Wise vs. Stupid-1 Cor 2:6-16

Are you wise? Mature? Spiritual? What or who do you boast about? Do you know what gifts you received? Do you love God? Do you have the mind and heart of God?

How wise & mature R U? No one thinks they’re stupid, unwise or immature. Paul wrote to Christians who thought they were very wise, spiritual and mature, but were not, for they were seduced, deceived and hijacked by the “wisdom” of the world, resulting in schisms, party politics and divisions in the church (1 Cor 1:10).

True wisdom [the gospel] can ONLY be revealed by the Spirit–NOT perceived by oneself. Paul goes after their “wisdom,” asserting that God acted according to His own wisdom (1 Cor 1:21) and made Christ to be wisdom for us (1 Cor 1:30). True wisdom–per Paul–is soteriological–God’s [ONLY] way of salvation. That it’s “a demonstration of the Spirit’s power” (1 Cor 2:4), means that the gospel Paul preaches–the crucified Messiah–IS the wisdom of God, which CANNOT be perceived by pursuing sophia [worldly wisdom], but can only be received by those who have the Spirit.

Paul‘s biting argument. The Corinthians are full of themselves. They are enamored/hijacked by their own wisdom and thinking as “spiritual,” and regard Paul’s gospel message as “milk, not solid food” (1 Cor 3:2). With fine irony, Paul destroys their misrepresentations and false boastings. Only those who have the Spirit will be revealed what God has really accomplished in Christ. Because they HAVE the Spirit, and thus the mind of Christ (1 Cor 2:16), they should’ve seen the cross for what it is–God’s wisdom–and make true judgments, instead of seeing the cross as foolishness and judging Paul. The net result–and irony–is that they are “spiritual,” yet “unspiritual.” They pursue wisdom, yet miss the very wisdom of God. The 3-part argument is:

1. (2:6-10a). The nature of God‘s wisdom. Contrast between those for whom it was destined and those who can’t perceive it (1 Cor 2:7-8). God’s wisdom always brings God’s glory and is a mystery/secret (1 Cor 2:7), while being hidden from the present age and it’s leaders (1 Cor 2:8).
2. (2:10b-13). How we are let in on the secret/mystery [by receiving the Spirit who knows the mind of God], and why others are left out.
3. (2:14-16). Reaffirming “natural” and “spiritual” people. The people of this age–pursue mere “wisdom” and so consider the cross “foolishness” (1 Cor 1:18)–do not have the Spirit. Thus, they can’t understand true wisdom (1 Cor 2:14), nor make valid judgments (1 Cor 2:15)–available only to those who have the Spirit. Paul concludes with Isa 40:13 for biblical support for people’s inability to comprehend, which is reversed by the Spirit/mind of Christ (1 Cor 2:16).

Secret wisdom. Paul insists that he preaches nothing but the cross (1 Cor 1:23; 2:3) and that any other message would replace the power of God with human wisdom (1 Cor 1:17; 2:5). Then Paul suddenly talks about a secret wisdom for the mature (1 Cor 2:6). Has Paul forgotten what he just said? Or contradicting himself? Or backtracking and qualifying his position? Is 2:6–16 inserted by a later editor? Scholars puzzle over the passage, and it’s one of the most difficult in the letter.

An ironic mode is the best explanation. Paul adopts their religious vocabulary to beat them at their own game and at same time show how ridiculous the game is. He takes up their problematic “wisdom–enthusiasts‘ language” (wisdom, spiritual, mature, etc.), and trumps their boasting by speaking of a secret hidden wisdom which he does after all reveal to those who are ready to listen. That wisdom is nothing other than the cross!

Irony is the most dangerous rhetorical device, for it employs semantic misdirection; the author relies on the audience to pick up the clues that what is meant is NOT exactly what is said. So, the risk of misunderstanding is great: Readers who are not tuned in to the author and audience may miss the clues and drastically misread the text. A famous eg. is the public outcry that attended Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal,” when readers failed to recognize that Swift’s “proposal”—that the problems of famine and overpopulation in Ireland could be solved by selling Irish babies to be eaten—was a piece of political satire. A similar hermeneutical misfortune befalls this text (2:6–16)—wrenched out of their context—have served as a classic proof-text for Gnostics, elitists, and enthusiasts who want to assert their possession of a spiritual insight exalted above that of their fellow Christians. That’s exactly what Paul’s Corinthian problem children were claiming!

Read the clues rightly. Keep these 5 points constantly in mind to interpret and appreciate what Paul is really doing.

1. Paul has already explicitly and unambiguously defined the content of true divine wisdom: “Jews demand signs and Greeks desire wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified … Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God” (1:22–24). Precisely the cross–the wisdom of God–makes human wisdom look ridiculous. Therefore…
2. 2:6–16 is ironic–characteristic of Paul. He’d completely undercut his own position (1:18–2:5) if he meant to dangle esoteric/special wisdom other than the cross. (The theory that 2:6–16 is an interpolation is unnecessary when we perceive the biting irony of the passage.)
3. Paul’s use of “wisdom” is not philosophical but apocalyptic: “this age,” “hidden mystery,” “decreed before the ages,” “glory,” “revealed,” etc. The emphasis is on God’s revelatory initiative cf. human capacities of knowing.
4. The distinction between those who do and do not know the mystery is between Christians (who have received the Spirit of God) and those who belong to the old age (who have not). It is NOT between two kinds of Christians.
5. The meaning of “spiritual maturity” is defined, with a final ironic twist, in 3:1–4: those who are mature act in love, NOT in jealousy and quarreling. Authentic wisdom is characterized by unity and humility NOT by special knowledge or rhetorical skill.

With these points, the force of Paul’s rebuttal to them is clear, and we won’t drift into naive Gnosticism. We can follow the argument only if we read it in big chunks [as throughout the letter], locating 2:6–16 within the logic of the larger unit and noting thematic links in the surrounding context. Outline illustrating how this logic works:

• 1:10–17 Appeal for unity.
• 1:18–2:5 The word of the cross, foolishness to the world, is the true wisdom of God.
• Christian preaching must begin and end with the cross.
• 2:6–3:4 Wisdom for the mature:
• We preach God’s wisdom (i.e., Christ crucified) (2:6).
• This was hidden from the powerful, as Scripture foretold (2:7–9).
• God has revealed this wisdom (Christ crucified) to us through the Spirit (2:10–13), which is…
• …foolishness to the natural mind, but we can discern all things because we have the mind (=spirit) of Christ (2:14–16).
• If you’re really mature in the wisdom of God (Christ crucified), you’d be unified in love, NOT divided (3:1–4).

Unity within the church –Paul’s original theme (1 Cor 1:10-12; 3:3-5). The whole intervening discussion of the cross and wisdom has prepared the theological groundwork for the more explicit exhortations that Paul will develop in chap. 3 and 4.

God Reveals the Hidden Wisdom of the Cross through the Spirit (2:6–16). At 1 Cor 2:6, Paul pivots sharply on the word “wisdom,” highlighted by the word order of Paul’s Greek: “Sophia, however, we do speak among the mature..” Is it wisdom you want? OK, let’s talk wisdom.” This strategy of ironic reversal–abruptly co opting a term previously used as the opposition’s keynote–is a characteristic Pauline argumentative move. For eg.:

• In Phil 3:2–6, Paul starts out with a polemical warning against those who urge circumcision of Gentile Christians; yet before the paragraph is through, he has claimed that “it is we [i.e., Christians] who are the circumcision.” He insists that no confidence should be put in the flesh, yet before the paragraph is through, he pivots about and says, “As a matter of fact, I have confidence in the flesh. [The NRSV’s words reason for confidence do not appear in the Greek text.] If any others think they can trust in the flesh, I can all the more.”
• Or, consider the “fool’s speech” in 2 Cor 11:1–12:10: “Since many boast according to the flesh, I will also boast” (2 Cor 11:18). Do the opponents boast of visions and revelations? Paul could as well—as a matter of fact, he knows somebody who was caught up into the third heaven—but he chooses instead to boast of suffering and weakness.

“I can play your game and top you” is in effect what Paul saying. The above 2 examples are pertinent because both of them involve Paul’s response to “boasting,” just as in 1 Corinthians. In both cases his own “boasting” leads back to defining his own identity exclusively in terms of conformity to Christ’s suffering, weakness, and death, i.e., the cross. 2:6–3:4 is similar–Paul’s ironic appropriation of the opponents’ language.

Sophia is their slogan-word. Another is “the mature” (teleioi) (1 Cor 2:6). This appears in the writings of Philo of Alexandria to describe those who have arrived at an advanced stage of spiritual insight and perfection. Presumably, the Corinthian wisdom-enthusiasts describe themselves in this way, cf. the “infants” or novices of lesser spiritual attainment. Paul will spring the rhetorical trap that his proud readers will encounter (1 Cor 3:1)—and find themselves excluded from the ranks of the teleioi—but here in 2:6 he is preparing the ground for it. They’ve complained that Paul wasn’t much of a teacher, because he didn’t instruct them in the niceties of wisdom. He responds that he in fact does teach wisdom among the mature (1 Cor 2:6). [An eg. in LXX, Wisd 9:6: “For even one who is perfect [teleios] among human beings will be regarded as nothing without the wisdom [sophia] that comes from you.”] For Paul, teleios–a spiritual grown–up–is defined as concern for upbuilding the community (1 Cor 14:20), submission to God’s will for service in community (Rom 12:2), and of pressing toward conformity to the eg. of Jesus (Phil 3:15; Col 1:28; Eph 4:13).

(1 Cor 2:6). The wisdom Paul teaches belongs to the new creation and is NOT “of this [old] age or of the rulers of this age who are being brought to nothing.” This is apocalyptic language. True divine wisdom is an eschatological wisdom that belongs to the new age inaugurated by the cross. This wisdom is NOT attainable through philosophical speculation or ascetic disciplines or any other human exertion. Rather, it is “God’s wisdom,” revealed through the death of Jesus and the preaching of the gospel (1 Cor 1:23–24). The “rulers of this age” are the wielders of power in this world: the wise, the powerful, and those of noble birth, who find the cross incomprehensible (1 Cor 1:26–28). Using one of his favorite apocalyptic verbs, Paul says that they are being “brought to nothing” (NRSV: “doomed to perish”), the same verb used of the eminent power-wielders (1 Cor 1:28 – “reduced to nothing”). This parallel shows that God is acting to destroy these rulers and to establish his sovereignty over the world. (Other uses of the same verb: Rom 6:6; 7:6; 1 Cor 6:13; 13:8–11; 15:24–26; 2 Cor 3:7–11; Eph 2:15; 2 Thess 2:8; 2 Tim 1:10).

1 Cor 2:7–9 on the apocalyptic dimensions of divine wisdom, is that the wisdom of the cross was foreordained before the ages but hidden  from the rulers of this age. So, Paul’s preaching [the cross] is a “mystery” (1 Cor 4:1; Rom 16:25; Col 1:26–27; 2:2; Eph 1:9–10) to those who can see only the power structures of the present age. This is not, as older commentators suggested, Hellenistic mystery religions; Paul’s Jewish apocalyptic thought is that the “mysteries” concern the concealed will of God, which will play itself out in the eschatological events of judgment and salvation. These mysteries are revealed to the elect though the mediation of the prophet or seer. (Dan. 2:27–28: “No wise men, enchanters, magicians, or diviners can show to the king the mystery that the king is asking, but there is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries, and he has disclosed [through Daniel] to King Nebuchadnezzar what will happen at the end of days.”) To Paul, God’s purpose in decreeing this mysterious salvation through the cross was “for our glory” (1 Cor 2:7). The concealed wisdom of the cross points to the future eschatological redemption, God’s gracious bestowal of glory upon the elect (Rom 8:17, 29–30; 2 Cor 3:18; 4:17; Phil 3:20–21).

“…the rulers of this age” (1 Cor 2:8) are not demonic powers, which is advocated (Eph 6:12). “Rulers” (1 Cor 2:6) is linked to 1:26–28 in relation to human authority figures, as in Rom 13:1–7. Paul’s point in 1 Cor 2:8 is that the human power-wielders were so completely clueless about God’s way of working that they crucified the Lord of glory. Why, therefore, should we now pay attention to human notions of wisdom and power? [It’s argued that Paul thinks of cosmic forces operating behind and through these human rulers, but the present passage doesn’t develop that idea] Thus, the reference to the crucifixion reminds us of the counterintuitive content of God’s wisdom, Christ crucified, and continues to develop the ironic juxtaposition of God’s ways and human ways.

God‘s intention announced ahead of time in Scripture. 1 Cor 2:9 doesn’t conform exactly to an OT text. 2 explanations: Isa 64:4 (with an echo of Isa 65:16) quoted loosely from memory, or it comes from an apocryphal source no longer extant. In favor of Isaiah, Paul elsewhere cites “as it is written” exclusively for texts belonging to the subsequently formalized canon of Hebrew Scripture. Paul’s letters also contain numerous allusions to Isaiah, particularly its later chapters, which he read as a prefiguration of God’s eschatological salvation of Gentiles along with Israel. Isaiah would fit the general context in 1 Cor 2 very well. [“O that you would tear open the heavens and come down” (Isa. 64:1) and the prophecy of “new heavens and a new earth” (Isa 65:17).] Bu there are equally good reasons to think that it’s from a lost source. Origen, from the 3rd century C.E., identifies it as coming from the Apocalypse of Elijah, a text now no longer extant. The Gospel of Thomas, a 2nd century text, says: “Jesus said: I shall give you what no eye has seen and no ear has heard and no hand has touched and (what) has not entered the heart of man” (Gos. Thom. 17). This isn’t the source of Paul’s quotation, but it may come from a source unrelated to Isaiah. What’s Paul’s point?

God’s way of bringing salvation to the world through the cross was hidden from all human understanding, but God had “prepared” this plan from before the foundation of the world for those who love him. Paul uses “love” here: the Corinthians might expect Paul to say that God has prepared all these things “for those who know him.” But for Paul, we relate to God not primarily through knowledge or wisdom, but through love. This is a theme to which Paul will return later in the letter.

1 Cor 2:10–13 has a very simple point: The hidden wisdom of God (Christ crucified) is revealed to us by the Spirit of God. How do we know the mystery, which Paul characterizes as “the things graciously given to us by God” (1 Cor 2:12)? [Paul isn’t talking about “spiritual gifts” like tongues and prophecy but about the gift of God’s deliverance of the world through the cross.] All Christian believers (1 Cor 12:3b) have received God’s Spirit, and God’s Spirit alone discloses that the word of the cross is the truth about God. The logic is that like knows like. Paul proposes an analogy: Just as no one knows the thoughts of an individual person except the person himself or herself, so also, “Only God knows and can communicate the truth about himself” (Barrett). Paul’s point is not that the human spirit knows humanity in some generic way; rather, the specific individual thoughts and identity of a person are known only to the spirit of that person. 1 Cor 2:13: Paul and other Christians can speak now about the identity of God not because they have received advanced philosophical instruction or lessons on rhetorical declamation but because they have been taught by the Spirit of God how to speak of God through the word of the cross. The obscure phrase “interpreting spiritual things to those who are spiritual,” which could be translated in several different ways, should probably be understood as one more ironic dig at the self-styled Corinthian pneumatikoi: If you were really as spiritual as you think you are, Paul suggests, you would understand that our rhetorically unembellished speech about Christ crucified is the message that comes from the Spirit of God.

Another way to put Paul’s point is that the truth about God is revealed not through philosophy but through prophecy, not through rhetoric but by revelation. The “deep things of God” (2:10; cf. Dan. 2:22) are not arcane Gnostic trivia; rather they are the secret saving purposes of God for the whole world, now laid bare by the Spirit’s disclosure that the wisdom of God is made known through the cross.

1 Cor 2:14. “The psychikos does not accept the things of God’s Spirit.” The natural human mind rejects the preaching of the gospel, because—Paul reminds us—it sounds like foolishness (1 Cor 1:18, 23, 25, 27). The term psychikoi is difficult to translate properly; it refers to human beings living in their natural state apart from the Spirit of God and therefore unenlightened and blind to the truth. They just don’t “get it.” In other words, it refers to those who belong to the old age; it emphatically does not refer to less advanced Christians. When Paul says in verse 15 that “those who are spiritual… are themselves subject to no one else’s scrutiny” (NRSV) he certainly does not mean that Christians who have the spirit are no longer subject to community discipline. Indeed, everything in this whole letter suggests exactly the opposite (cf. 14:32–33a and the entirety of Paul’s admonitions to the community in 1 Cor. 5–6)! He means, rather, that the person who has received God’s Spirit has a privileged understanding of reality: she “discerns (anakrinei) all things but is herself discerned (anaknnetai) by no one.” In other words, we understand what is going on in the world, but the world cannot understand us. The apparently startling last clause merely restates the point of verse 14, now referring not to the world’s inability to understand the gospel, but to its incomprehension of those who have received the Spirit.

Again Paul concludes his argument with a clinching quote from Isa 40:13 LXX. Isaiah’s rhetorical question “Who has known the mind of the Lord?” presumes a negative answer: “No one.” On one level, the quotation reinforces Paul’s point that the natural mind is incapable of understanding God’s designs (Rom 11:34 quotes the same text). The quotation also suggests a second, quite different point. The LXX phrase “mind (nous) of the Lord” translates the Hebrew phrase “spirit (ruach) of the Lord.” In context, Paul understands “mind” and “spirit” to be synonymous. He also understands “the Lord” to be Jesus, and because Christians have received the Spirit, he moves to his final audacious claim: “We have the mind (=spirit) of Christ.” It has been given to us to know the mind of the Lord. Who has known the mind of the Lord? Answer: We who have received the Spirit know it, because we, unlike the world, have the mind of Christ. This formulation restates in more striking language what was already explained in 2:10–13.

Here it certainly sounds as though Paul has fallen into the insidious trap of trying to outdo the elitist boasters. But to understand rightly what it means to have the mind of Christ, “Christ” is for Paul: the crucified one. To have the mind of the Lord is to participate in the pattern of the cross (Phil 2:1–11), for the wisdom of God is manifest definitively in the death of Jesus. So, the privileged spiritual knowledge of which Paul speaks should result in the renunciation of all privilege, all boasting and quarreling. To summarize the implications of the whole passage: “The Spirit that teaches understanding to the Christians is the spirit of the crucified Christ. This spirit is to be measured by the cross, and it is a critic of all self-directed wisdom and of all elite wisdom.” The fact that the Corinthian wisdom-enthusiasts are so dramatically failing to live according to “the mind of Christ” leads Paul on to the next devastating step in his argument.

People of the Flesh (3:1–4). In contrast to 2:6-16, Paul now speaks directly and clearly, though still with overtones of irony, to their situation. They reproached Paul for not providing sufficiently advanced instruction in wisdom. Paul replies with a direct shot: “I could not speak to you as spiritual people [pneumatikoi], but rather as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ” (1 Cor 3:1). The metaphors used here (adults vs. infants and solid food vs. milk) are known in the ancient world. It assumes that spiritual progress can be graded with a different curriculum appropriate to each level of maturity. Thus, Paul turns the tables on the spirit-enthusiasts, placing them at the bottom of their own scale of religious achievement rather than at the top, where they suppose themselves. They consider themselves mature and spiritual, but Paul replies with a put–down: sorry, you remain immature and fleshly. Paul demonstrates how dramatically he wants to redefine their understanding of spirituality: “For as long as there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving [literally “walking”] according to human inclinations?” (1 Cor 2:3). The word “jealousy” can also mean “zeal” of a religious sort. Paul says that he persecuted the church with zeal (Phil 3:6; Gal 1:14), and he uses it to describe the religious enthusiasm of his Jewish kinsmen, whose unbelief he laments: “I can testify that they have a zeal for God, but it is not enlightened” (Rom 10:2). Similarly, the Corinthians may well have been motivated by religious zeal; we do them an injustice if we suppose that they were merely squabbling jealously over petty matters. The factions in the community were caused—at least to some extent—by serious questions of theological understanding and religious practice. How do we attain divine wisdom? What actions constitute idolatry? What sexual norms should be observed in marriage? How should manifestations of the Spirit function in worship? What is the meaning of resurrection? These issues were splitting the church, and the different groups were zealous in their defense of their convictions. Paul insists, however, that when such matters produce “quarreling” it’s a sign that the contending factions are not truly spiritual but “of the flesh.”

For Paul, being “of the flesh” means living in rivalry and disunity within the church. […not as their wisdom-enthusiasts supposed: lacking refined spiritual knowledge and experience, nor living in lust and sexual sin.] This shatters and reshapes their whole view of measuring themselves. If they accept this new scale that Paul proposed, they can’t deny that they fall at the immature end, for they have indeed aligned themselves with the party slogans that Paul quotes back at them: “I belong to Paul” or “I belong to Apollos” (1 Cor 3:4). Thus Paul artfully brings his long reflection on the cross, the Spirit, and wisdom back to the problem that launched the letter: divisions in the church (1 Cor 1:10, 12).

Paul’s diagnosis of the problem causing divisions: They judge and act according to the standards of “this age,” leading inevitably to the recapitulation of the world’s boasting and power struggles. Paul delivers a splash of cold water on their faces, for they supposed themselves to be burning with spiritual ardor. “Wake up,” he says. “Stop fighting with each other; you’re acting like spoiled babies, not like people who have received the Spirit of God.”It’s a grave mistake to use 3:l-2a as a Pauline warrant to rank individuals in the church on a scale of spiritual advancement. Paul uses their own elitist language ironically to execute a reversal of perspective—a reversal homologous with what God has done to “the wise” through the cross—to shake them out of their infatuation with elitist spiritual experience. In 1 Cor 3:4, Paul has brought the “wisdom of the cross” powerfully to bear as a critique of his Corinthian readers.

Paul’s unambiguous point: The real measure of spiritual maturity is unity and peace in the community. Spiritual elitism is a perennial problem in the church. 1st Corinthians is the earliest example of a careful pastoral response to this problem, but chap. 2 is subject to serious misunderstanding. It’s the irony of Paul’s response to show how the message of the cross destroys spiritual elitism at the roots, or it’ll feed spiritual pride rather than deflate it. Reading 3:1–4 as part of the pericope [extract from a text].

Elitism can take many different forms. Some will boast in:

• spiritual gifts,
• scholarly knowledge,
• doctrinal correctness or
• moral uprightness or
• proper political concerns.

The most insidiously divisive forms of elitism will be precisely those that are most “spiritual” in motivation and manifestation. Wherever such apparently spiritual concerns fracture the community into special-interest caucuses or lead people into self–absorption with their own spirituality, the word of the cross is needed to recall the community to “the mind of Christ” (1 Cor 2:16). Teaching and preaching must ensure that the mind of Christ is never severed from the passion story, from the model of Christ crucified.

In our time, there is much fascination both inside and outside the church with “spirituality,” but it’s often individualistically focused and aimed at promoting selfish forms of personal well-being and contentment. Paul addresses issues by insisting that the Spirit [wisdom] of God reveals the truth through the story of the cross–the only way for unity in the church/community of faith.

Claim for yourself the audacious but foundational truth that “we have the mind of Christ” (1 Cor 2:16). This sounds scandalously bold, but there’s no reason for the church to exist if it’s not true. What discernments and actions would ensue if we reflect on and really took this claim seriously? (1 Cor 2:16; Phil 2:1–13).

If we put “the mind of Christ” into action, the rulers of this age will react with hostility and violence against the church, which should not be surprising (1 Cor 2:6-8). Those who live in light of the wisdom of God will appear foolish and even threatening to those with a vested interest in the status quo arrangements of power in this age. Beyond the story of Jesus’ death, the stories of most of the saints exemplify this same truth, including Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Oscar Romero.

Grapple with the apocalyptic horizons of Paul’s gospel. This is a message about God’s plan from before the ages to bring God’s people through and from conflict to eschatological glory. Only in that frame of reference does the cross make sense, and will the divisions in the church be seen in their proper light. God works through the Spirit to reveal this eschatological truth in and through our common life.

Reference:

1. Richard B. Hays. First Corinthians. Interpretation. A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. 1997.
2. Gordon D. Fee. First Corinthians. The New International Commentary on the NT. 1987.

Sermon Divisions:

1. 7/12/20: Always Thank God (1:1-9) [1 Cor 1:4].  Cosmic Epic Calling [1 Cor 1:2].
2. 7/19/20: The Devil Divides, God Unites (1:10-17) [1 Cor 1:10]. All Agree. No Divisions. Perfect Unity.
3. 7/26/20: The Cross—God‘s Way—is Dumb (1:18-25) [1 Cor 1:18]. The Cross Stumbles. The Cross is like a Cop Out. Foolish Cross.
4. 8/2/20: What You Were, Who Christ Is (1:26-31) [1 Cor 1:26, 30]. The Necessity of Lack. No Boasting  [1 Cor 1:31].
5. 8/9/20: Nothing but Jesus (2:1-5) [1 Cor 2:2].
6. True Wisdom is ONLY for the Mature (2:6-3:4) [1 Cor 2:6]. The Mind of Christ [1 Cor 2:16]. Mature Wisdom.
7. Field Laborers (3:5-9) [1 Cor 3:5].
8. Construction Workers (3:10-15) [1 Cor 3:10-11].
9. God’s Temple (3:16-22) [1 Cor 3:16].
10. True Self (4:1-5) [1 Cor 4:4].
11. Become Scum (4:6-13) [1 Cor 4:13].
12. Final Warning (4:14-21) [1 Cor 4:19].