Tag: 1 Corinthians

Posted on

Is Baptism a Part of the Gospel Message?

1 Corinthians 1

10I appeal to you, brothers,] in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. 11My brothers, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas’”; still another, “I follow Christ.”

13Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul? 14I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. 16(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) 17For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. (1 Corinthians 1:10-17, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

What is required for salvation?

That’s a basic question that every religious system should be able to answer.

Traditional Christianity says that salvation comes to those who place their faith in Jesus, who died on a cross to pay the penalty that we deserve for our sins.

However, there are some within the Christian tradition who hold to the view that baptism is an essential step in the salvation process. So in addition to believing in Jesus, one must also be physically baptized, with water, in order to be fully saved.

Is this true? Does one need to be baptized in order to be saved?

I think this passage in 1 Corinthians gives us some insight to address this question.

The context of this passage is that Paul is addressing some problems in the Corinthian church that were creating divisions.

The source of these divisions is that people in the church were aligning themselves with different leaders. I wrote about this passage and the divisions that we can experience in my blog post  “Name Dropping in the Early Church”, as well as my post, “Political Divisions within the Church”.

What’s interesting about this passage, though, is that Paul, while addressing the divisions that were occurring in the church, tangentially speaks to the issue of baptism.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

The source of the divisions is that people in the church were aligning themselves with various leaders. These leaders were becoming the central figure for each faction instead of Jesus being the central figure for the whole church. So in essence, you had the Paul faction, the Apollos faction, the Cephas faction and so on.

Paul’s argument is that Jesus isn’t divided. Therefore, his church shouldn’t be divided into factions of people who are identifying with certain popular figures. Instead, the church should be united with everyone identifying with and following Jesus.

To make his case, Paul asks a number of rhetorical questions:

Was Paul crucified for you? (Obviously, the answer is NO)

Were you baptized into the name of Paul? (Again, the answer is obviously NO)

Paul then makes an interesting statement. He says that he is thankful that he didn’t baptize many of the Corinthians. He is glad about that because then they could not claim to have been baptized into Paul’s name. Paul did not want believers making him more important than Jesus.

This begs the question: if baptism is essential for salvation, why would Paul be thankful and glad that he didn’t baptize many people? Wouldn’t he be sad that he hadn’t been able to save many people?

Paul completes his thought with the following statement:

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel

it’s easy to gloss over this statement but what’s important is the fact that Paul is claiming that his goal, his mandate, was to preach the gospel.

A question I have often asked people when engaging in this discussion:

If a person responds to the gospel, will they be saved?

I think most Christians would agree that the gospel message contains everything that is necessary for a person to become saved if they respond positively to the message.

In fact, Paul, n Romans 1:16-17 says,

I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 17For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.

According to Paul, the gospel “is the power of God unto salvation.”

Now if the gospel message saves people and Paul says that he was sent by Christ to preach the gospel and NOT baptize people, then clearly, baptism is NOT a part of the salvation message, which means it is NOT necessary for a person to be saved.

This does not mean that baptism is not important or that there isn’t some significance to it. There is. It’s just not necessary to be saved.

To learn more about what baptism is and its significance to the Christian, please read the following related posts:

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What do you think are the essential elements of the gospel message? 

If baptism is necessary for salvation why does Paul say that Jesus did not send him to baptize but to preach the gospel?

If baptism is NOT necessary for salvation, what is the purpose? Why is it practiced?

In verse 13, Paul asks the question, “were you baptized into the name of Paul?” What do you think that means? What does it mean to be baptized “into the name” of another person? How does this understanding of the word “baptize” shed light on the issue of whether baptism is necessary for salvation or not?

 

Photo by Alex Shute on Unsplash

Posted on

Will Christians Really Experience a Bodily Resurrection?

1 Corinthians 15

12But tell me this—since we preach that Christ rose from the dead, why are some of you saying there will be no resurrection of the dead? 13For if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised either. 14And if Christ was not raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your trust in God is useless. 15And we apostles would all be lying about God, for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave, but that can’t be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. 16If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. 17And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless, and you are still under condemnation for your sins. 18In that case, all who have died believing in Christ have perished! 19And if we have hope in Christ only for this life, we are the most miserable people in the world.

20But the fact is that Christ has been raised from the dead. He has become the first of a great harvest of those who will be raised to life again. (1 Corinthians 15:12-20, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

The resurrection of Jesus is one of the cornerstone doctrines that sets Christianity apart from all other religions.

The resurrection is vitally important because without the resurrection, there is no Christianity. What we think of as Christianity just becomes another religion where its followers seek to adhere to the advice and admonitions of a self-proclaimed guru.

Quite simply, the resurrection proves that Jesus is God, which is significant because only God could provide complete atonement for the sins of mankind. if you want to understand the theological ramifications of the resurrection, I explain more of the logical reasoning behind this idea in my post “He is Risen…Why Does it Matter?”

In this section of his letter to the Corinthians, Paul is responding to an apparent misunderstanding about the resurrection that was circulating within the church.

It seems that many in the church could not wrap their mind around the idea that they would experience a bodily resurrection. This aligns with prevalent Greek understanding at that time, in which the body was seen as a prison or a shell for the soul. Greek philosophy had a concept of the immortality of the soul but not so much for the body.

In this passage, Paul addresses the faulty thinking that denied a future bodily resurrection. His argument is as follows:

    • If there is no such thing as a resurrection, then obviously, Christ was not resurrected (verse 13)
    • If Christ hasn’t been raised (resurrected) then our preaching is in vain (wasted) and as a result, your faith is in vain because it is predicated on the message we preached (verse 14)
    • In addition, we are then false witnesses because we preached the resurrection of Jesus whom God did not raise (verse 15)
    • Hence, If Christ hasn’t been raised, your faith is worthless and you are still in your sins; they have not been paid for (verse 17)
    • Furthermore, those who have died then have perished (verse 18)
    • Therefore, if the hope of Christ is for this life only, we should be pitied (verse 19)

Paul then ends the argument in verse 20, saying:

But the fact is that Christ has been raised from the dead. He has become the first of a great harvest of those who will be raised to life again. [emphasis added]

In short, without a resurrection, there can be no salvation and as a result, this life is all there is. That makes life ultimately meaningless and Christianity is just a nihilistic ideology with lipstick.

The resurrection is not only the cornerstone of the Christian faith, proving that Jesus is God and therefore His death completely atones for the sins of mankind, but the resurrection also signifies that those who believe in Christ will ALSO experience a bodily resurrection, just as Jesus did.

So if you like your body, the good news is that you will have an even better model in eternity. And if you DON’T like your body for whatever reason, you can rest assured that your resurrected body will be an upgrade, free from defects, flaws and imperfections.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

Reflection

What has been your concept of life after death? In other words, what do you imagine heaven to be like for you and others who are there?

How does the concept of having a resurrected body align or contradict your thinking about heaven and eternal life?

How confident are you in the resurrection of Jesus? What are some reasons that cause you to doubt whether it is actually true?

If Jesus was not resurrected, how do you explain the crucifixion? What was it’s purpose? What did it accomplish?

 

Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Posted on

What is Sexual Immorality?

1 Corinthians 7

1Now about the questions you asked in your letter. Yes, it is good to live a celibate life. 2But because there is so much sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman should have her own husband.

3The husband should not deprive his wife of sexual intimacy, which is her right as a married woman, nor should the wife deprive her husband. 4The wife gives authority over her body to her husband, and the husband also gives authority over his body to his wife. 5So do not deprive each other of sexual relations. The only exception to this rule would be the agreement of both husband and wife to refrain from sexual intimacy for a limited time, so they can give themselves more completely to prayer. Afterward they should come together again so that Satan won’t be able to tempt them because of their lack of self-control. 6This is only my suggestion. It’s not meant to be an absolute rule. 7I wish everyone could get along without marrying, just as I do. But we are not all the same. God gives some the gift of marriage, and to others he gives the gift of singleness. 8Now I say to those who aren’t married and to widows—it’s better to stay unmarried, just as I am. 9But if they can’t control themselves, they should go ahead and marry. It’s better to marry than to burn with lust. (1 Corinthians 7:1-8, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

We live in a highly sexualized culture.  After all, “sex sells” as they say.

Our culture’s current views on sex can be traced back to the sexual revolution of the 1960’s. Until then, it was commonly understood and accepted within the culture that sex was reserved for marriage. Any portrayal outside of that paradigm was generally frowned upon.

I remember watching reruns of “I Love Lucy” as a kid and when they showed Ricky and Lucy’s bedroom, there were two twin beds.

Opening scene of “I Love Lucy” from the episode “Lucy is Envious” (Season 3, Episode 23) showing Lucy and Ricky’s bedroom in which Lucy and Ricky sleep in separate beds.

Now everyone knew that married couples sleep together but there was a stigma associated with sex. It wasn’t talked about and it certainly wasn’t portrayed on screen.

But things started to change in the 1960’s with the sexual revolution, which sought to break down the social mores that existed at the time, promoting sexual activity for anyone who might want to partake, even if you weren’t married.

Sex was just an activity, the thinking went. It was just pleasure. Nothing more, nothing less. Why should two people who wanted to engage in something pleasurable be denied this activity? Why should society shame people who weren’t married but happened to be engaging in intercourse?

And so for the last 50+ years, our culture has engaged in one of the most intense, long-lasting and successful media campaigns to change the culture’s perception of sex.

I say it’s been successful because there is no doubt that our culture’s views and attitudes toward sex have drastically changed over the last 50-60 years. What started with posters and buttons telling us to “Make Love, not War” advanced to TV shows and movies that continued to push the envelope in terms of what was shown to viewers.

Throughout the culture at large, the stigma that existed with people engaging in sex outside of marriage has largely been erased. In fact, the topic of sex, which was once considered taboo and off limits in public is actively promoted by our education system as well as the media in TV shows and movies.

Christians who hold to the authority of the Bible are perhaps the last holdout for the antiquated view that sex is reserved for marriage between a man and woman.

But in recent years, even the Bible has come under attack for its views on sex. Many people who identify as Christians no longer believe that the Bible restricts sexual activity to married couples.

Many Christians believe that it’s ok to have sex before marriage and still others believe that the Bible affirms sexual activity among same-sex couples.

The problem with some of these views is this phrase “sexual immorality”. The Bible clearly condemns sexual immorality in both the Old and New Testaments. There is nowhere in the Bible where sexual immorality is not condemned as sinful.

The question then is: what is sexual immorality? While there may be wider agreement that sexual immorality is wrong (I mean, it’s hard to deny since the word “immoral” is embedded in the phrase), there is less agreement on what activities fall under that larger umbrella term.

This post is not long enough to do justice to this topic, but this passage does give some insight into the issue.

It appears that one of the issues this church was dealing with had to do with prohibited sexual practices. Like our culture, the Corinthian culture was highly sexualized and sexual temptation abounded. Some were suggesting that the remedy for avoiding sexual temptation was a commitment to celibacy, even within the confines of marriage.

Being single himself, Paul affirmed that being celibate has certain advantages. However, his solution for combating sexual temptation was NOT abstinence. Instead, Paul’s solution for those who have strong sexual urges and are struggling to control them is to satisfy those sexual desires within a marriage relationship.

Whatever your definition of sexual immorality is, Paul’s solution to addressing the sexual temptation is to get married and to get busy!

What I find interesting is that Paul says that each MAN should have his own wife and each WOMAN should have her own husband.

In just these few verses, Paul establishes that sex within the confines of marriage between a husband and wife is NOT sexual immorality, but is the antidote to sexual immorality. The strong implication is that any sexual activity that is not between a married man and woman IS sexual immorality.

There are some who undoubtedly will disagree with this assertion, stating that Paul only mentions the marriage relationship and doesn’t mention other potentially acceptable sexual relationships because of cultural reasons.

That is exactly the point though. The Bible clearly condemns sexual immorality but in our culture, morality is no longer tethered to any objective standard.

Hence, the list of activities that are considered sexually immoral and therefore prohibited are continually being condensed by the culture. This means that any appeal to the Bible regarding sexual ethics has to be reframed or explained in such a way to allow for those practices that have traditionally been considered sexually immoral.

This passage certainly isn’t the last word on biblical sexual ethics. It may not even be a main passage used for or against one’s preferred sexual views.

But it’s clear that sexual temptation, which was very strong in this culture and was a major issue within the Corinthian church, prompted Paul to make a statement regarding how to deal with that temptation. The ONE thing he affirms as being appropriate and NOT sexually immoral, is for husbands and wives to be engaged and active sexually.

This is the traditional, biblical view of sexual ethics – that only sex within the context of a marriage union between one man and one woman is ordained by God, and it is clearly affirmed by Paul in this passage.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

How would you define sexual immorality? What do you think is included in that category?

How did you arrive at your answer to the previous question? What role does the Bible play in determining your morality?

Do you think that there are some sexual sins that the Bible prohibited but that are no morally ok? If so, what is the reasoning for your position?

In what ways do you see the culture influencing people’s views on sex and morality in general?

 

Photo by Dima Solomin on Unsplash

Posted on

Dealing with Gray Areas

1 Corinthians 10

23“Everything is permissible”—but not everything is beneficial. “Everything is permissible”—but not everything is constructive. 24Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others.

25Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, 26for, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it.”

27If some unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. 28But if anyone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience’ sake — 29the other man’s conscience, I mean, not yours. For why should my freedom be judged by another’s conscience? 30If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for?

31So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. 32Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God — 33even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved. (1 Corinthians 10:23-33, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

When is the last time you wondered if the meat you were about to eat had been sacrificed to idols?

That’s probably never happened to you but in the New Testament culture, this was a big issue that created a lot of controversy.

The Roman Empire was an amalgamation of many diverse cultures that had been conquered and grafted into the Roman/Greek culture. As a result, there were hundreds of different religions and gods that the people worshiped and animal sacrifice was a normal part of worship for most of these religions.

So the context of this passage is one in which Christians were wrestling with whether or not it was morally right for them to eat a meal with someone when they know the prepared food had been previously sacrificed to a pagan deity and then later sold at the local market.

Though we don’t wrestle with this exact issue today, Paul outlines several principles that enable us to make wise biblical decisions when we’re faced with unclear moral choices today. In some Christian circles, we refer to these issues as “gray areas” – issues the Bible doesn’t specifically speak about but there’s an element of the issue that might make it morally questionable.

Classic “gray areas” might include: drinking, smoking, dancing, gambling, watching R-rated movies, listening to certain kinds of music, etc.

The Bible never says anything about R-rated movies, as movies didn’t even exist until a little over 100 years ago. So how can we know whether it’s ok to partake in some of these activities that some have questioned?

Paul gives a number of principles that we can apply to current situations.

The first thing Paul says is that even though we may be permitted to do certain things (in other words, it doesn’t clearly violate God’s laws) doesn’t mean it is beneficial or constructive. The implication is that we should not do things just because it’s technically allowed. We should consider whether it’s beneficial to us, and others!

Paul builds on this by citing his main principle, which is to seek to the good of others, not our own good.

Paul explains that he has no problem eating anything that is set before him because he knows that there is only one God and that even if the meat had been sacrificed to an idol, he knows that the idol is not a real god. So in his conscience, he can give thanks to the one true God and gratefully eat whatever is put before him.

However, others may not have that understanding. This difference may be the result of a lack of spiritual maturity and understanding on such issues or the person may just have a difference of opinion. Whatever the case is, Paul explains that he will forgo the eating of meat if he thinks it may in any way be a hindrance to the conscience of the other person who is there to observe.

The bottom line is summarized in verses 31-33. Whatever we do, we should do it for the glory of God and in whatever we do, our aim should be to not cause others to stumble. We should seek the good of others above our own good so that we may not create any barriers to them being saved.

Reflection

What are some “gray areas” that you have wrestled with in the past?

What do you think are the most critical and controversial “gray areas” issues the church is facing today?

What has been your method in the past for determining whether or not it was ok to participate in some of these questionable activities?

Of the principles shared, which one stands out to you the most? Why?

What changes do you need to make to adjust to the principles Paul shares in this passage?

 

Photo by Kyle Mackie on Unsplash
Posted on

Is it Always Wrong to Judge Others? (Part 2)

1 Corinthians 5

12It isn’t my responsibility to judge outsiders, but it certainly is your job to judge those inside the church who are sinning in these ways. 13God will judge those on the outside; but as the Scriptures say, “You must remove the evil person from among you.” (1 Corinthians 5:12-13, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

One of the biggest criticisms against Christians in our culture today is that we’re “judgmental”. Gabe Lyons and David Kinnaman, in their book “UnChristian” outline several negative traits that non-believers perceive to be true of Christians and being judgmental is one of them.

As a result of this criticism, many Christians wrongly believe that we should NEVER judge others. Matthew 7:1, in which Jesus says: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged” is often cited as proof that Christians should never judge others.

I wrote about this passage several months ago (you can read it here) and explained why that passage does not teach that Christians can never judge others, while explaining what Jesus was really teaching in that passage.

Now, in this passage of 1 Corinthians, Paul gives further clarity on the issue of judging.

The context of this passage is sexual immorality. Apparently, there was a person in the church who was involved in some pretty heinous sexual sins, and nobody was calling him out on it.

Does this sound familiar?

Often, we in the church don’t want to confront others regarding their immoral life choices because we don’t want to be seen as “judgmental”.

Paul offers a rebuke to the Christians in the Corinthian church precisely because they did NOT judge the person for their sinful actions.

Paul explicitly states that while it’s not our job as Christians to be the morality police to the world, for those who are in the church, those who claim to be followers of Jesus, we ARE to confront and rebuke them when their actions and life choices do not line up with God’s standards for righteous living.

We should note that the idea of “judging” someone is simply confronting them whenever they are in sin.

Unfortunately, the world’s view of “judging” usually involves any type of negative feedback that might be critical of a person’s choices. Paul says that we, as believers CAN and SHOULD be prepared to approach, confront, rebuke and even criticize those who are in the church if their actions are not righteous and honoring to God.

Of course, whenever we do this, we need to be careful how we do it and we need to ensure that our own lives are above reproach. Otherwise, we can easily be labeled as hypocrites, which is another one of the negative traits labeled against Christians that was identified in the book UnChristian by Kinnaman and Lyons.

If you read the passage in Matthew 7, you’ll see that this was exactly the point Jesus was making about judging others – it’s not wrong to judge but we don’t want to be hypocritical in the way that we judge others.

So is it always wrong to judge others?

Clearly, NO! But we need to be careful how we confront others so that we are not doing it in a way that may seem hypocritical. Additionally, we should not apply the same moral standards to those outside the church as we do to those who are followers of Jesus.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What do you think is meant by the term “judging”?  How have you defined it?

What is your response to the view that many non-Christians view Christians as being judgmental? Do you think this charge is true or fair?

Paul says that “it certainly is your job to judge those inside the church who are sinning in these ways.” How does this statement align with your current thinking on the issue of judging? Does it surprise you to know that we as Christians SHOULD judge others (those inside the church)? Why or why not?

What do you think are some ways we can be better at judging others without reinforcing the negative stereotypes that Christians have on this issue?

 

Photo by Adi Goldstein on Unsplash

Posted on

The Importance of Conditioning

1 Corinthians 9

24Remember that in a race everyone runs, but only one person gets the prize. You also must run in such a way that you will win. 25All athletes practice strict self-control. They do it to win a prize that will fade away, but we do it for an eternal prize. 26So I run straight to the goal with purpose in every step. I am not like a boxer who misses his punches. 27I discipline my body like an athlete, training it to do what it should. Otherwise, I fear that after preaching to others I myself might be disqualified.
(1 Corinthians 9:24-27, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

A few days ago, I wrote a blog post about spankings and discipline that included passages from Proverbs 23 and 1 Samuel 3. I also included a related story about a box of Lemonheads. If you’re wondering what that’s all about, you can read about it here.

The big idea was about discipline and how we tend to think of discipline as punishment, but the broader idea behind discipline is the idea of training.

In today’s reading, Paul provides the classic passage regarding discipline as training.

Paul compares the Christian life to a race that we run. But this race is not a sprint or a relay; it’s more like a marathon.

I have twin boys who were distance runners in high school. In the Fall, they competed in Cross Country and in the Spring, they ran track.

For distance runners, training is year-round. Even in the off-season, they are still running 5-6 days a week.

Some sports require a lot of what I call “skill acquisition.” Think about baseball and the hand and eye coordination needed to hit a 90 mile per hour fastball.

Or think about a golfer who has to learn the exact right mechanics of his or her body to be able to hit a golf ball off a tee in order to make it fly 250 yards down the green. These are not easy skills to acquire. It takes time and patience and repetition. But if you get injured and have to take several weeks or a month off, when you resume, you can often pick up right where you left off. You haven’t lost the skill.

But this isn’t the case with a distance runner because their success is not so dependent on acquiring certain skills as much as it’s dependent on developing their level of conditioning. To miss a week of training means your conditioning suffers and when you resume, you will not be able to pick up where you left off. There is often ground that needs to be made up to get back to where you were.

This is the idea Paul is presenting when he says we should train like an athlete. He’s talking about training like an endurance runner. This kind of training takes focus, intentionality and consistency. There are no short-cuts and it is hard work.

Can you imagine a distance runner who only trains one or two days a week? Or how about an Olympic marathon hopeful who rarely runs 26 miles in a week, let alone 26 miles in one race! What kind of results would you expect for the person who approaches running with this kind of mentality?

And yet, many Christians approach the Christian life by investing in their personal spiritual development only once or twice a week. This kind of haphazard approach will never yield the kind of conditioning necessary to compete in and finish the race.

For the distance runner who is not properly conditioned, one of two things will generally happen when they run in a race. He or she will fall so far behind the rest of the group that functionally, they are not even in the race. There  is ZERO measurable impact.

The other potential outcome is they may give up and drop out of the race altogether. Paul equates this with a person who ultimately abandons the faith, walking away from the Lord.

This was Paul’s biggest fear. You probably know people who once called themselves Christians but who have abandoned the faith, forsaking the person and the cause of Christ.

If we don’t want that fate to befall us, we have to discipline ourselves, training and conditioning ourselves spiritually to be able to handle whatever course we run with whatever obstacles we may encounter.

Reflection

What kinds of activities or hobbies have you engaged in that required discipline (sports, music, mental, etc.)?

When is a time you engaged in an activity where you didn’t have adequate conditioning? What were the circumstances? What were the results?

What has been your practice for training yourself spiritually? 

What are some steps you could take to develop a more focused, intentional and consistent approach to your spiritual development and training?

 

Photo by Jenny Hill on Unsplash

Posted on

“Name Dropping” in the Early Church

1 Corinthians 1

10Now, dear brothers and sisters, I appeal to you by the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ to stop arguing among yourselves. Let there be real harmony so there won’t be divisions in the church. I plead with you to be of one mind, united in thought and purpose. 11For some members of Chloe’s household have told me about your arguments, dear brothers and sisters. 12Some of you are saying, “I am a follower of Paul.” Others are saying, “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Peter, ” or “I follow only Christ.” 13Can Christ be divided into pieces?

Was I, Paul, crucified for you? Were any of you baptized in the name of Paul? 14I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15for now no one can say they were baptized in my name. 16(Oh yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. I don’t remember baptizing anyone else.) 17For Christ didn’t send me to baptize, but to preach the Good News—and not with clever speeches and high-sounding ideas, for fear that the cross of Christ would lose its power. (1 Corinthians 1:10-17, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

We live in an age where social media, podcasts and the internet have made it easier than ever for pastors and ministry leaders to attain “celebrity” status. Write a book, start a podcast, gain a large online following, embark on the speaking circuit demanding ever larger fees, and pretty soon, you’ve become famous within the Evangelical church, with your status being measured by how many Twitter followers you have or how many subscribe to your podcast.

Not surprisingly, many Christians today choose to align themselves with various Christian leaders. They buy and read all their books, watch all their podcasts and quote/retweet everything they say.

This isn’t just a modern phenomenon apparently, as even in the early formation of the church we see people segregating into different camps. It turns out that this was a major issue in the Corinthian church and one of the primary reasons Paul writes this first letter to its members. People in the church were aligning themselves with various leaders, such as Peter, Apollos, Paul and others.

This leadership affiliation was causing disunity as people were jockeying for position and attempting to gain an edge in the power structure.

Certainly, there’s nothing wrong with learning from and being influenced by godly men and women leaders within the church. But what Paul is addressing is more than that. It’s an obsession to be aligned with and connected to someone whose name association might elevate my own stature in the eyes of others.

We have a name for this in our culture. We call it name dropping, which is a practice whereby a person mentions the name or names of famous or important people in a story or a conversation in order to impress others and make themselves look better.

Paul says this is wrong and the primary reason for it is because it elevates people over the person of Christ. Jesus is the only one who has died for us and he’s the only person with whom we should be identifying.

There’s a second reason this practice is unadvisable and it’s not one that Paul mentions in this passage. That is, what happens when we become so closely aligned and affiliated with a “celebrity” Christian and then they have a moral failure?

Unfortunately, over the years, I’ve seen too many Christian leaders who had large followings succumb to various worldly temptations and thus disqualify themselves from ministry leadership. When we attach our leash to a leader who ends up experiencing a moral failure, our own reputation can inadvertently suffer.

Paul’s appeal is for unity in the church. The only way to achieve that unity is for believers to stop identifying as groupies of well-known Christian leaders and instead, identify with Jesus alone.

Reflection

Who are some well-known Christian leaders you yourself or others are prone to align with?

When have you experienced “name dropping”, either by yourself or someone else?

What do you think are some reasons why Christians are inclined to “name drop” other influential Christians?

How can you take advantage of the tremendous resources and teachings of Christian thought leaders while maintaining Jesus as the person with whom you primarily identify?

 

Photo by Ben White on Unsplash