Romans 8:21 Note:  The Greek is “phthora” and literally means “decay,” that is, “ruin, (spontaneous or inflicted, literally or figuratively), destroy, perish.”  This word meant a lot more to Paul’s audience of the time.  The Romans were a very brutal bunch, as the crucifixion method demonstrates.  And what Paul is expressing here, and especially in First Corinthians, is what the Romans inflicted upon a murderer.  They would strap the dead body of the murdered person upon the back or the murderer and he/she would have to carry it around for the rest of their lives, which was not too long, in that the corpse would begin to “decay” and worms and all sorts of other things would begin their process; which in turn would begin to eat at the live murderer’s skin until he/she died from the exposure.  Now we can picture and feel the power behind Paul’s message as well as his original audience did.

 

15:44:  “a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body” = It is obvious that the spiritual man in this passage is not a nonphysical person.  Rather, it is someone who is guided by the Holy Spirit, in contradistinction from someone who is guided by natural impulses.  If, in this present physical body, which is subject to the Law of sin and death, it can be found to be following the direction and instructions of the Holy Spirit now, then in the future resurrection of the righteous, this body is one in which it will take part.

 

The resurrected body is called “spiritual,” because it is ruled not by carnal impulses but by the Holy Spirit.  We can know this because Christ’s resurrected body was certainly physical, since He was touched by Thomas (John 20:17 & 27), and He ate food (Luke 24:38-43).  Evan more telling is Paul’s use of the same two words (“natural,” i.e., “psuchikos” & “spiritual,” i.e., “pneumatikos”) in the same epistle:  “[14] But the natural [natural, i.e., “psuchikos”] man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God:  for they are foolishness unto him:  neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. [15] But he that is spiritual [“pneumatikos”] judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.”  First Corinthians 2:14-15.

 

It is obvious that the spiritual man in this passage is not a nonphysical person.  Rather, it is someone who is guided by the Holy Spirit, in contradistinction from someone who is guided by natural impulses.  This insight helps us also to understand Paul’s statement a few verses later:  “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.”  First Corinthians 15:50.

 

It is evident here that Paul is not saying that the resurrected body will be nonphysical, because writing to the Romans he states:  “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.”  Romans 8:9.  By the phrase “not in the flesh,” Paul obviously did not mean that Christians who were led by the Holy Spirit already had discarded their physical bodies.  Rather, he means that already in the present life, they were guided by spiritual, as opposed to the worldly values of others (Rom. 8:4-8).

 

If Paul could speak of Christians as not being “in the flesh,” already in the present life, his reference to the absence of “flesh and blood” in the Kingdom of God cannot mean the absence of physical bodies.  It simply means the absence of the natural, carnal limitations and sinful inclinations of the present life; because the redeemed will be led fully by the Spirit of God (see Rom. 7:14).

 

Note also that if the resurrected/translated body were to be radically different from the original creation body, then God would be admitting that His original design of the human body had some flaws; that it was not really perfect after all.

 

You may retort, Did not Jesus say that “in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven?”  Matthew 22:30.  Does this passage not indicate that at the resurrection all gender distinctions will be abolished and our bodies will no longer be physical?  This conclusion cannot be drawn legitimately from Jesus’ statement.

 

He here is referring to the angels, not in order to teach the nonphysical nature of the resurrected body, or the absence of gender differences in the new world, but simply to explain that the pro-creational function of marriage will no longer exist, since, like the angels, the bringing of new children into the World would mean another process of probation.  The reason why the six brothers of the hypothetical situation created by the Sadducees, married in succession their brother’s widow, was to “raise up children for [their] brother,” Matthew 22:24.  It seems legitimate to assume that in His reply, Jesus refers to the angels to explain that in the new world marriage for the purpose of procreation will no longer exist, since their probation period is already over.

 

15:45:  “a quickening spirit” = In the sense that Jesus will “quicken,” or raise our immortal bodies to mortal bodies at the last day.

 

15:50:  “Flesh and blood” = Paul is not saying that the resurrected body is nonphysical, because Christ taught Thomas differently (John 20:27).  Christ in His resurrected body declared that He was “flesh and bones,” Luke 24:39, and we will have a body like His (see Php. 3:21).  Paul teaches the real meaning of “Flesh and blood” in Romans 8:9, when he says, “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.”  Obviously, Paul was not saying they had discarded their physical bodies, rather, he meant they were guided by spiritual values over “flesh,” or carnal worldly inclinations.  Jesus expresses the same assertion when He says, “for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father [The true Spirit].”  Matthew 16:17.  The Bible also uses the term “flesh” to describe the unconverted person such as in Romans 8:8-9 and John 3:6.

 

15:51-52:  “I shew you a mystery” = Second Coming Texts.  See First Thessalonians 4:16-17.  Staying in context, the “mystery” is not the Second Coming of our Lord, but the changing of our physical bodies at that prescribed point.

 

“mystery” = The Greek word for “mystery” used here is “musterion.”  In Greek thought, a “mystery” is something that was once clouded with uncertainties, but is now known and revealed.  For applications where the use of this Greek word and its concept is better seen, see Mark 4:11; Romans 11:25; 16:25; First Corinthians 2:7; Ephesians 1:9.

 

 

CHAPTER SIXTEEN

 

 

16:2:  “Upon the first day of the week” = Here is an excerpt from my Bible Study:  “SABBATH STILL VALID TODAY.”

 

The Greek for “Upon the first day of the week” is, “G2596; kata; G3391; mia; G4521; sabbaton,” which should be literally translated as, as the “ISV” version has it, “After the Sabbath ends.”  This should dispel any Sunday concepts being applied to this text.  But I digress to what follows.

 

Important to consider, is why this collect that Paul is asking the Corinthians to take part in along with the Galatians (verse 1) that he had already asked.  According to Acts 11:28, Agabus prophesied “a great famine,” and Paul, along with “the disciples. . . determined to send relief to the brethren dwelling in Judea.”  Acts 11:29.  This could also include the Romans 15:26 instruction, for the “poor in Jerusalem.”  In Romans it mentions “Macedonia,” just as it does in First Corinthians 16:5.  Thus, we could be speaking of the same coming (future) event.  See also Second Corinthians 8:1-3, that even though the Macedonian Church was having the same issues of “deep poverty,” they gave freely.

 

Thus, Paul is not specifically setting up a new exclusive policy that is to replace the Biblical Sabbath.  The Greek word for “in store” is “G2343; thesaurizo,” and is a direct translation of the Hebrew word “owtsar,” which is translated in the “LXX,” as “storehouse” as it is in Malachi 3:10.  Therefore, Paul was most definitely admonishing the Corinthian believers to adhere to the tithing system:  “Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse,” Malachi 3:10.  Plus, “lay by him in store,” if you check, most, if not all Bible commentators, all agree that Paul is teaching the believers that they were to be “storing” their tithes in their own houses; not in the Synagogue or Church, or any other type of assembly.

 

Therefore, a better translation would be, “every first day from the Sabbath.”  Thus, this lets us conclude that Paul is referring to the week by the Jewish designation, or “first day from the Sabbath,” and is not referring to the prevailing pagan name “dies solis” -- “Day of the Sun.”  Rather, he reveals that he taught his Gentile converts to regulate their lives by the Jewish calendar.  Please note also that there is nothing in the text to suggest any public assemblies, inasmuch as the setting aside of funds was to be done “by him[self],” “par’heauto,” verse 2.

 

After learning the context, or possible context of First Corinthians 16:2, to then jump to the conclusion that Paul is saying to the Corinthian brethren that he is now changing the Biblical Sabbath to the first day of the week is totally ridiculous.  Please evaluate where the Sabbath is mentioned in this verse and also show where the first day of the week is now “blessed; sanctified; commanded; or made holly,” which was the requirement for the Fourth Commandment or changing thereof.  Also, then Jesus Christ would have to Come down AGAIN and die for this new Commandment as a form of ratification.

 

We understand that Malachi 3:10 states, “Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse.”  The “when” is what we would like to know.  Therefore, notice that the word “day” is a supplied word and does not belong in the text.  A literal understanding would be any first days of the week.

 

Thus, Paul’s mention of the “first day” as a day to set aside one’s funds is motivated more by practical grounds than theological reasons.  To wait until the end of the week, or of the month, to set aside one’s contributions or savings is contrary to sound budgetary practices, since by then one finds empty pockets and empty bank accounts.  In other words, pay your Tithe first and your bills later, or else you might end up not paying your tithe.

 

On the other hand, if, on “the first day of the week,” before planning any expenditures, believers set aside what they plan to give, i.e., Tithe and Offerings, the remaining funds will be so distributed as to meet all the basic necessities (since, as I have personally experienced, if I don’t pay my Tithe first, I will be in danger of not paying it at all).  The text, therefore, proposes a valuable weekly plan to ensure a substantial and orderly contribution to our Lord and on behalf of the poor brethren of Jerusalem.  To extract more meaning from the text would be to distort it and to take away from its valuable Biblical principles that one can put into one’s own life values for Tithing.

 

Finally, in reality, Paul suggests the “first day of the week be when you “work” out your gift, so as not to be doing this “work” on the Biblical Sabbath day.  In fact, what “day” did the Corinthians Church worship upon?  According to Acts 18:1-5, specifically verse 4, “every Sabbath” day; NOT every “first day of the week.”

 

16:11:  “Let no man therefore despise him” = This, as you know, is improper English.  The “therefore” should always come first, such that you should not read any further until you have understood the previous.  Thus, it should read:  “Therefore, let no man despise him.”

 

16:22:  “anathema” = This word means, “A thing devoted to destruction; accursed.”

 

“maranatha” = This word means, “Our Lord Come.”