1 Corinthians: Way More Issues Than You Think!, Transcript
(22) 1 Corinthians: Way More Issues Than You Think! | Secular Bible Study (Episode 46) - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg7uDXiivzs
Transcript:
(00:00) welcome to mind shift I'm Brandon today's episode 46 of my secular Bible study Series in which we are looking at First Corinthians this is the fourth letter written by Paul if you're going chronologically so it comes before Romans and by the way I know that the gospels are super interesting and then you get the crazy adventure book of Acts then you get the theological magnum opus of Romans you have Revelation but everything in between can kind of feel redundant or boring and I'd like to encourage you to not think that way each book and especially each letter of Paul is fascinating I think for understanding
(00:32) modern Christianity and also for understanding where Christianity came from the excuses and apologetics that were being made right away to defend these things and this one does not disappoint so stick with me today I think you'll find this very interesting let me go ahead and set the stage and then we're going to dive into 0.
overview
(00:51) 1 book overview but there's a few things I think it's cool to see all the pieces coming together you know in Acts 18 we can see Paul as he meets Aquilla and Priscilla and he gets to Corinth he has plans to go to Ephesus which is his third missionary journey and that's where Paul is right now as he writes the first letter back to Corinth or the Corinthians and this letter is a correction now what's cool is unlike first and 2 Kings or 1 and 2 Chronicles which were just broken up for their length these letters 1 and 2 Corinthians are broken up because they are indeed
(01:22) separate letters the second letter back to the Corinthians that we'll get to next week is Paul defending himself because after the Corinthians get get this letter they're like who are you to say so anyways and so you're going to see a very defensive Paul next week where here we get a very corrective PA according to acts 18 Paul founds the church in Corinth somewhere around 50 to 51 CE and then between 52 and 55 he's on his third missionary journey he's hanging out in Ephesus and he writes this first letter then we get something after the letter it's a very brief visit of Paul to Corinth to kind of address
(01:56) the letter this is usually referred to as Paul's painful visit then Paul writes a new letter that we have called the severe letter and this is something that is lost to time we know about it but we don't have it and then as Paul is traveling through Macedonia we hear reports about what's going on and he decides to write his second letter to the Corinthians so that's it now where and what is Corinth
where and what is Corinth
Corinth was very strategically placed to connect the pelian peninsula to Mainland Greece so this connects the aan and the ionian
(02:26) Seas this is a major trade Hub also fun fact it's got the the second most important games the isian games only second to the Olympic Games themselves Corinth started as a Greek state it was destroyed and conquered by the Romans in 146 BCE and then it is rebuilt about a 100 years later as a Roman colony in the year 44 BCE and immediately came back to be very prosperous so with all that popularity with the games and all the trade and the importance and all of the wealth this brings a lot of different cultures and now you have this newly established church by Paul with all of
(03:04) these Greco Roman influences and this is where things start to go wrong thus Paul's first letter which we are going to break down in a few segments and the first one is going to take us from chapters 1 through chapters four now a lot happens here we have Paul's introduction and greeting and Thanksgiving this is pretty common for Paul and then he gets right into the divisions of the church now this is so interesting it's literally what happened today it even is what happens on YouTube with a certain apologist that people
(03:33) like or a certain Pastor that people like to follow and I'll just read to you so you can kind of hear it in Paul's words it sounds so very modern I appeal to you Brothers by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that all of you agree and that there be no divisions among you but that you be United in the same mind and in the same judgment for it has been reported to me by Khloe's people that there is quarreling among you what I mean is that each one of you says I follow Paul or I follow Apollos or I follow C this or I follow Christ so again you have kind of these clicks
(04:03) developing in Corinth well we like Paul Paul taught us this well Paulo said this well cus said this well what about when Jesus said this they're already seeing the disunity there's already different leaders within the communities that have different ideas that are more attractive or less attractive to certain people in certain groups and so you have this division you have this infighting you have denominations in this section Paul brings it back in Chapter 2 this is about Christ crucified this is all that matters let that be the uniting factor
(04:33) which is again pretty and as far as the Christian belief goes would be a true statement but not helpful to the individual differences and mutually exclusive claims and contradictions that everyone is trying to deal with and by the way Apollos is another leader at this time kind of a wannabe Paul and and Paul even says this he says what I planted Apollos watered which is a good way of understanding that you know Paul is a missionary he goes he builds plants I mean all of the terminology that Paul uses is what we still use today in modern Christianity it really is just amazing how foundational this was but
(05:08) then he goes and he moves on and other leaders will rise up the problem is is sometimes again they get more popularity than Paul or a different idea than Paul what they're watering what they're shepherding might look different or might just be more attractive and so Paul in chapter 3 is talking about the division between him and Apollos and any other leader and again trying to get back on track with unity and he goes on in chapter four to make the point they're all any Apostle any leader is just a servant of Christ not worth forming a click over we are simply at
(05:38) the disposal of Christ trying to bring about the one true church the last verse of chapter 4 always gets me it says for the kingdom of God does not consist in talk but in power what do you wish shall I come to you with a rod or with love in the spirit of gentleness and I think that sums up Paul well because you can almost see that inner turmoil in him as he writes these letters many of them are in the spirit or he'll try to start in the spirit of rebuking and iron sharpening iron that you know he's no better but come on guys you know let's
(06:09) let's do this and let's unify in Christ and other times it's you're so wrong you're so stupid you're so foolish why would you do this why can't you get this right and it is just interesting to see I don't know these different approaches that he deems necessary based off different circumstances or different churches or different places but it is again a character study of Paul would be like the most fascinating thing in the world to me but let's move into segment two for our book of review which is going to be ethics issues I say ethic issues because there's more than just
(06:39) sex but most of what we're going to cover in chapters 5 through 7 are about sexual immorality and marriage and things like this but also in chapter 6 we get some specifics on lawsuits for believers now I'm going to come back to that in problematic passages but I just want to cover what is covered here and again even like churches today there is a lot of Gossip going on and so Paul has some very specific situations that he knows about of sexual misconduct we have a man who had sex with his father's wife and I want to just show how clearly this
(07:15) in-group outgroup thing is you know we have all these things about working with people and loving them where they're at and hating the sin but not the sinner but listen to what Paul says let him who has done this be removed from among you and again hang tight we're going to get to some of these examples in problematic p messages because there's some pretty wild things said here some pretty severe ingroup outgroup think going on so then we get to the lawsuits for believers we get the avoidance of sexual immorality
(07:41) we start getting into the principles for marriage how often you're to give your spouse sex and not to withhold and things like this things that have had catastrophic harm even if you're just saying oh they're misusing it Paul wrote it and it ends with concerning ethics around the unmarried or widows and what that looks like and it's funny because our next segment segment three is going to be mainly about food and it's just like these things keep cropping up think about the Old Testament think about how many laws were around sex and not even
(08:13) particularly sexual acts but even women on their period or nocturnal emissions these kinds of things and how many were around food to have such a focus that this idea of cleanliness and that sex is inherently unclean that certain foods were inherently unclean and that one needed to be clean these came from the levitical laws of what had to be followed to be in the presence of God and it's like even though Paul has left a lot of these Jewish Ideas behind and that's by the way a lot of what this book is struggling with is but I thought we were free in Christ why is this still
(08:49) an issue and sometimes Paul falls down hard on the side of this is still an issue your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit how dare you and sometimes it's yeah no this was for them this isn't for us we're free in Christ it's very inconsistent and it's just I think interesting that with 63 laws to be worked from to understand God's heart even if it's just for his chosen people why when Paul extends this grace to a new group the Gentiles are they not subject what it really is right here that we start to Pinch at why doesn't the Old Testament matter anymore why did those laws get broken why is there a new
(09:29) covenant where are you actually getting this from and so much of it is from the Apologetics and the philosophy of Paul what I'm going to say here is the third segment around food which is going to be chapters 8 through 10 and it starts off with food but it just gets into Christian Liberty and the example that is used here is the food that the non-christians were using to sacrifice should Christians be able to eat that or not there was a lot of division around this and here's Paul's answer and I'm summarizing of course hey if it's going
(09:59) to be reputation issue if it's going to cause another person to Fumble because they're confused about what you're doing then don't do it but if you're alone and no one can see you this is just food so enjoy it this is the freedom that Christ brings you but again reputation's important we don't want to confuse or cause others to stumble so be diligent be vigilant so you could say even though food is the example here this is really about freedom and responsibility but let's move on to segment four which is going to be chapters 11-4 and I'm not
(10:31) sure what word sums this up maybe spiritual gifts or Worship in general what it looks like to act this out or to gather together and I'd encourage everyone who thinks that Paul got it right with this freedom and responsibility that we just saw with one issue to read the beginning of chapter 11 where Paul is very specific about the right and wrongness of when women versus men should wear head coverings go and read it for and maybe I'll cover it in point 7 how Stern serious and black and white this issue is to Paul this isn't gray this isn't freedom in Christ This is a should do a disgrace not to do a
(11:13) command essentially so again this is what I mean the inconsistency with Paul on what he views as negotiable and what he views as sternly as an Old Testament command then the rest of chapter 11 is Paul correcting on what the Lord's Supper is and his supposed to be and how to properly observe it then all of chapter 12 is this very long monologue on spiritual gifts what they are who can have them when to utilize them how they're different parts of the body that make up the whole and thus the church and this is going to be by the way in direct conflict and contrast with other things that are said about spiritual
(11:50) gifts so stick around for again7 contradictions then we get to the famous love chapter 1 Corinthians 13 compare what Paul says love is here through direct revelation of Christ Jesus by the way with how God acts and I did a video on that so after this go check that out if you haven't seen it and then we get to the tongues chapter and prophecy this is chapter 14 and also a little bit on worship at the end of 14 contradictions everywhere here by the way now we have two sections left and each is just a chapter chapter 15 is all about the resurrection Paul builds the case for how we know the resurrection can happen
(12:28) which is where we get the claim of the 500 Witnesses this is something that so many Christians don't know I know that a lot of us who are kind of in the community here know about it and Pa just know about it because they have to defend it but this isn't in the gospels this isn't anywhere else this is one man Paul making one claim one time that hey by the way we know this is true because 500 people saw it and yet how many pastors preachers and even apologists will say things like look we have over 500 people that saw Christ risen and not one account from many of of them not one
(13:00) iota of evidence that they ever even existed one claim from one man unattested unverified that's it that's your 500 Witnesses it's right here and then he goes on to address the doubts not even just the doubts of Christ Resurrection but of resurrected bodies in general what will happen to Believers and so he goes on and tries to explain this and it's kind of wild actually just listen to how Paul talks here you know you know so he gets down to the section on the resurrected body and he says I tell you this Brothers flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God nor does the perishable inherit the
(13:37) imperishable behold I tell you a mystery we shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trumpet for the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised imperishable and we shall be changed this Grand idea completely concocted in the mind of one man about what will happen to everyone after death new planes of existence places that physical bodies cannot be a resurrected body in a new form but the mystery of it all it's absolutely as insane as any other religious claim from all the religions that Christians would say are evil demonic weird Pagan Etc and we all
(14:21) just said yep that makes sense who cares what Jesus said who cares that it's mutually exclusive with what Jesus said or what the of the Old Testament clearly said about the afterlife and where bodies go and these kinds of things we'll just get over that but am I still in01 okay I apologize let's wrap this part up really quick segment 6 chapter 16 we just get closing remarks personal requests greetings and a collection plate being passed around for the Believers in Jerusalem so again normal Church stuff
authorship and date
let's move straight into
(14:53) point two authorship and date we've covered a lot of this so I'm going to move fast this was probably written in 53 or 5 4 CE this was his third missionary journey he was in Ephesus when he wrote it we know why he wrote it we know to whom he wrote it we know how he got it there this is an authentic letter of Paul there is really no question even from the scholarly approach that this is one of the forgeries not that someone couldn't say this if they were making a forgery but again just in terms of how we know it's
(15:17) Paul and not Titus or something like that Paul starts and ends this letter making sure that people know it was him in his own hand which sometimes he used a scribe like in Romans that's totally fine I think that's in Romans 6 where the Scribe kind of says hi I'm writing this and people get really confused by that totally fine totally average for that day but here Paul specifically says it was by his hand in terms of the manuscript tradition this is going to be redundant to what we've seen you've got your main two codexes that come out in the fourth Century CE which have really
(15:47) clear full copies of First Corinthians as well as Papyrus 46 which is in 200 CE that also contains First Corinthians the important part of that is to show the early transmission of Paul's letters and Papyrus 46 comes from the larger Chester Bey papy we have a good handful of textual variants I'll give you a couple examples like I typically do 1 Corinthians 13:3 some manuscripts read if I give away all I have and some have to the poor added on it's not a Salvation issue but it is a difference and it does seem like at some point someone took a liberty right to make sure we knew who it should be given away
(16:27) to another one would be from 1 Corinthians 15 1551 and in some cases it's we shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed and in others we shall all sleep but we shall all be changed the difference here reflects the interpretation of the Resurrection so again you could argue not that important in the grand scheme of what's being laid out in these chapters but we do have textual variance and there's more than just these two and for this particular book 1 Corinthians most would be considered minor textual variants
historical accuracy
so
(16:58) let's move right into point three historical accuracy background context I gave you a lot when we set the stage we talked about Corinth and the rebuilding of Corinth by Rome and when that happened and the trading Hub the many different gods and ideas and philosophies and ideologies these culture mesh is happening at the same place where Paul is trying to start another new religion I think one thing we could add here that is kind of cool is to see Paul understanding the world around him for what analogies he's going
(17:28) to make like in 1 Corinthians 9 he has kind of this athletic metaphor knowing that Corinth host the isian games which Paul would have known this would have made great sense to those people I think that's really cool so that would be an example of a cultural reference and we're going to keep our eyes out for that as we see Paul in these different cities and talking to different groups the archaeological evidence you know there's not a lot that we need to go off of here I gave some examples of Rome of
(17:55) you know the graffiti and the catacombs and I think that's interesting for Corinth we have tons of archaeological evidence showing what a major Hub it was we have dug this stuff up we have seen the Agora the great Marketplace the theaters the temples the buildings we know of the Temple of Apollo showing the great Pagan worship of the day we do have some verification from Romans 16 erasus is mentioned and we actually have erasus that has been found in the remains we're going to reach outside of 1 Corinthians but in Acts which talks about some of this you know as Paul is
(18:28) dragged before the court officials he may very well have been on the beima seat this is a judgment seat located in the Forum where the public officials or even the Roman governors kind of addressed the people so it is fun to be in the New Testament and be able to get these different understandings we're not utilizing it though in the same way that we did back in say First Kings are there any archaeological digs that have shown that the events described there the battles Etc could have actually happened no we trust for the most part Paul went
(18:59) where he said he went a lot of these city names have even stayed the same we don't really have reason to doubt it it's more just cool to see the corroboration
point four
let's move on to point four which we still have some new things to say for and it will change a little bit but in covering Romans we've covered a lot of how Paul writes so I'll just try to thread the details and cover any unique aspects from book to book or epistle to epistle in Romans we saw the DIA tribe a great rhetorical tool and that is utilized here for sure also the
(19:31) exhortation like in 1 Corinthians 13 but unlike Romans we're now getting into Paul's Epistles where it's a rebuke where Romans was this theological Treatise we now have corrective letters and that changes the tone Romans you could almost say though passionate the tone is educational here the tone is kind of this mix of compassionate guidance but also Stern reprimand because say whatever you want about Paul how harsh he is he has an end goal of correct behavior of unity of spiritual blessing he just doesn't mind getting there by any means necessary fear love carrot stick whatever is going to work
(20:11) let's shape these people up or ship them out so you can argue with his methodologies or the philosophy of how one should correct another but he does have to the Christian ideal the correct desired outcome we see an analogy that has been used before expanded on here by Paul and one is the body of Christ we see this mainly in 1 Corinthians 12 and also and similar to the body of Christ like in 1 Corinthians three we get the foundation the building Paul calls himself the master builder laying the foundation While others will come and build upon it like many writers uh and like much of the Bible Paul likes to
(20:48) play with contrast wisdom versus foolishness strength versus weakness Unity versus division he's pretty thorough in showing all sides and where people are currently out on this spectrum and where they need to be and so his use of contrast is something worth noting the love passage sticks out to me if we're doing a literary analysis it's Himel in nature it's often considered a himm to love it's got this poetic structure nature to it that the rest of 1 Corinthians does not have and then also unique here is 1 Corinthians 15 which is Paul repeating a credle
(21:21) statement and this is something we'll see often just restating the gospel message essentially so we'll see a lot of this from Paul as we get into the rest of the Epistles but I think between this more rebuking epistle versus the more theological Romans you're seeing some of the differences in how he chooses to utilize his writing to create different effects for different audiences but let's move on to 0 five which is main themes I have just a few for you the first one is Unity there's a reason the metaphor here in this book is that of the body many parts coming
(21:55) together to form one whole this is how Paul sees the individuals that make up the church and like a body there's a different hierarchy of importance the head the heart the hands the feet Etc and so he plays off of that with church leadership and the roles for certain individuals and even within spiritual giftings which we could make our second category spiritual gifts with everything that happens in 1 Corinthians 14 and where it crops up elsewhere in this book we'd have to say spiritual gifts is a main theme of 1 Corinthians third would
(22:25) be love again not just because of 1 Corinthians 13 but in Paul begging for Unity he often talks about love the love of Christ that is in us that Christ has given to us how we should be giving it to others as we unify fourth would be Resurrection I mean Man 1 Corinthians 15 is very obvious it's a huge part of this book it really is the Final Chapter you know 16 is the Final Chapter but it's all the greetings and the call for an offering he ends the Pinnacle here becomes 1 Corinthians 15 about resurrection and then the last them just because of everything we get from like 4 to 9 is going to be Christian ethics
(23:03) which I think we've explained pretty well
reception and influence
so moving on to point six reception and influence the first place to see the impact of First Corinthians is on the early church fathers we've talked about many of these who really like Paul you've got Clement of Rome ignacius of Antioch and irus have all quoted we know they've quoted First Corinthians in fact it was Clement who about 40 50 years later writes his own letter to the Corinthians where he references First Corinthians and also the early Christian
(23:32) Creeds that are going around some of them are based very obviously off of First Corinthians 15 so the early church the early church fathers they had a lot of influence coming from this book of course just church doctrines and practice in general concerning tongues spiritual gifts acts of worship Church Unity ethical Behavior like these are being set down foundationally even more so than the doctrines you have certain theologies at play in 1 Corinthians we get Christ's nature and work work through the death on the cross and what his resurrection means so christology
(24:02) and Sodor ly some notable interpretations and adaptations we've got Augustine of Hippo getting into Western Christian thought and ideologies on love and grace and Resurrection we have John costum known for his very elegant sermons his homilies on First Corinthians were amazingly influential for providing detailed exegesis and pastoral teaching you know aquinus in his sum theologica utilizes 1 Corinthians extensively for his work on charity or love as a virtue and within the Protestant Reformation Luther is utilizing First Corinthians for the topics of faith and works in the
(24:39) sacrament and all the way up to Modern theology something known as Liberation theology is really rooted in books like First Corinthians emphasizing solidarity Community Justice and equality of course still very modern are ideas about sex and differences between men and women from a Christian Perspective 100% are pulled from First Corinthians in addition to others the love chapter you know as you look at weddings it's the main thing read at a wedding so even within Christian unions utilizing this book so the the reception influence I
(25:12) mean we could make entire videos on reception and influence for any particular New Testament book especially Paul's Epistles
Contradictions
I think it's time to move on to contradictions, followed by problematic passages. As always, let's go to the list. Please note that not all differences are contradictions, and I do point out differences here. Within book to book, Paul is pretty consistent, but there is one thing you could make an argument for. In 1 Corinthians 11:5, Paul permits women to pray and prophesy in public, provided they cover their heads. However, in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, Paul says that women should remain silent in church. These aren't necessarily the same, but the reason I point this out is because Christians who want to make the case that the "remain silent" part is an addition will say, "Well, look, Paul obviously is okay with women praying and prophesying in public." It is possible there was a distinct difference to Paul between being in public and within the church. Also, having your head covered, or even Paul says maybe just cut the hair short, but since that isn't right to do, then definitely cover your head. There are implications there that I don't want to try to make a case for, which you can get from the Old Testament about it causing lust to the angels above, and that this would be the real issue. Thus, why cutting the hair short would also help because it would not be as feminine. If you think this kind of thing is crazy, again, you just haven't read your Old Testament. If you think Paul isn't reading the Old Testament to get a lot of his ideas, it's not that far of a leap, but again, it would take a lot of explaining and something that's not worth doing here for 1 Corinthians.
There are plenty of contradictions and differences when we compare 1 Corinthians to other works in the Bible, so let's get into those. I think the first thing I could point out is salvation and baptism issues. I mentioned how Paul seems to not even care about the same things Jesus cares about. I'll give you an example: Matthew 28:19, this is from Jesus, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." Now Peter, who knew Jesus unlike Paul, if we can believe Acts 2:38, says, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." So here, there's a link between salvation and baptism. You kind of took what Jesus said and went further with it. Then Paul, in 1 Corinthians 1:17, says, "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and elegance, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power." This is what I mean; it's like Paul has created his own complete identity in theology of a hierarchy of importance, and he has just chosen to go so differently. We know that Paul and Peter conflict a lot, but again, if you were a Christian and trying to figure out which way to go, would it not make more sense to go off Jesus's very words and Peter, whom Jesus chooses to build his rock, the church, upon? It's why it's so crazy to me that Paul's letters became so much more the value system of the Christian doctrine building than that of Jesus and his actual followers. The problem is they're all included in the canon, so even if you said, "No, yeah, you're right," you can't just dismiss everything Paul is saying here. Otherwise, you have to say, "We got it wrong," and because no one is willing to do that, everyone is utilizing all of this obviously contradicting behavior.
Now, I won't take this much time on all of them, but this is how clear these differences are. Paul says something interesting about tongues in 1 Corinthians 14:22: "Tongues, then, are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is not for unbelievers but for believers." But in Acts 2:4-6, you have the account of Pentecost, where speaking in tongues is obviously for the believers. In fact, it is a sign for believers that the Holy Spirit has come upon them. Now I'm about to go into a contradiction between 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy. Again, many even Christian scholars are on board that 1 Timothy is a forgery, so you can easily say, "Bring it in, no contradiction here; one was written by Paul, one was not." Well, we have many other books not written by Paul in the canon that we would still call out contradictions between, and the bigger issue here is why are there forgeries in the Bible? If Christians know about those forgeries, how can we trust other parts of the Bible? This isn't an argument from inerrancy, where the whole Bible has to be perfect or the whole thing's blown, which I think you can kind of make a case for. But when half the epistles of Paul are up for question, I think we really need to consider how we got the canon we have and why other books aren't included that have massive contradictions or why we've included the books we do have. As soon as you say, "Oh, there's enough contradictions between them that we have to admit it's a forgery," then this just comes down to the picky and choosiness of what Christians are willing to call contradiction issues everywhere.
But I'm going to go ahead and state this: in 1 Corinthians 7:8-9, we have Paul suggesting to remain unmarried if possible; it is better for the kingdom of God. But if you burn with lust, go ahead and get married because sexual sin is so horrendous. Now, this is horrible advice in general. Many people are not ready for marriage; many people need to date each other longer, mature more as individuals, etc. This we see still trickle down into very young Christians getting married because they can't keep their hands off each other, terrified of sexual sin, only to pop out a few kids and get divorced a few years later because they weren't compatible. Now we have broken families with real harmful effects. I hate this verse; I think it is horrendous advice, all from a fear of sex. But contrast that with 1 Timothy 4:1-3: "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. They forbid people to marry." So here, the author of 1 Timothy is warning against those who forbid marriage.
Judging others: what does Jesus teach in Matthew 7:1-2? "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." But in 1 Corinthians 5:2-13, Paul specifically instructs the Corinthians to judge those inside the church. He says, "What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. Expel the wicked person from among you." So this is what I was referencing earlier, and we'll get into some problematic passages. Paul is harsh here: in-group, out-group, get rid of them. Paul says, "Hey, sexually immoral people, get them out, judge them, and leave them in the dust." And again, Jesus is saying, "Don't judge." It's just crazy to me.
Resurrection appearance: we'll just move on. Obviously, the gospels couldn't even agree on resurrection appearances—who Jesus appeared to, when, and how many—and the total number. Then Paul just makes up his own list. Again, in 1 Corinthians 15:5-8, the Gospel according to Paul mentions the appearance of Jesus to Peter, the twelve, the other 500 brethren, James, all of the apostles, and lastly himself. Now, just because the other gospel writers left out the 500 would not immediately mean that it didn't happen. But just like Matthew's raising of all the Jewish dead that come to life and walk around the city, when you have an event that is so amazing, if you're a gospel writer trying to record the history of this thing, you would think you'd include it. So it does cast a huge shadow of doubt on that event in Matthew happening if other authors don't mention it or the fact that there were 500 witnesses if none of the gospel writers are going to mention that. Even if all of them mentioned 500 witnesses, it still wouldn't prove anything other than that there was a claim that 500 people witnessed this resurrection. We don't have any evidence from any of those people. I can tell you right now there's 500 people outside my house, and all you have to go on is my word. There's a good chance there's not 500 people outside my house when you consider that houses aren't typically in places where you can look out your window and see 500 people. How much more crazy for a one-off claim by one person to say 500 people saw this man raised from the dead? You need more than that. We should not just give this one to Paul. Furthermore, again, it contradicts the gospels.
You know, Paul, for everything he says and how intellectual he comes across and how logical he tries to be, really doesn't like knowledge or wisdom. You know, he has things like 1 Corinthians 1:20: "Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?" Or in 1 Corinthians 8:1: "We all possess knowledge, but knowledge puffs up." This negative connotation, and he contrasts this with where love builds up. But all throughout the Old Testament, we hear about the importance, specifically in Proverbs, of wisdom: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," that fools despise wisdom. It kind of seems like Paul despises wisdom and has replaced it with love. I think that's interesting, and I've read it a couple of times now, and I wonder if it caught your ear weird. But in 1 Corinthians 2:1-2: "And so it is with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God." This is a very different Paul than we get in the accounts of Acts, which again just tells us why we have very little reason to believe Acts. But in Acts 17:22-34, and just summarizing here, you know, Paul is utilizing the culture of the day and talking about all this poetry and philosophy from the culture as he preaches about Jesus. So again, an issue.
Next would be even just considering what Paul does say about marriage here in 1 Corinthians 7:28: "But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this." Again, talking about how it's better not to marry. But the wisest man who ever lived, and no one would ever be wiser, is what the Bible tells us about Solomon, says this in Proverbs 18:22: "He who finds a wife finds what is good and receives favor from the Lord." Did he just not read these parts? We know he quotes the Old Testament. Did he not have access to a book of Proverbs? Did he think he was wiser than Solomon? Did he not read that no one can be wiser than Solomon? Was this an issue just to Paul, and he's projecting? How did he reconcile this and all the other differences? Again, when he directly contradicts even the teachings of Jesus, like on baptism, I just—oof—it's very strange to me, and I think it's something worth thinking about. Again, when Christians get so much ammo and doctrine and identity from Paul's epistles, maybe not even realizing it, it's just something that they know is in the New Testament. How are they reconciling this?
Now, this could be a change as Paul progresses in ministry, but there's a big, I think, contradiction in if one should be able to make a living off of ministry. In 1 Corinthians 9:14, Paul says, "In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel." This is what the Lord commands. But in Acts 20:34-35, Paul says, "You yourselves know that these hands of mine have supplied my own needs and the needs of my companions. In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak." So there we know that Paul—I think Paul was a tentmaker, if I'm not confusing it—you know, he makes his own living on the side to support his ministry. But it's commanded by the Lord that those who do preach the gospel should make their living off of doing so. This verse is also bent and used by most prosperity teachers about why they have a right to their private jets and their expensive cars and their $2,000 sweaters and things like this.
Another thing I want to point out—sorry, it's the head covering thing in 1 Corinthians that has so much we could talk about. You know, in 1 Corinthians 11:10, "It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head because of the angels." You know, and I referenced you can make a pretty strong case, I think, back to the angels looking down on the women of men and lusting after them. But this is beside the point. Listen to Galatians 3:28: "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, nor is there male and female." Now, I'm going to make a point that is totally not about this book, but bear with me. In 1 Corinthians, Paul is clear about the differences between men and women, whether it is speaking in church, whether it is head coverings, whether it is in marriage and what they owe one another. This is clear. Paul knows there's a difference between men and women. So what does he mean in Galatians when he says there is no male or female in salvation? So where's the contradiction here? I'm just using this to show that every single time you bring up slavery with a Christian, they say, "Ah, what about the New Testament where Paul says there is neither slave nor free?" Just as clearly as there are males and females, there are free men and slaves. To say that that verse is in any way condemning the act of slavery is as stupid as saying that that verse is in any way saying that in the view of Paul, he's wrong that there's a difference between men and women. Hopefully, you understand my point there. I hate that excuse for slavery.
The Lord's Supper is interesting. We get in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26: "Do this in remembrance of me," and many denominations hold on to a verse like this, that it is a symbolic gesture. It is a reference back to the importance of Jesus's sacrifice. Yet we know there are many denominations who take it more seriously, the transubstantiation, and they believe more along the lines of John 6:53-56, where you are consuming the actual flesh and blood of Jesus. It is not a symbolic gesture, and if you fall into either one of these camps, you think the other camp is ridiculous. But I'm just showing where we're getting these ideas and contradictions from.
This next one—oh, I'm nervous to bring it up because I can hear the arguments, but let's try to flesh this out. In 1 Corinthians 10:13: "No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear." Now compare this with James 1:13: "When tempted, no one should say, 'God is tempting me,' for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone." What I can hear the Christians saying is, "God doesn't tempt anyone, but he will allow temptation up to a certain point." I actually don't think this delta really exists. If God is controlling whatever circumstances are allowing me to be tempted, then he is indeed controlling temptation itself. It's the exact same argument as "God doesn't cause evil; he just allows natural things to happen, some of which are evil because of the fall that he allowed with his foreknowledge," right? Like, you get into the minutiae of that, but I don't think it's minutiae. I think it's incredibly important. In the same way that the buck of evil stops with God, if he's controlling the levels of temptation, he's allowing temptation in the first place. We see this, right? Satan, or the accuser, had to come before the Lord with his plans for what he was going to do to Job, and only with God's allowance could he go and try to tempt Job away via suffering. It's an unnecessary distinction to say Satan did it. No, he could only do it with God's allowance, and therefore God did it. Transitive properties, people.
Problematic Passages
But anyway, let's move on to our final part: problematic passages. Now, the good news is I think I've covered a lot of problematic passages as we've gone through, so hopefully, this doesn't have to be too extensive, but just thorough. That's 1 Corinthians 11:5-6, mainly the same thing with women being permitted not to speak in church, that's 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. In 1 Corinthians 5:1-5, this is where Paul is calling out the sexual immorality of incest that was gossiped about in the Church, where the man slept with his father's wife. After addressing it, he says, "For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus." The same Jesus who said not to pass judgment on the one who has been doing this. So when you are assembled, and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. What does this mean? Whatever it means, it's incredibly extreme. Not only is he actually judging, which he should not be doing, but whatever this means to hand this man over to Satan, there are many different theological ideas about what this means, and I don't think any of them are good. Also, what is the church's role here? Are they the police? Are they judge and jury? Is this a crime? Are they to carry out some sort of sentencing for it? This is scary stuff.
Let's move on next to 1 Corinthians 6:9-10: "Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." Now, we could talk about Paul's takes on homosexuality. In fact, it's how Romans starts; there's quite a bit there in Romans 1. But this shouldn't be surprising. Paul was a Hebrew of Hebrews. Leviticus says it's an abomination, so it's not so much about that to me that I'm making this verse about. Listen to all the things included in here, which of course, he had to throw that one in specifically: thieves, greedy, drunkards, slanderers. It always amazes me how many people—I guess I am making it about the homosexual thing a little bit—because how many Christians who are so opposed to homosexuality utilize this verse to show, "Oh hey, it's not just an Old Testament thing, okay, it's New Testament too." It's horrible on the same level as gossip and drinking too much, which most of those people have gossiped about their homosexual neighbors and are thus equally cast out of inheriting the kingdom of God according to this verse. So I think it's the inconsistency there that bugs me so much. What does this mean? They won't inherit the kingdom of God? Are these particular sins not forgivable, not redeemable, or is it people that live in these continuing sins because they're lifestyle sins? Is he just saying before receiving the grace of Christ? It's not even my misunderstanding here; it's the inconsistent application of Christians within this verse that is the problem to me.
How about 1 Corinthians 7:20-21: "Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them. Were you a slave when you were called? Don't let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so." If you guys have watched this channel, you know I think the biggest case we can make is that the Bible 100% condones and endorses slavery, one of the biggest cases in the Old and New Testament. And just as I showed earlier that in Galatians, it's not a get-out-of-jail-free card because there's no slave or free person does not actually mean there's no slavery. Here in this verse, remain in the situation where you were. Hey, if you're a slave and you find Christ, you're included in salvation; you're still a slave. If you can gain your freedom, do so, but no admonishment that slavery is wrong. And I want you to think about everything Paul is willing to say is wrong, how harshly he judges what he thinks is wrong. If there was anything in Paul's mind, which is supposedly directly connected to the revelation of Christ Jesus, this is where we would have heard about it, and we did not. This is not as simple as an omission. By the fact of the omission in light of all of the prescription, we can see that Paul and thus Jesus, God, have no issue with slavery.
1 Corinthians 7:8-9: "Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion." Why shouldn't we just be called to control ourselves? He's saying homosexuality is unforgivable. He doesn't say, "Oh, but if your homosexual tendencies are so strong, here's a good outlet." So why make this little exception for lust, which is a subpart of the entire issue? The obvious issue here is again the harm that it leads to, which I already talked about. I want to utilize the next verse once again to point out the contradiction and impossibility of reconciling the God of the Old Testament with the God of the New. 1 Corinthians 7:18-19: "Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Yes, that was a thing. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts." So what do you do with the fact that it was God's command for those who followed him to be circumcised from the very prescription of things with Abraham, that every man and slave in his house be circumcised? Now, we've pointed this out before with the dietary laws and everything else. Paul's just saying it doesn't matter anymore. He's just made this a thing. Jesus never said this. Jesus said, "Do not think I've not come to uphold the law and the prophets, every dot and tittle."
The next one here is 1 Corinthians 6:1-2: "If any of you have a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord's people? Or do you not know that the Lord's people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases?" This, to me, says Christians, listen, in-group stuff, when you guys mess up, when you have a problem with each other, you don't let the rest of the world know. Sweep it under the rug. Don't seek secular, objective legal recourse. How many Christians have been harmed by this kind of thinking? How many sexual abusers have been covered up for by the church so as not to cause doubt or division? And also from this place of insane arrogance, Christians are the ones to judge the world. Again, not what Jesus says. So therefore, they have the obvious right and power to judge the trivial cases amongst one another. No, they are no better at making decisions. If anything, the bias and bigotry within make them less capable. The fear of being found out from the objective public on the fact that they aren't a new creation, that they aren't doing things better through some power of the Holy Spirit than anyone else. They divorce at the same rate, they rape at the same rate, they beat their children at the same rate. It's absolutely insane to me that we have no proof of being a new creation in Christ or what the power of the Holy Spirit allows someone to actually act differently in their life, and yet verses like this suggest that they are better and they should handle conflicts internally. It is a prescription for abuse. This I know to be true.
Listen to this insanity: 1 Corinthians 11:29-30: "For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. That is why many of you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep." Now, I believe "fallen asleep" there to mean to die. So this passage is suggesting that improper participation in the Lord's Supper can actually lead to physical sickness and death. Tell me Paul isn't still operating in this weird world of sin leading to death and sickness, that this is the root cause. Oh, someone got sick when they did the Last Supper in remembrance of Jesus; they didn't have the right heart about it. I remember being warned about this kind of thing in church. "Hey, if you're going to participate in communion, okay, you need to get right. You need to have repented and asked for forgiveness of sins, or otherwise, don't do this." It's coming from verses like this. Still today, we believe this insanity that there's some implicit curse for not being in the right headspace when participating in these rituals. Think about how ridiculous this sounds. Have you heard of any other religion where you go and you perform a pseudo-cannibalism on your dead savior that's not really dead anyway, where you eat his flesh and drink his blood, either realistically or metaphorically, and that if you're not thinking the right thoughts as you do it, you can get sick and die? And yet that's what Christians have to believe if they accept these New Testament scriptures. The insanity, not just of this religion, but the arrogance and insanity to call all other religions so stupid or pagan or weird or off or whatever the judgment is, while not recognizing that this is their reality. It really is just ridiculous to me.
1 Corinthians 7:3-4: "The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his body but yields it to his wife." Oh look, Brandon, it's equal. He's saying the same thing to the husband. Yeah, except there are not many cases, and there are some, and this verse would be equally ridiculous in that case. But generally speaking, it is women who suffer because of this. If you're the kind of Christian that thinks marital rape can't happen because of this verse, you are the exact proof of how corrupt this line of thinking is.
And I think we'll just stop there. We've covered a lot. I was a little more slow and specific with the contradictions and problematic passages than just throwing them up on the screen, so let me know if you preferred that. Thank you for being here. See, again, I think we covered a ton of ground that we simply did not get in Romans, and I hope that you are seeing the educational purposes of each book. That's my goal. I don't ever just want it to be another one for another episode, and I think there's enough that we can pull out most of these. We'll see when we get to like third John, who knows how that's going to go, but we've got some room to grow still. So thanks for being here. I appreciate it. I'll see you Sunday with a new video, and until then, keep thinking.
I wanted to personally thank my top tiers of support: Myconic and Boris GVI, Jacob, Joe, Martin, Oliver, Perry, Rocket, and Shan, my Humanist Heroes Jared, James, and Christe, my Atheist Advocates Caleb, Imposter Jeff, Jeffrey, Karen, Paul, Sparky, and Todd, as well as all of my Secular Scholar patrons. If you believe in the mission of this channel or you just enjoy the content, please consider joining these fine people today.