1 Corinthians 2

The mystery of God’s revelation

Autonomous human reason cannot know all things, because we are hopelessly finite. We don’t need human speculation, but divine revelation. The Spirit knows all things, and he has revealed the truth to us. In this chapter, Paul makes his case for the fact that believers have true wisdom.

(2:1) “And when I came to you, brethren, I did not come with superiority of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God.”

“I did not come with superiority of speech.” Paul already mentioned this in 1:17 (“not in cleverness of speech”). This doesn’t mean that Paul is against sophisticated Bible teaching. After all, he said that “in everything you were enriched in Him, in all speech and all knowledge” (1 Cor. 1:5). This most likely “refers to his manner of preaching.” Paul didn’t speak with the “eloquence” or “rhetoric” of the sophists in Greece.[] That is, Paul didn’t use long-winded rhetoric to show off his intellect.[] He wanted to “preach the gospel apart from the values embodied in Greco-Roman rhetoric,” and he “rejects is self-presentation and haughty speech.”[]

“Or of wisdom.” Again, Paul isn’t against wisdom. Acts tells us that Paul “was reasoning in the synagogue every Sabbath and trying to persuade Jews and Greeks” (Acts 18:4). Rather, Paul is against the “wisdom of men” (v.5). In other words, Paul was writing directly against the rhetorical sophistry in Corinth. Elsewhere, he writes in favor of “the wisdom of God” (1:21), and how Christ is the “wisdom and power of God” (1:24).

“Proclaiming to you the testimony of God.” Paul didn’t focus on the glamor or pride of sophistry. He kept the focus on Christ, as verse 2 explains (“Christ and Him crucified”).

(2:2) “For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.”

Fideistic and postmodern interpreters argue that this shows a change in Paul’s approach, after the supposed “failure” at his Mars Hill debate with the philosophers (Acts 17:16ff). Not so. Some of the people wanted to hear more (Acts 17:32), and Luke records that “some men joined him and believed” (Acts 17:34). Dionysus the Areopagite has a title that “means that he is a member of the council and has significant social standing.”[] After one lecture, Paul reached a number of people for Christ. That is hardly a failure!

(2:3) “I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling.”

Our interpretation consistently fits these passages: Paul’s focus is on the delivery of his message—not the message itself. Paul is showing that he didn’t come with the eloquence or rhetoric of the sophists. Instead, he was “weak,” and, in fact, he was scared (cf. 1 Cor. 1:28). Later in 2 Corinthians, Paul writes more about how his (physical?) “weakness” led to God’s power (2 Cor. 11:30; 12:5, 9-10; 13:9).

“In fear and in much trembling.” Morris argues that Paul wasn’t fearing men, but God in this passage (note the parallel in 2 Cor. 7:15; Phil. 2:12; Eph. 6:5).[] Yet how does this fit with Jesus telling Paul to “not be afraid” in Corinth? (Acts 18:9-11) We agree with Fee that that Paul was literally afraid when he came to Corinth.[] Mark Twain famously said, “There are two types of speakers: those that are nervous and those that are liars.” It must have been intimidating to share about the message of Christ in the wild atmosphere in Corinth—like Billy Graham giving a sermon to a biker gang. Of course, the polished and sophists who were obsessed with their public image would never be this honest about their fear and weakness.

Additionally, Paul wasn’t a good looking “rock star” like the Greek sophists. A later apocryphal work gives this description of Paul: “A man small in size, bald-headed, bandy-legged, well-built, with eyebrows meeting, rather long-nosed, full of grace. For sometimes he seemed like a man, and sometimes he had the countenance of an angel” (The Acts of Paul, 2.3). This late historical tradition seems to have a certain amount of credibility.[] After all, just consider how many beatings Paul took in his lifetime. He his face must’ve looked mangy and mangled. This explains why the Corinthians thought Paul’s “personal presence was unimpressive and his speech contemptible” (2 Cor. 10:10).

(2:4) “My message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.”

“My message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom.” What does Paul mean by this statement? After all, Paul used reason and persuasion when he first spoke to them (Acts 18:4). At the risk of being repetitive, Paul is referring to “the kind of persuasion found among the sophists and rhetoricians, where the power lay in the person and his delivery.”[]

“But in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.” All of the erudition and rhetoric in the world couldn’t convert a group of Pagans in Greece. But the message of Christ could. Paul’s message had the power that could change the human heart (cf. 1 Thess. 1:5). Morris writes, “It was not human excellence that accomplished this, but the Spirit’s power.”[] Indeed, this is the first mention of the Holy Spirit in the letter.

(2:5) “So that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.”

Their faith didn’t rest in Paul’s gift of speech or his gift of knowledge. It rested in God’s raw power working through Paul to reach them. Paul started this argument by writing, “The word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18). The message itself (“the word of the cross”) is the power of God.

(2:6) “Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature; a wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away.”

“Yet we do speak wisdom among those who are mature.” Morris contends that Paul is not referring to two different types of Christians here: the infants and the mature. Instead, according to Morris, Paul is contrasting the believers from the unbelievers. He writes, “The New Testament writers do not envisage ‘grades’ of Christians.”[] Morris acknowledges that Paul addresses spiritual “infants” in chapter 3, but understands this to refer to their love—not their knowledge. Likewise, Fee believes that all Christians are the “mature,” because the context refers to the blessings given to all believers (vv.10-15).[] This makes a certain amount of sense, because all believers have access to God’s truth. However, in chapter 3, Paul is surely speaking of walking Christians versus carnal Christians.

“A wisdom, however, not of this age nor of the rulers of this age, who are passing away.” In our estimation, the “rulers” refer to demonic rulers.

(2:7) “But we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory.”

“We speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom.” The concept of a “mystery” doesn’t refer to something mysterious, but rather, something that was formerly hidden and now revealed. That is, it refers to “something formerly hidden in God from all human eyes but now revealed in history through Christ.”[] Taylor agrees, “God’s mystery is not a riddle that men can solve but rather a secret that the human mind by itself is wholly unable to penetrate. God’s wisdom remains hidden until he chooses to disclose it.”[] Verses 9-10 show that revelation is the key to understanding this “mystery.”

“God predestined before the ages.” This mystery goes back all the way before time began. Paul must be referring to the crucifixion of Christ (see “Why Did Satan Crucify Jesus?”). God’s wisdom is what has been “predestined.”[]

“To our glory.” While God deserves the glory, he chooses to give glory over to us (cf. 1 Pet. 1:7; Rom. 8:17-18; 1 Thess. 2:12; 2 Thess. 1:10).

(2:8) “The wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood; for if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.”

“The wisdom which none of the rulers of this age has understood.” The rulers of this age refer to demonic rulers, as is common in Paul’s writings (v.6).

“For if they had understood it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” The rulers of this age followed natural wisdom, rather than God’s wisdom. What was the result of their natural wisdom? They crucified God’s Messiah, rather than bowing their knee to him. Consequently, Paul is showing just how diametrically opposed God’s wisdom is from his creation.

This is the only use of the title “the Lord of glory” to refer to Jesus (cf. Jas. 2:1).[] Morris writes, “More than one scholar has thought that this is the loftiest title Paul ever applied to Christ.”[]

(2:9) “As it is written, ‘Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard, and which have not entered the heart of man, all that God has prepared for those who love Him.’”

In context, Paul explained that human rulers missed the culmination of God’s wisdom through the Cross. The first portion of this citation from Isaiah (64:4? 65:17?) shows that God has kept certain things hidden from humans. The second half of the verse goes on to explain what they have not seen and not heard.

“‘All that God has prepared for those who love Him.’” In context, Paul was writing about the crucifixion of Christ (v.8) and our glory (v.7). This is what the rulers of this age could not see.

(2:10) “For to us God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.”

“To us God revealed them through the Spirit.” God kept the Cross a mystery from the world until he was prepared to reveal it. We couldn’t have discovered God’s plan through empirical study or autonomous human reason. We need revelation (v.10), not speculation (v.9). The “natural man” cannot understand true wisdom, because he rejects God’s revelation (v.14).

“For the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.” The “wise” and “mature” Corinthians boasted about their knowledge, but Paul counters by stating that they would truly need to be at the level of omniscience—on the level of the Holy Spirit himself—in order to understand the “depth” of God’s wisdom (cf. Rom. 11:33). Incidentally, since the Spirit searches “all things,” this implies that the Spirit is omniscient. He knows the full depths of God’s thoughts. Morris writes, “This ascribes full deity to the Spirit.”[]

(2:11) “For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.”

This is sort of a strange comparison. In God, there are three separate persons, but in a human, there is only one. This is just an analogy, and it should not be pressed to affirm that humans have a tripartite nature of body, soul, and spirit, nor that the Trinity is analogous to humans having a body, soul, and spirit.[] Paul is simply stating that only an individual person knows his or her own thoughts. We cannot know these thoughts unless that other person communicates them to us. Similarly, we cannot know God’s thoughts unless the Spirit communicates them to us.

(2:12) “Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God.”

Here is where Paul is leading the comparison: We can know the mind of God, because we have the Spirit of God (see verse 16). God hasn’t revealed everything, but he has revealed his promises to us. By contrast, the “spirit of the world” seems to refer to Satan (cf. Jn. 12:31; Eph. 2:2).

Part of the Holy Spirit’s role is to reveal to believers all of the things God has given to us. He makes these truths a living reality to us through Scripture, prayer, and other means like fellowship with other believers. The emphasis on “spiritual words” in verse 13 seems to make the focus on Scripture.

(2:13) “Things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.”

Paul’s point is that we have wisdom by revelation—not speculation. God has spoken! Therefore, we can and should speak His words to others, because the words are taught to us by the Spirit of God.

“Combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.” This could also be rendered “interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual” (ESV; cf. NASB footnote).

(2:14) “But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.”

The “natural man” refers to the “unconverted and unregenerate.”[] Paul is stating that they cannot understand the truths of God while they are in a state of pride and refusal. Humility is the key to coming to God, but the “natural man” refuses this simple step. Consequently, he cannot understand anything else taught by God—especially the “depths of God” (v.10).

(2:15) “But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.”

“But he who is spiritual appraises all things.” The word “appraise” (anakrino) means “to engage in careful study of a question, question, examine” (BDAG). It is used for “examining the Scriptures” (Acts 17:11). Elsewhere Paul writes, “Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil” (1 Thess. 5:21-22). The believer in Christ can discern all things because he has accepted the Spirit’s view, and the Spirit can discern all things—even the depths of God (v.10).

“Yet he himself is appraised by no one.” The main point is that God’s “appraisal” is the ultimate standard. Later, Paul writes, “But to me it is a very small thing that I may be examined by you, or by any human court; in fact, I do not even examine myself. ⁴ For I am conscious of nothing against myself, yet I am not by this acquitted; but the one who examines me is the Lord” (1 Cor. 4:3-4). Taylor comments, “Here Paul clarifies that the evaluations of others, even self-examination is ultimately inconsequential. Only one assessment matters. ‘It is the Lord who judges me’ (4:4).”[] Fee qualifies, “Taken out of its context, [this passage] has suffered much in the church. There are always some who consider themselves full of the Spirit in such a way as to be beyond discipline or the counsel of others. Such a reading of the text is an unfortunate travesty, since these people are usually among those most needing such discipline.”[]

(2:16) “For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ.”

Questions for Reflection

In the introduction, we learned that Greek sophists were eloquent speakers who would draw large crowds with their speaking gifts. How does Paul’s example compare to these sophists?

Compare and contrast God’s wisdom and worldly wisdom (vv.6-10).

What can we learn about spiritual maturity from this chapter? In other words, if all you had was this chapter of Scripture, how would you define spiritual maturity?

Does it bother you that God would keep part of his will a secret from humanity? What would you say to someone who said, “Doesn’t this make God guilty of lying?”