This category includes all posts that are primarily about exegesis (biblical interpretation), except for posts already included in the Church Chat category.
“I and my wife are thankful God answered our prayers and gave us children.”
Yes, “I and my wife.”
Now, grammar grumps, cool your fingers and curb your complaints. đ I claim divine precedent for putting myself before my wife. Or at least scriptural precedent. Or at least Pauline precedent.
Oh, and I’m not relying on mere gender doctrine, either—which would actually tell me to put myself last. I have better justification for my grammar.
In 1 Corinthians 9:6, Paul wrote, “Is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living?”
Except that isn’t what he actually wrote.
This is what he actually wrote: “ÎŒÏÎœÎżÏ áŒÎłáœŒ Îșα᜶ ÎαÏΜαÎČáŸ¶Ï ÎżáœÎș áŒÏÎżÎŒÎ”Îœ áŒÎŸÎżÏ ÏÎŻÎ±Îœ Όᜎ áŒÏγΏζΔÏΞαÎč;”
In Greek: “áŒÎłáœŒ Îșα᜶ ÎαÏΜαÎČ៶ϔ (“I and Barnabas”)
In English: “Barnabas and I”
That’s how the ESV “corrects” Paul’s good Greek grammar to make it good English grammar. The KJV and about a dozen other English translations retain Paul’s order, but most read like the ESV.
Surprisingly, however, here is the NIV: “I and Barnabas.”
Wow! I see no semantic reason for retaining the Greek order of these words, and the NIV places a high priority on using normal English language conventions. Yet here they are more hyper word-for-word than the ESV. What gives?
At any rate, there you have it: Both Paul and the NIV give me permission to put myself first.
He is blind and has been blind since birth. He can neither see nor speak, though occasionally he laughs. His head is large, and his hands are small. His legs are twisted, and his feet are as tiny as a five-year-oldâs. He canât learn. He canât even lift his head. He has to be spoon-fed and sponge-bathed, and someone has to change his diapers. Sometimes he has convulsions, rattling not only the frame of his bed but the hearts of those who love himâŠ
Who would think that in that bed was the power to move presidents? Who would think that muteness could be so eloquent? That blindness could open so many eyes? Who would think that so many lives would be uplifted by someone who couldnât lift his own head?
You would. You would think those things. If you had been to Oliverâs roomâŠ
So writes Ken Gire, in his forward to Christopher de Vinckâs memoir about his brother, Oliver. Few books have moved me as powerfully as this one.
Gire continues:
From the bed in Oliverâs room comes a glimmer of Bethlehem. If you will not look away, you will see something of what was revealed in the straw and swaddling clothes of the manger.
You will see the power of the powerless.
It is the way God works in a world that idolizes strength and worships the means of attaining it. âHis strength is perfected in weakness,â is the way the Bible puts it. And weakness is what you find when you come to Oliverâs room.1
The book is called The Power of the Powerless. Henri J. M. Nouwen writes the introduction:
Chris⊠writes about⊠people who by many are considered misfits, vegetables, tragic flaws of nature, people about whom many feel that it would have been better if they had not been born. But for Chris these people are Godâs messengers, they are the divine instruments of Godâs healing presence, they are the ones who bring truth to a society full of lies, light into the darkness, and life into a death-oriented world.2
If the words of Gire and Nouwen resonate with you, read de Vinckâs book for yourself. Â His brother Oliver illustrates the central point of this blog series: âweakâ people are indispensable in Jesusâ church.
“In patristic thought the theme recurs that believers need those to whom they can show active care, protection, support, and love,â writes Thiselton. âOtherwise they cannot serve as Christ served âfor others.ââ 3 We need âweakâ Christians, and God intentionally composed Christâs church to include them.
âThe church is a school for sinners, not a museum for saints.â4 This witticism, Thiselton notes, âunderlines that a church made up only of self-styled âgiftedâ elite would not be the church of Christ.â5
IS WEAKNESS ALWAYS GOOD?
Weakness and mutual suffering are not the sum total of Godâs purposes for us, of course. His eternal design includes much more. That body you inhabit, which is the scene of so much dishonor and weakness? âIt is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in powerâ (1 Cor. 15:43).
Even now, what was true of the blind man in John 9 is also sometimes true of us: He was born blind, not because he or his parents had sinned, true enough, but also not because God intended for him to remain blind his entire life. Rather, he was born blind âthat the works of God might be displayed in himââthe works, that is, of God healing him and thus demonstrating that Jesus was sent from God (John 9:3).
If this blind man had resisted being healed by Jesus, his weakness would have missed its purpose. What about us?
And should we really lump all forms of weakness together as equal? Surely it is not only the “strong” who should seek to become skilled physicians of the soul who can distinguish between different soul diseases. Those who are “weak” must likewise seek to be honest about the mix of physical, emotional, and spiritual causes of their weaknesses, submitting to God’s grace for each.
It is also true that, though weaknesses need not destroy our usefulness in the church in general, they may limit our usefulness for specific missions. Well-meaning Christians wonât always agree when this is the case; recall Paul and Barnabas splitting ways over John Mark (Acts 15:37-40).
We do not know what sort of weakness (spiritual? emotional? physical?) caused Mark to âwithdrawâ from the âworkâ of Paulâs first missionary trip. Whatever the cause, Paul experienced Markâs withdrawal as an indication that he could not be trusted to persevere in the hard work of traveling gospel ministry. Yet Markâs life contains many lessons for both âweakâ and âstrongâ Christians. Consider:
Barnabas took Mark with him on a mission trip to Cyprus; quite likely he proved useful there under his cousin Barnabasâs softer leadership.
Mark later proved to be âvery usefulâ to Paul âfor ministryâ (2 Tim. 4:11).
Mark was humble enough that, despite having been rejected by Paul, he was willing to again be one of Paulâs âfellow workersâ (Phm. 1:24).
Paul was humble enough to call Mark âvery useful,â to count him as a âfellow worker,â and to make a special point of insisting that others âwelcome himâ (Col. 4:10).
Markâs great usefulness was revealed most powerfully when he wrote his Gospel.
Was it wise for Paul to refuse to take Mark along on his return missionary trip? We really donât have enough data to answer that question well. What we do know is that âweakâ Mark proved indispensable to the Church for all ages.
Markâs story also suggests that âweakâ Christians may grow in strength and usefulness. Similarly, right after our key passage about God honoring the weak, Paul urges us to âearnestly desire the higher giftsâ (1 Cor. 12:31). We should not assume that God intends for us to remain lacking in new gifts that could equip us for new forms of service.
LOVE, WEAKNESS, AND THE GOSPEL
But something is even more important than âthe higher gifts.â Something is better even than if all of us possessed all the gifts, better than if we all appeared strong and bursting with honor. âI will show you a still more excellent wayâ (1 Cor. 12:31).
That more excellent way is the way of love (1 Cor. 13). And in this broken world, love blossoms most fragrantly in Christâs body when we do not each possess all the gifts that are most honored among us. Love blooms most fully when some of us appear weak.
And so we rest in Godâs design. âGod arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he choseâ (1 Cor. 12:18).
If simply getting out of bed in the morning to feed your family requires every ounce of your of faith, then perhaps God says of you as Jesus said of the widow who put two small coins into the temple offering box:
Truly, I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all of them. For they all contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on. (Luke 21:3-4)
Perhaps this widow overheard Jesusâ words. If so, imagine how honored she felt!
Witherington reminds us that the same sort of honor must be given to the seemingly weak within the church:
Paul’s word about giving more honor to the weaker members of the body of Christ, the less âpresentableâ ones, needs to be heeded. He believes that even these folk have essential gifts and functions to exercise. It is a mistake to bring the world’s evaluative system into the ekklÄsia and to set up an honor roll that favors the more presentable and dignified, or those with the more outwardly showy or dramatic gifts. Paul believes that the body of Christ is only truly strong when it gives special honor and attention to its weakest members. The more presentable members do not need such attention.6
In offering honor to its weakest members, the church displays something that is essential to the gospel message itself. Listen to Paulâs description of those whom God has gathered around the âfollyâ of cross:
God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. (1 Corinthians 1:27-29)
Paul was speaking, in part, about himself. Later he contrasts himself and the other authentic apostles with the arrogant Corinthians:
I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to death, because we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men. We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are wise in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong. You are held in honor, but we in disrepute. To the present hour we hunger and thirst, we are poorly dressed and buffeted and homeless⊠We have become, and are still, like the scum of the world, the refuse of all things. (1 Cor. 4:9-13, emphasis added)
Again, this âweaknessâ was not a distraction from Paulâs ministry. Nor was it a mere happenstance, a set of circumstances that was neither here nor there. Rather, this âweaknessâ was essential to the nature of the gospel Paul was preaching. It was essential for the display of Godâs grace.
Jesus’ weakness in the manger was an essential element of the gospel story. His weakness on the cross was crucial for our salvation. Just so, our weakness today remains an indispensable part of the good news of God’s mighty kingdom.
âMy grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness,â the Lord assured Paul (2 Cor. 12:9).
The Lordâs assurance is for us, too. Therefore we, like Paul, can respond with courage: âI will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me.â
Are you weak? Do others consider you weak?
Do not despair. Your weakness is exactly what God needs to complete his composition.
He chose you. He placed you. His design is that âthe power of Christâ will ârest uponâ you.
You may appear weak, dishonorable, and even unpresentable. But you are indispensable.
God needs you. Your weakness is Godâs gift to his church.
(Dare I preach this even to myself? âGod needs me. My weakness is Godâs gift to his church.â I believe. Help thou my unbelief!)
Trust the Artist. Someday we will see that every shadow has enhanced his glory and our joy.
Thank you for reading this blog series. I would love to hear your feedback. What is your experience of strengths and weaknesses in the church? Where have you seen Christians do well or poorly in how we honor the “weak” among us? What have I missed in my exposition? Please share your insights in the comments below. Thank you!
Ken Gire, foreword to The Power of the Powerless, by Christopher de Vinck (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995), 9-10. Bold print added. ↩
Henri J. M. Nouwen, introduction to The Power of the Powerless, by Christopher de Vinck (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995), 18. ↩
On page 287 of The Thiselton Companion to Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2015), Thiselton credits this quote to âJ.C. Wand.â Though I have not been able to find the original source, my research confirms that this Wand is otherwise known as John William Charles Wand, Anglican bishop of London after World War II. ↩
What if your weakness is Godâs gift to Christâs church?
I asked this question at the end of my last post, and I plan to return to it. But first, in this post, I want to (1) summarize this blog series so far, and (2) give some advice to âstrongâ Christians.
SUMMARY
This blog series is my attempt to encourage discussion of Paulâs teaching about âthe parts of the body that seem to be weakerâ (1 Cor. 12:22). Here, without adornment, are the main ideas weâve covered:
Discussions about the body of Christ usually conjure images of spiritual gifts and individual strengths. But when God âcomposed the body,â he also intentionally wove into its fabric members who âseem to be weaker,â people whom âwe think less honorableâ or even âunpresentable.â Valuing only strengths will lead to bad fruit.
In the analogy of the body, the âweakerâ members are the hands and feet, but especially the ânecessaryâ or âprivate parts,â which we honor by covering with clothing.
In Christâs body, the âweakerâ Christians are those who tend to be considered weak or embarrassing because of some perceived lack, such as in social status, psychological disposition, aptitude, confidence, spiritual gifting, or knowledge. Often they are perceived as being less âspiritualâ in some way. The symptom that is perceived as weakness often truly exists. But more importantly, it exists as âweaknessâ in the eye of the beholderâin the eyes of other Christians who often feel themselves âstrongâ by comparison.
âWeakerâ Christians are âindispensableâ to the rest of Christâs body. God gives them gifts that are essential. Further, God uses them to unify the church, as other members share in their suffering and extend them honor. Mutual suffering, even mutual embarrassment, stimulates mutual care, which binds the body together in unity.
God designed our physical bodies so that our brains, eyes, and hands instinctively work together to honor our crucial reproductive organs with appropriate clothing. In the same way, God designed Christâs body so that its Spirit-filled members work together to give honor to fellow Christians who appear weaker, knowing they are valued by God and essential to the church. In this way, God gives âgreater honor to the part that lacked it.â
Godâs composition is not something you or I would have dreamed up. But what if what your world most needs is someone with needs? What if your weakness is Godâs gift to Christâs church?
ADVICE TO THE “STRONG”
On the other hand, perhaps you donât think of yourself as one of the âweakerâ ones in Jesusâ church. Perhaps you have been granted the gifts, social graces, and spiritual empowerment that have secured you a respected place among Godâs children. Maybe you are typically the strong one in your relationships, usually helping others along, often leading. You feel weak the odd time, but generally people admire you, want to be around you, and want to be like you.
If so, thatâs okay. Itâs not wrong to be strong (howâs that for a slogan?), as long as you remember that your strength is actually Godâs strength, and that it wonât always be yours. Just as âweakerâ Christians are indispensable, so are âstrongerâ ones.
How, then, should a âstrongerâ Christian relate with âweakerâ Christians? This question deserves books; I will discuss one sentence of Scripture. Consider this four-point sermon outline from Paul:
And we urge you, brothers, admonish the idle, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all. (1 Thess. 5:14)
Paul is matching the cure to the disease. He identifies three types of Christians with problems: the idle, the fainthearted, and the weak. And he names three responses to these Christians: admonish, encourage, and help. The way he pairs these responses with these âproblem Christiansâ is most instructive.
The âidleâ are disorderly, disruptive, and unruly. They are not so much lazy as âbusy doing the wrong things,â1 such as being busybodies and spreading false teachings. These people need to be âadmonishedââfirmly warned and even disciplined if necessary (cf. 2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15).
The âfaintheartedâ are timid and discouraged. They may be worried, sad, or low on faith. âThese people did not need to be admonished but persuaded not to give up.â2 If âencouraged,â they will succeed.
The âweakâ may be the least specific category. The word here is a variation of the same word translated âweakerâ in our main passage, 1 Corinthians 12.3 Here, as there, commentators suggest diverse references, such as spiritual shortcomings, physical sickness, economic need, low social status, or psychological weakness. Whatever the case, what these people need is âhelp.â
Our English word âhelpâ may be too vague and weak, however.The same Greek word4 is found three places in the New Testament, where it is translated as âbe devoted toâ (Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:13) or âhold firm toâ (Tit. 1:9). The word seems to imply proximity, focus, and allegiance. Someone who âhelpsâ in this sense will not hold others at a distance, will not devalue or forget them, and will not reject them. Paul is saying we should âtake an interest in [the weak], pay attention to them, and remain loyal to them⊠Those whom society walks over and puts down are lifted up and given support by the church.â5
Finallyâpoint four in Paulâs outlineâall three kinds of Christians require, and must be offered, patience.
AT THE PIANO: WHEN ONLY HELP WILL HELP
In identifying the âidle,â âfainthearted,â and âweak,â Paul seems to be describing three levels of ability: Those who are able and active but unruly, those who are able but inactive because discouraged, and those who are unable and need help. Because of these differing levels of ability, offering the correct response is crucial.
What will happen if we give the unruly encouragement or help? They will probably abuse them. What will happen if we warn the fainthearted? Their discouragement will only deepen. And if we help them without encouraging them? They may never learn to do what they, with encouragement, could do for themselves.
And what about the weak? What if we warn them? What if we feed them motivational words? What will warnings and âencouragementsâ do to their souls if they are truly unable, for whatever reason, to do what we are expecting them to do?
Let me illustrate. Recently we hosted a piano recital in our home. Each of my three daughters played a solo. One of my daughters is developing socially somewhat more slowly than her sisters. She turns inward when she is asked to interact with new people.
When this daughterâs turn came, I asked her aloud, âDo you want to tell us what song youâre playing?â Immediately I read on her silent face the expected answer: No. So I whispered to her, âShall I say it?â Yes, she nodded. She then relaxed, I introduced her song, and we were treated to a lovely, sensitive performance of âSilent Night.â
You can catch the tail end of our daddy-daughter conversation here, along with her performance:
Now what would have happened if, when my daughter communicated that she did not want to introduce her song, I had admonished her in front of a living room full of people? âWhy are you being stubborn? Donât you realize that you are dishonoring our guests? We can wait here until you find enough respect to talk.â As her dad, I simply canât imagine saying anything like this.
What if, instead of rebuking her, I had encouraged her, saying âYou can do it!â or âDonât be afraid!â or âEveryone here is friendly, youâre safe.â While this would have been less damaging, it still wouldnât have been pretty. Suddenly the girl who was already trying to avoid attention would have been thrust doubly into the center of everyoneâs focus. Shame and fear would have washed over her. Even if she had eventually found words, her piano performance would probably have suffered.
No, what my daughter needed in that moment was not admonishment, not encouragement, but help. We’ve all been there! She needed someone who was devoted to her and who would care for her. She needed me to speak for her. And when I gave her the help she needed, she freely shared her gift with the groupâa pleasing performance of a carol she had diligently prepared. As her father, I was, and am, delighted and proud.
âStrongâ Christians, what was true for my daughter is equally true for the âweakerâ Christians in our midst. While every Christian benefits from regular encouragement, and we all need warning from time to time, what âweakâ Christians need most of all is help.
What that special needs teen needs is someone to continually give him attention by rubbing his back, so he doesn’t feel a need to speak out during the service—and a congregation who will laugh good-naturedly when he does. What that post-operation preacher needs is someone to read his sermon for him. What that immigrant family needs is an opportunity to share a song in their own language. What that timid music team member needs is permission to look down at her music instead of at the congregation, so she is not distracted from worship by social anxiety.
I witnessed each of these and more yesterday at the church we visited.
Sure, it takes a lot of patience sometimes, but what “weak” Christians need most of all is help.
PHYSICIANS OF THE SOUL
Christians, then, must learn to be what the Puritans called âphysicians of the soul.â We must learn to not only note symptoms but also diagnose diseases correctly and then apply the right cures.
The easiest thing for all of us, of course, is to note symptomsâsome dishonorable behavior in our âweakerâ brother or sisterâand then diagnose them based on our knowledge of ourselves. âIf I acted the way he did, I would be stubborn, selfish, or unrepentant.â But I am not him and you are not me, and essentially identical symptoms may be caused by very different diseases. We need to listen devotedly to our âweakerâ brother or sister, learning to know them well. If not, we will diagnose wrongly and could apply a âcureâ that actually worsens their disease.
The Puritans had sophisticated diagnostic casebooks containing scores and even hundreds of different personal problems and spiritual conditions. John Owen was representative when he taught that every pastor must understand all the various cases of depression, fear, discouragement, and conflict that are found in the souls of men. This is necessary to apply âfit medicines and remedies unto every sore distemper.â Puritans were true physicians of the soul. Their study of the Scripture and the heart led them to make fine distinctions between conditions and to classify many types and sub-types of problems that required different treatmentsâŠ
In addition, the Puritans were able to make fine distinctions in diagnosing the root causes of the problems. [Richard] Baxterâs sermon, âWhat are the Best Preservatives against Melancholy and Overmuch Sorrow?â discerns four causes of depression (sin, physiology, temperment, and demonic activity) which can exist in a variety of interrelationshipsâŠ
The Puritansâ balanced understanding of the roots of personal problems is not mirrored in the pastoral practice of modem evangelicals. Most counselors tend to âmajorâ in one of the factors mentioned by Baxter. Some will see personal sin as the cause of nearly all problems. Others have built a counseling methodology mainly upon an analysis of âtransformed temperments.â Still others have developed âdeliveranceâ ministries which see personal problems largely in terms of demonic activity. And of course, some evangelicals have adopted the whole âmedical modelâ of mental illness, removing all âmoral blameâ from the patient, who needs not repentance but the treatment of a physician.
But Baxter not only shows an objective openness to discovering any of these factors in diagnosis, he also expects usually to find all of them present. Any of the factors may be the main factor which must be dealt with first in order to deal with the others.
So we see sophistication of the Puritans as physicians of the soul⊠Biblical counselors today, who sometimes are rightfully charged with being simplistic, could learn from the careful diagnostic method of these fathers in the faithâŠ
Most of us talk less about sin than did our forefathers. But, on the other hand, the Puritans amazingly were⊠extremely careful not to call a problem âsinâ unless it was analyzed carefully. One of their favorite texts was: âA bruised reed he will not break, and a smoking flax he will not quenchâ (Matthew 12:20). 6
This, then, is my advice to âstrongâ Christians: seek to be physicians of the soul. We wonât always get it right, of course. But do not assume everyone is as strong as you are. If someoneâs symptoms are due primarily to weakness, then be very slow to offer warning. Be judicious even in how you offer encouragement. Aim primarily to offer help.
Understand, however, that help is not help, biblically speaking, unless it is an expression of authentic devotion and loyalty. In fact, be wary of communicating that you are providing help. Seek ways to personally share in the suffering of the âweakerâ members of Christâs body, experiencing empathy and not merely offering sympathy.
Join God in honoring your âweakerâ brothers and sisters, that your mutual joy may be full. Remember that God is the one who placed both of you in his composition. All colors are indispensable there, not just your brilliant ones. Mourn when your strength inhibits Christâs grace. Offer help to the âweakâ with great patience and devotion. Donât, by holding them at a distance, miss an opportunity for God to increase the unity of Christ’s church.
This post grew beyond my expectations. I want to speak a final word primarily to “weaker” Christians in my final post. (And don’t we all have at least one turn being weak?)
But for now, I invite your responses to this post. I’m sure I’m missing a lot that should be said, so likely my balance isn’t perfect. Did you find something here helpful? Do you have more to add? Please share your insights in the comments below. And thanks for reading.
G.K. Beale, 1-2 Thessalonians, IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2003), 164. ↩
Gene L. Green, The Letters to the Thessalonians, Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 253. ↩
The lexical form for the words in both texts is áŒÏÎžÎ”ÎœÎźÏ. ↩
