The Preacher's Homiletical Commentary
1 Corinthians 4:6-13
CRITICAL NOTES
1 Corinthians 4:6.—From 1 Corinthians 3:5 he has discussed what applied to all the factions and their leaders, and even more to the others than to the so-called Pauline and Apollonian factions, in connection with himself and Apollos alone. “For their sakes” he has done so, to avoid arousing personal feeling or giving avoidable pain, content if, “in himself and Apollos” as sample cases, the question might be more calmly discussed and its conclusion more dispassionately arrived at. And the one lesson emerging from the discussion is, Not to think of themselves, or of teachers they were tempted to idolise, without taking account of what is written in such Scriptures as, e.g., he had quoted in 1 Corinthians 1:19; 1 Corinthians 1:31, 1 Corinthians 3:19; and therefore not to be, in any overweening conceit of themselves or their own judgment, such strong partisans for one teacher as against another teacher. Puffed up.— 1 Corinthians 4:18; 1 Corinthians 5:2; 1 Corinthians 8:1; 1 Corinthians 13:4.
1 Corinthians 4:7.—Transition to the self-esteem which really underlay their party zeal for this or that leader. Who?—Certainly not yourself, nor the man to whom you attach yourself.
1 Corinthians 4:8.—Note the tenses in Sharply—not bitterly, but sadly—ironical. As if the Master’s “judgment” (1 Corinthians 4:4) were over, the rewards distributed, and they were already on their thrones (Luke 22:29; Revelation 3:21; Revelation 1:6; Revelation 5:10). Apart from Paul and Apollos! And yet to them, if to anybody, the Corinthian Church owed its very existence (1 Corinthians 3:6). “Would that the day for your thrones had really come! We should then be on our thrones too, and all this weary life of labour, suffering, obloquy, would be done with! But it is not done with yet!”
1 Corinthians 4:9.—The last batch of criminals doomed (say) to the lions, kept back as the climax of the show in the amphitheatre, where the Corinthians sit in comfort and royal state as spectators. As to the angel spectators, see Ephesians 3:10. The whole story of God’s revelation in Christ had been through the ages unfolding itself before the eagerly interested gaze of the watching, studying “principalities and powers in heavenly places.” Paul’s career was a small incident in the history which was being wrought out under their eyes; and they studied him and his fortunes, like everything else, with closest attention. [Like his Master, he was “seen of angels.” Cf. “set forth,” Romans 3:25, as if uplifted and exhibited upon the cross, “appointed to death,” to the gaze of heaven, and earth, and (perhaps) hell.] Apostles.—Whole reference is so vague, whilst mainly starting from himself and his career, that this does not necessarily include Apollos, or make him “an apostle.” Paul is “numbering himself with the eleven apostles.” (See also 1 Corinthians 9:1.)
1 Corinthians 4:10.—Note the ascending climax. All ironical, except that perhaps “Ye are wise in Christ” may not only be “You think you are,” but also “You really are; and do not forget that you owe that indirectly to us who by the derided ‘message of the Cross’—‘such folly!’—led you to Christ.” (The “folly,” 1 Corinthians 1:18; 1 Corinthians 1:21; 1 Corinthians 1:23; 1 Corinthians 2:1. Their very real “wisdom,” 1 Corinthians 1:5.)
1 Corinthians 4:11. This present hour.—Paul in Ephesus was still sustaining himself by manual labour (Acts 20:33), which often left him (as it did in Corinth, 2 Corinthians 11:9) in real want. We.—True of apostles in general. Yet these, and Paul pre-eminently, were, of all men then living, of greatest worth to and importance for the world’s interests and life. They were the little lump of leaven with which God was revolutionising the world! What a picture of Apostolic life is suggested! Naked.—Insufficiently clad (cf. 2 Timothy 4:13). Buffeted.—His Master was, literally (Matthew 26:67); perhaps he himself may have been (2 Corinthians 11:7 [1 Peter 2:20; 2 Corinthians 12:7]). No … dwelling-place.—Partakers with Christ again (Matthew 8:20), and with the Old Testament saints (Hebrews 11:37). “A peculiar grief in the ancient world” (Stanley).
1 Corinthians 4:12.—“We use only the Christian weapons of resistance” (Matthew 5:44; Luke 6:27). Paul’s is “the earliest instance of such language being used” (Stanley).
1 Corinthians 4:13. Entreat.—Usually men who have been in the wrong do this, and who deprecate punishment. Or perhaps, more generally, “We give good words back in exchange for calumny.” Offscouring.—E.g. Acts 22:22. [So they cried of his Lord, “Away with Him!”] Not only did Israel cast him out, but the very Corinthians seemed to have less than no esteem for him; and the world outside, of course, counted him as vile and offensive. There seems to be some evidence that at Athens human sacrifices were cast into the sea as offerings to Neptune, with the words, “Be thou our ‘offscouring’ ” [the same word as the second here]; as procuring “salvation” or “redemption” in times of famine or plague.
HOMILETIC ANALYSIS.— 1 Corinthians 4:6
Kings; Real and False.
I. Where to look for the true kings.—“How it strikes a stranger” used to be the title of a pleasant bit of thinly veiled satire on many of the commonest facts and customs of our daily life, familiarity with which has dulled in us the perception of their absurdity or their unrighteousness. Had one of the “principalities and powers” from “the heavenly places” been told off, in the days of our Epistle, to guide through the Roman world a “stranger” from some other planet, and had been asked to show his planetary charge the men of that age who were destined to stand forth in all future ages as its greatest, and to leave their work most deeply on the centuries “after Christ,” he would have conducted him to no philosophers or statesmen, but to a scattered dozen or so of Galilean country-people, who were beginning to be distinguished in their own obscure circle of friends as “the apostles”! “Find me, let me see,” says the visitant from the distant sphere, “the greatest man of the time, the man who will be seen by-and-by to count for most in the story of your race, the man whose influence and example and teaching are going to live and grow and govern your world’s life after he is gone. Where is the king of the world?” Certainly not within any then recent, or any then coming years, upon the throne of the Cæsars. The Stoics said more worthily, “The wise man is king”; but could hardly just then have found our inquirer a wise man of the first rank. As the verdict of the ages has pronounced, as the eliminating process of the oblivion of history has left names emergent from the general obscurity and forgetfulness of the remote past, our visitor would have needed conducting to a humble lodging in the city of Ephesus, to see a by no means striking-looking Jew sitting at work, with roughened, dirty hands, making goat-hair tent-cloth; perhaps, as he does so, dictating a letter to a friendly amanuensis who sits beside him, taking down from his lips, in only moderately good Greek, thoughts which are often sadly broken in their grammatical expression—sentences which, what with the pauses to allow for the writing down and with the impetuousness of the thinker’s heart, not seldom get very disjointed in their logical form. Or they might happen to find him on the Jewish Sabbath, a private person in some synagogue, taking what opportunity he can get of discussing the story and the claims of one Jesus of Nazareth, to whom he seems greatly devoted. And he has a strangely unroyal story of persecution from his own friends and countrymen, of repeated scourgings from Roman lictor and Jewish synagogue officers, of shipwrecks and hunger and cold, and want of necessary clothing. Yet that man’s name is going to stand forth as the foremost name of the age, as the most influential ruler of the thoughts and morals and activities and destinies of that and all after-ages. Our visitor might well wonder at the topsy-turveydom of the world where such things can be; where the kings are “fools” and “weak,” “despised,” “hungry,” “naked,” “buffeted” the “refuse” of the world, and where the “puffed-up” Corinthians, “full” of nothing but self-esteem, are kings and “judges,” forsooth, of apostles; where “the world knows nothing of its greatest man.” [
1. A commonplace of the cynical moralist in all ages. The age is past, the men are dead, before the sorting-out process of history relegates to their real obscurity many who lived loudest to the public ear and most obtrusive to the public eye in their own generation, and leaves the really great and strong and good and helpful to stand forth, like the temples of some ancient city amidst the wreck of the common buildings or the waste from which the very traces of other slighter edifices have disappeared.
2. The men of thought are really the kings of the race. Man is, in the last analysis of things, ruled by Mind; and, still more, by Mind plus Character. The royalty of Mind apart from principle has indeed the golden head, but the feet are of clay, and it cannot permanently stand the shocks and tests of time.
3. Paul would have said—and it is after all the Truth—“Jesus Christ is King; I am only king ‘in Him.’ ” And if in the year 27 A.D. our visitor from some other sphere had sought for the Man, the Name, the Ruler of the world, he must indeed have seen a Tiberius on the Imperial throne, the absolute ruler of the lives of millions of men, a monster of cruelty and vice, surfeited to utter nausea with the banquet of his own vicious pleasures, but must have turned away from him to far-away Judæa, to a desolate district amongst its most rugged mountain region, to find a peasant Carpenter, alone, hungry, tempted to help Himself to miraculous bread, seeing that His Father in heaven seemed to have left Him in a wilderness to starve. And yet earlier, though Magi from the East aimed more nearly true, when they sought the King, not in Rome or Athens, but in Jerusalem, yet even they missed the mark. The King was a Babe in a manger in a village khan in Bethlehem. And later they would have found Him on a cross.
4. The law of disturbed, topsy-turveyed order holds good of the King, and of His apostles, and of His people. The “meek are the heirs of the earth” (Matthew 5:5). The world is “out of joint.” The Problem of Evil faces us, sooner or later, in every path of thought and inquiry we pursue, no matter what direction we take. For “God hath appointed” (1 Corinthians 4:9).
5. One thing, then, and one only, is clear: that Paul, or any other servant of God, should, and can afford to, go simply, directly forward day by day, doing duty, doing right, speaking all the message of God which is given him, bearing to be called a “fool” and “weak,” to be buffeted whilst he only “entreats,” to be “persecuted” etc. (as 1 Corinthians 4:10), and leaving all question of the effect of his life, and of the estimate man forms of him (1 Corinthians 4:3 above), and of the rank he will by-and-by take before God and man. It will take care of itself. God will take care of it and of him. Once Paul stood at the bar of Felix. Soon after, Felix sat trembling before the arraignment of the man of conscience (Acts 24:16). And which to-day does all the world count the greater, nobler man? But meanwhile:]
II. What a “royal” life! (1 Corinthians 4:10).—
1. The greatest man of the time is the “filth” and “offscouring” of the world! The World—and even the Church of Corinth—are holding continually their “day” of judgment (1 Corinthians 4:3). And, as though in petty mimicry of that greater “Day” the sequel of whose sentence shall be that out of the kingdom of the Son of Man shall be gathered “all things that offend” (Matthew 13:41), they are sweeping out into the Gehenna of their condemnation and rejection Paul and his fellow-apostles.
2. Yet the kings, God’s true kings, do come to their kingdom (1 Corinthians 4:8). Their Lord has received His throne. He was cast out and rejected as though He had been the “off-scouring” of all kings. But His vindication and glory have come. And it is the pledge and foretaste of their vindication and glory and enthronement in the day when “the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father” (Matthew 13:43). When their Lord comes in His glory, they come into theirs.
3. A “royal” life! Why, it is hardly the life of common, peaceable, happy citizens! Rather call it the death-in-life of gladiators or criminals. Year after year it is one battle with forces and men, wholly evil, before which it seems certain they must succumb. [Yet they conquer by dying; as did their Lord. “It is finished!” is the cry of a Conqueror. Every one “that falleth on this stone shall be broken.” Let the hard-pressed, persecuted Christian be patient. The victory is with the dying ones of the amphitheatre. How often has a dying Stephen pricked deeply the conscience of a Paul! And not only are the “angels” looking on. The Lord Himself is amongst the deeply interested spectators.] The world’s kings are in the arena, gazed at, scoffed at, buffeted, slain. But one touch transforms it all! God has appointed it, has thus exhibited them in the world’s great amphitheatre; and as they fall one after another, by the sword, the cross, the scourge, the fire, they cry, dying, “It is for Christ’s sake!”
III. “We apostles, doomed to die, salute you!” Who are these human spectators whom the Apostolic band salutes from the arena? Those who sit complacently there criticising this Paul so confidently, as good judges might appraise the points of a good gladiator or a criminal down there in the sand; setting up, playing off one against another, of the dying band exhibited there; with lofty superiority of wisdom and strength shouting at them their taunts of “Weak!” and “Fools!” Who are these who are so “full” of knowledge that a Paul can teach them nothing more? Such judges of an apostle that they can weigh up and measure off and ticket with the exact bulk and size and value they have determined, a Paul, or a Cephas, or an Apollos? Why, one would think that they were “full” and needed hardly any more of God and His bounty; or, at least, that the Judgment was indeed over, and that they had already entered into the glory and the triumph of the “Kingdom of God,” in its eternal and supreme form! These sit and talk and judge like kings! Yet every rag of their royal robe of wisdom and strength and Christian standing they owe to another. What is their own? And how nearly all do they, under Christ, owe to those very men, Paul and Apollos! To whom, moreover, do they owe it that there ever came a Paul into their city to bring the “glad tidings” of the King and the Kingdom? The premier Church in European Christianity? Perhaps; but if they sit upon the spectators’ benches, in quasi-royal state, whilst apostles struggle and suffer and die down below, observed of angels and scorned of men, who seated them there? Yes, one thing is their own. God who, mediately or immediately, gave them all besides, never gave them the self-conceit which puffs them up. And, little as they suspect it, their inflated notion of their ability to judge between teacher and teacher, and their overweening, swelling self-centering of thought, make them the easy, willing bondmen of any party leader who will flatter their judgment and say “Yes” to their opinions. These inflated, “windbag” “kings” of Corinth are really subjects after all; but they have made their own yoke, and, in the vain wisdom of their foolish heart, have chosen their party-leaders for their lords. The servant of his own vain, darkened heart (Romans 1:21) readily becomes the “servant of man” (1 Corinthians 7:23). If only a man may be honoured and flattered in the choosing of his own tyrant, he will wear any yoke. The sham king easily becomes the real slave! [Much of the revolt of unbelief against “orthodoxy” means only a change of masters. Free-thought is often entirely under the yoke of great names. Much in the same way as some nations have thrown off the yoke of an ancient, native dynasty of kings, only to put themselves under the yoke of a dictator or a despot, perhaps an alien. But then it is something to have chosen your own despot and your own bondage! “Heresy” originally meant only “choice”; but moral conditions and evil so constantly mingle with and colour and direct choice, that the evil connotation early attached itself to the word (beginning to appear even in Titus 3:10). There are schools of unbelief as well as of belief, where learners obediently take in the master’s principles. Self-will doubts on authority as certainly as many Christians must needs believe on authority.]
[NOTE on 1 Corinthians 4:13.—Readers of this Commentary, on both sides of the Atlantic, who are interested in the Evangelical Revival in England in the eighteenth century, may find an apposite and helpful parallel to this verse in the following words of a prominent helper of John Wesley in the early days of the movement: “There was law for us, but we could not find a magistrate who had courage or honesty enough to put it in force. [No Gallio to drive the persecutors from the judgment seat.] Men of all ranks used their power and influence to stop the blessed work of God. They spoke all manner of evil against the work and the instruments employed therein. They dispensed with two or three awakened clergymen tolerably well; these were regularly ordained, men of learning, gentlemen, and divines; but to see a ploughman or an honest mechanic stand out to preach the Gospel, it was insufferable. Hell was roused from beneath.… Layman and ecclesiastic joined heart and hand to suppress these pestilent fellows; not with acts of kindness, Scripture, or reason, but with invectives and lies. Dirt, rotten eggs, brickbats, stones, cudgels—these were Satan’s arguments in vindication of his own cause. It was the common cry in town and country: ‘Press them for soldiers, send them on board a man of war, transport them, beat them, stone them, send them to prison, or knock out their brains, and despatch them at once, for there is no law for them.’ ” (Christopher Hopper, Lives of Early Methodist Preachers, i. 191 sq.). The early history of the Friends in England abounds in many parallel stories of sufferings. In fact, such persecution is the opprobrium of no one Church, nor of “The Church” in any true sense. The persecutors may in name be Christians, but it is the work of the evil heart in man, in every age and Church, expressing in the like violence its hatred of good. Paul should be pictured, not as a prince-apostle, but as a working, tent-maker evangelist, and a Jew to boot; often roughly handled; and always, by the educated and high-placed of his day, when they happened to hear of such an obscure person, taken at the world’s valuation of an early Methodist lay evangelist or a Quaker preacher.]
APPENDED NOTES
1 Corinthians 4:11 sqq. Since it was by preaching and teaching that Paul laid the foundation of the Church of Corinth, the builders must be different kinds of teachers. Since the matter taught is the material the teacher uses, this must be the gold, silver, wood, straw, etc. The results produced by the teacher in the hearts and lives of his hearer are the building he erects. He may produce good results which will last for ever and be to him an eternal joy and glory. Since these results are altogether the work of God, and are revealed in their grandeur only in the great day, they are a “reward” given by God in that day for work done on earth. But a teacher may produce results which now appear great and substantial, but which will then be found utterly worthless. He may gather round him a large number of hearers, may interest them, and teach them much that is elegant and for this life useful, and yet fail to produce in or through them results which will abide for ever. If so, the great day will destroy his work and proclaim its worthlessness. But he may be said to build upon the one foundation, Jesus Christ. For he is a professed Christian teacher, and people go to hear him as such. He may be a sincere, though mistaken Christian believer, and therefore be himself saved. But his work, as a teacher, is a failure. Now the permanence of a teacher’s work depends upon the matter taught. The soul-saving truths of the Gospel enter into men’s hearts and lives, and produce abiding results. All other teaching will produce only temporary results. We understand, therefore, by the wood and straw whatever teaching does not impart or nourish spiritual life. The three terms suggest the various kinds of such teaching. It may be clever or foolish, new or old, true or false; but not subversive of the “foundation,” or it would come under the severer censure of 1 Corinthians 4:16 sq.… We have Christian examples in many of the trifling and speculative discussions which have been frequent in all ages. We also learn that even of the teaching which produces abiding results there are different degrees of worth; in proportion, no doubt, to the fulness and purity with which the teaching of Christ is reproduced. In both cases the results are the results, lasting or transitory, produced in the hearers’ hearts by the use of these materials; results which are in some sense a standing embodiment of the teaching.—Dr. Beet.
“By Fire.”—
1. It may be homiletically useful to cast into orderly shape the Bible use of “Fire.” Needless to say that the Bible is not pledged to any such unscientific piece of obsolete antiquity as that Fire is an Element—one of four. It is content to take the visible fact, and its palpable effects, as a serviceable illustration, apprehended readily by the child or the heathen, and perfectly good as an illustration, whatever be the scientific revision of our knowledge of the state of the case. For teaching purposes Fire is Heat and, still more, Flame. Flame is now understood to be gas so highly heated as to become in some degree luminous, and generally made more luminous by being loaded with incandescent particles, whether of carbon or other matter. That is nothing new to the Divine Author of Scripture and of Nature; nor was it unworthy of Him, or untrue, that what was to be the popularly apprehensible phenomenon should in the original planning of Nature be so adjusted and adapted as to lend itself well to teach moral truth. Indeed, the devout students of Nature find that both the superficial, phenomenal facts and the deep scientific “laws” are alike parabolic and didactic Nature is full of man, and of truth which man wants. Creation is didactic. “Creation is redemptive.”
2. A convenient starting-point is Hebrews 12:29: “Our God is a consuming fire.” Closely connected with “God is Light.” The difference is here: Light is what God is in Himself; fire what He is in relation to (sinful) mankind. Hence frequently the chosen symbol of His self-manifestation,: the Bush, Exodus 3:2; the Pillar, Exodus 40:38; Tongues of Pentecost, Acts 2:3; Sinai, Exodus 19:8; Exodus 24:17; Deuteronomy 4:36; Vision of God’s glory, Ezekiel 1:4; Exodus 24:9 (N.B. Nadab and Abihu), Daniel 7:9; Revelation 4:2. In Isaiah 4:5 we have three manifesting symbols of God combined—light, radiant splendour, burning fire. Still more frequently the accompaniment of His self-manifestation: e.g. “After the earthquake a fire,” 1 Kings 19:12; “fire goeth before Him,” Psalms 97:8. Loosely connected with all this are the fiery Chariot and Horses sent for Elijah, 2 Kings 2:11; fiery Chariots round about Elisha, 2 Kings 6:17. This last and the Pillar over Israel, or the Shekinah in its midst, are gathered up in Zechariah 2:5.
3. Hence when He accepted, “took,” “ate,” appropriated, a sacrifice, it was by a fiery manifestation. E.g. at the Ordination of Aaron and the Inauguration of the priestly system and ritual, Leviticus 9:24. So at the Dedication of Solomon’s Temple, 2 Chronicles 7:1. And in less important instances: Carmel, 1 Kings 18; on Araunah’s threshing floor, 1 Chronicles 21:26; Gideon’s sacrifice, Judges 6:21. The Burnt Offering, as distinguished from the Sin and Peace Offerings, and as symbol of an entire surrender on man’s part and an entire appropriation on God’s part, was (as its name says) burnt with fire. And this links on the foregoing to the twofold employment of the symbol as exhibiting the active relation of a Holy God to sinful man.
4. All that could, so to say, be volatilised went up purified and in perfect acceptance; all that was gross and earthly was left behind, to be cast out. Hence, “Baptized with … fire,” Matthew 3:11; Malachi 3:2 brings out the action of the refiner’s fire upon metals. So Isaiah 4:4, “Purged Jerusalem by the Spirit of Judgment and the Spirit of Burning”; “in that day,” primarily the return of a purified remnant from Babylon, then the setting up of a Christian Zion, perhaps, by-and-by, a restored and purified Israel once more. Isaiah 30:23, and more remotely still Isaiah 29:6, perhaps may better come in later on. The same Holiness which is purifying to the man who desires to be purified, burns as a consuming fire against sin and the sinner who will not be parted from his sin. Hence fire frequently sets forth the holy, active antagonism to evil and evil men, in defence of His people. Isaiah 30:27, “His tongue a devouring fire; lips full of indignation.” “Fury like a fire,” Jeremiah 4:4 (against unfaithful Judah and Jerusalem), Jeremiah 21:2. So it proved, Lamentations 3:3. So against the heathen and Idumæa, Ezekiel 36:5; against Gog, Ezekiel 38:18. [Psalms 83:14; Psalms 140:10; Ezekiel 24:9; Amos 5:6.] God and His people are so identified that they become a fire too, Obadiah 1:18; Zechariah 12:6. So in Isaiah 30:27 we have it again. Fire purging the faithful from the unfaithful, sifting the nations, then burning up the pile of Tophet. [But “the King” may (as Talmud) be the Eternal King, and Tophet the burning-place outside the purified, ideal Jerusalem, where all the refuse is to be cast (Matthew 13:50).] Certainly the twofold action is seen in Isaiah 31:9, “Fire in Zion; furnace in Jerusalem”; Isaiah 33:14. As the Assyrian invasion approached, and the denunciations of holy wrath against sinners in and enemies of Zion, “sinners in Zion are afraid.” “Who can dwell with devouring fire?” cry they, “… with everlasting burnings?” i.e. with a God whose holy antagonism to sin never relaxes, never spares, never ends. 1 Corinthians 4:15 is the answer. But the principle is here which has occasioned and justified a very frequent use made of this text. God’s fierce, fiery antagonism to sin cannot cease unless sin cease—must last everlastingly if sinners live on everlastingly sinners still. Same connection appears in Nahum 1:6. Indeed, the whole cycle of events connected with the Assyrian invasion seems the foundation of much Bible language concerning the punishment of wicked. Not only such as Psalms 46:9 (usually [not in Speaker] connected with these events), but Isaiah 9:5, bring up the fires with which the dead bodies and the wreck of the host were cleared away (1 Corinthians 9:5 = no fighting, no blood, but simply burning of the litter and refuse and the dead), with, by the usual analogy, a future fulfilment. Isaiah 66:24 (foundation of Mark 9:44 [cf. Stier, Words of L. J., i. 156]; rather the figure of a holy Jerusalem with its Gehenna, its burning-place for all the refuse of the city [Matthew 13:50]); here also the fires on the battle-field after Sennacherib’s defeat are evidently in the mind of the writer. The battle-field is one vast Gehinnom outside the city walls.
5. Many actual examples of God’s vengeance in which fire is the agent of punishment. N.B. these are all examples of sins very directly against His holiness and unique position and claims. Nadab and Abihu, Leviticus 10:2; Taberah, Numbers 11:2; Achan, Joshua 7:25; Korah, Numbers 16:35; Elijah and the captains, 2 Kings 1:10 (unless, indeed, this be, first and chiefly, God’s manifestation of Himself, appealing both to Elijah and to the witnesses and hearers of the event). Above all Sodom, Genesis 19:24; referred to in Luke 17:29; and at least shaping the language of Psalms 11:6; Ezekiel 38:22; Revelation 21:18. [Imagery of Malachi 4:1 is anticipated by Genesis 19:24; Genesis 19:23.]
6. So, coming to the New Testament, we find three great cycles of type: (a) Sodom, (b) Gehinnom, (c) Assyrian invasion.
NEW TESTAMENT
1. General.—God’s vengeance against sin is fiery, Matthew 3:10 (? primarily the Jewish nation), “Tree hewn down and cast into the fire”; Hebrews 6:8, the doom of the persistently barren ground. Also of individuals, Matthew 7:19; Luke 3:9; Hebrews 10:27, “Judgment and fiery indignation; 2 These. 1 Corinthians 1:8, “In flaming fire taking vengeance.”
2. God’s holiness is testing.— 1 Corinthians 3:13 [though there is here very little of all this typology; hardly more than the commonly observed action of fire]; 2 Peter 3:7 (Luke 12:49 is connected).
3. Sodom.— Jude 1:7, “Suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” Revelation 19:20; Revelation 20:10, “Lake of fire and brimstone, where the Beast and the False Prophet are” [Revelation 18:9, Babylon; cf. Abraham beholding the ascending smoke of Sodom]; the Devil; Gog and Magog deceived by him (obvious ref. to Ezekiel 38:22); who-soever “not found written in the book of life.” Revelation 14:10, worshippers of the beast and his image, who have received his mark.
4. Gehenna.— Matthew 18:9, “Worm dieth not,” etc.; Mark 9:44, referring to Isaiah 66. “Furnace of fire,” Matthew 13:42; Matthew 13:50, where the latter verse, having nothing in the parable connected with it to suggest it—the fish are cast into the water—shows that the phrase had become, or was now first made by Christ, a customary equivalent for the doom of the wicked.
5. The battle-field.—Linked with Mark 9, as above, but originating the phrase “everlasting burnings.” In Matthew 25:41; figure (almost?) lost. So completely the revelation of the future that we must say: “Whatever be the nature of the punishment of a lost, embodied spirit, if we might ask him what he suffered, he would say, ‘Fire,’ as the only earthly analogy available.”
6. Mark 9:47. A difficult verse. Every man shall—must—come into contact with the holiness of God. Will a man let it (Him) burn away all impurity, and himself thus become a sacrifice salted with grace, and so accepted? Or, refusing this, will he simply meet and feel the fire which never burns itself out?
1 Corinthians 4:16. There were Hebrew converts in Corinth, and such would easily catch St. Paul’s allusion … to the national Temple. This national Temple in the Apostle’s mind clearly enlarges and transfigures itself into a Temple spiritual. This living Temple of the Catholic Church is one Temple; it is one, yet elastic; it grows and expands, associating to itself and assimilating, so to speak, many lateral chapels. It is, in fact, an organic unity of several organs, each it itself a unity; it is, in brief, a unity of many contained unities. Each several Church, therefore, of the Catholic Church is the Catholic Church in miniature, so that of the whole all the several parts are themselves wholes; each branch of the Tree is a tree planted in Christ.—Evans, in “Speaker.”
SEPARATE HOMILIES
1 Corinthians 4:7. Human Differences; their Origin and Design.
I. Some modern scientific thought is tending to an over-emphatic assertion of the principle of Paul’s appeal. According to it, there is nothing—not even conscience—which is not simply the special and most recent result in the individual of processes, or of a conflict of processes, and, so to speak, of interests, acting and interacting and reacting through long ages and issuing in man. Thinking, willing, desiring, even the moral judgments—all are the necessary and quasi-mechanical outcome of the unbrokenly continuous past of man’s natural antecedents. Nothing is his own; he has so utterly “received” everything he has and is, that nothing is ever really begun de novo in his life; nothing is ever in any real sense originated within the man himself; there is no true independence, nor creative power in the will, no freedom. The natural heart over-does its protest, and in the opposite direction would tend to claim everything, except of course the obviously derived physical part of manhood and some features and degrees of capacity and inclination which are part of the original draught of that “character” in which plainly the individual has no choice. Man feels that he is not the mere creature of, at any rate, his present-day and personal environment. He is made by circumstances, but he is the master of circumstances; indeed, he is often first, and intentionally, the maker of the circumstances and conditions which then make him. He will not believe that it is only an illusion when he seems to find an independent power of origination and creation in his will. The man made by “self-help” is apt indeed to be so much his ideal; any help from the outside, and above all from God, is so apt to be, to all intents and purposes, out of his calculations and thanks; that he is his own maker, his own god. The little street Arab, in the mission school belonging to a London chapel, whose minister gave me the fact, refused point-blank to say, “Give us this day our daily bread.” “I shan’t ask nobody; I can get my own bread” (H. J. F., from W. J. H.). He is typical of the natural heart. The Corinthian heart is “rich,” is “full,” and “reigns” royally, not only without Paul, but without God. It is the danger of wealth; of high intellectual endowment, conscious of its own nobility of powers and exulting in every conquest of a new field; of all strong character, which cannot help but know its own force, finding its judgment sound, its business instincts sure and correct, other men’s will obedient and plastic before its volitions. “Our lips are our own; who is Lord over us?” (Psalms 12:4) is no abnormal or isolated independence. It is the very antithesis of “the little child,” in his readiness to believe and to do what he is told, and in his simple and natural and acknowledged dependence upon “father” for all he has and wants. But because it is so hard for the man—the manlier the harder—to “show himself the man amongst men” (1 Kings 2:2) and to be notwithstanding only “a little child before God,” it is therefore reputed “easier” for women and children to be religious than for men to be. Man’s nobility, his Godlikeness, is his snare. He tends to deny any higher, any God, but himself. Paul appeals to such: “What hast thou that thou didst not receive?” etc.
II.
1. Natural character and constitution.—“From my parents?” Yes. “From my physical tempering together and make?” Yes. But all these only spell: “G-O-D.” To a Christian man of science what is or may be proved of (popularly so-called) Evolution is only so much more ascertained detail about the method of God in creation, the processes and instrumentalities He has employed. We are continually putting more and more numerous links into the chain of physical antecedents and consequents which links the will of God to the finished product; we find links almost innumerable where our fathers neither knew nor suspected any. But to the Christian thinker the chain still begins at God, and God is still as really in every link as when they were fewer. Our fathers believed God in immediate and direct contact with the created thing. If we are to be compelled to interpose a complex physical process between the Creator and, e.g., the finished individual man, yet He will be as really the Creator as ever. [The little child says, “God made me.” The parent, or the physician, or the modern physiologist, armed with all microscopic and other implements of the minutest observation and research, if he be a Christian, still says as simply as the little child, “God made me”; although, where the ignorance of the child or the uninstructed adult knows and dreams of nothing, he has watched a curious and highly complex physical process. To reconcile all that may emerge as proved fact in the evolutionary sketch of the history of creation, with a belief in a personal Creator, is only the “God made me” example on a larger scale.] “Tell me what your natural constitution is, what your inherited mental characteristics are. Tell me how the most recent scientific men settle questions of heredity and the like. I say God made you all that, and just that and no other sort of man. They are only ascertaining and exhibiting better than could ever be done before how He made you. You have nothing but what He put into you: your capacities and faculties are His gifts.” “But I have worked hard for my bit of money; I was up whilst other lazy people were lying in bed; I kept my eyes open, whilst other men were dreaming and let the chances slip, or never saw chances which I seized.” And so on. “True; and much of it—all the patient industry, the ungrudging labour, the diligent cultivation of natural powers, the honest thrift that watched every penny—all these and more are credit to the successful man. But remember that the original force of sense and business sagacity, the robust physical basis which made all this successful activity possible, where so many others were handicapped by sickness or other physical disability, are in the last analysis of all thought, God. He gave these as your capital, and in a score of ways He might have spoiled your returns from it, if He had pleased.” “Thou receivedst.”
2. The original surroundings and home.—No man chooses his own parents or birthplace, important factors as these are in all his after-career. “Chance!” is meaningless; it is no account of the matter at all; it is only a way of avoiding giving an account of it. It is only the baffled mind making its escape from the problem, covering its retreat—cuttle-fish fashion—with a dense wordy cloud. The sovereignty of God in election had in it this much of truth, evident in both Scripture and experience, that a thousand circumstances and conditions of life, all of which had some connection with, and influence upon, a man’s final salvation, nearly or more remotely, were beyond his control, and from the first were settled, quite outside his own choice. Whether he should see the light in a heathen or in a Christian land, for example, is in vitally close connection with the question of a man’s ultimate salvation, and, meanwhile, with his degree of moral responsibility, his standing and career and the influence of his life; this and numberless other elements in the case are ordered by rules which lie quite out of our sight, and are ordered by God. “Election” doctrine did not take sufficient account of a grace which held every man accountable for only the light and advantages he actually enjoyed, and which, on the other hand, made it possible for a man to be saved in any circumstances and with even a very limited measure of light. But, plainly, these things men “received.” Men should be thankful for, not vulgarly or proudly boastful of, the social advantages of birth and station. These are no mean elements, when consecrated, in conspicuous success for God. The “gentleman” born, or the man of inherited wealth, is so much the more debtor to God to use these for the glory of Him who gave them, apart from all choice or merit in their possessor.
3. All “natural” goodness is grace, the gift of God.—All points of “natural” beauty of character—unselfishness, generosity, truthfulness; and, much more, all early tenderness of conscience, all early disposition towards good and towards God; such early “goodness” as makes some say, “They were naturally religious from their childhood,”—all are of God. The “natural” is all grace; the preliminary gift of the Holy Spirit. “Man received it.” [The old theologians who drew stern pictures of human nature in its “total depravity” and its utter ruin and its entireness of evil, were dealing rather with a necessary conception of clear theological thought than with actual human nature. It was needful to state, as precisely and exactly as Scripture language, interpreted and verified by observation and experience—these being in their turn lighted up and explained by Scripture statements—would make it possible and would require, what human nature would have been, and would be again, without the grace of God. And no man, who knows his own heart, can doubt that, if that grace were wholly withdrawn, and himself were simply left to temptation, there is no depth to which he might not sink, no length to which he might not depart from God. But the old sketch of human nature wanted its hard, true outlines softening, and the whole picture transfusing, with the glow and life and tenderness of the grace of God shown in Christ to every man. Mere human nature, wholly evil, unrelieved by grace, has never been anything but a theological conception. In fact, there is good in every man; very much, and very early, good in very many. “But ‘thou hast received’ it. It is not thyself, but God, not nature, but grace, even before any conversion, or the desire to be converted. ‘Why dost thou glory?’ etc.”
4. Never will right hearts fells this more deeply and wholly true than when they stand, “saved,” in heaven’s eternal security. All their crowns of holiness, happiness, earthly sainthood, heavenly service, all will be cast before Him who gave them all. There at last “No flesh will glory in His presence!”