Study on 1 Cor 12:2-3

[binyanpiel]

The study began because verses 2 & 3 of 1 Cor 12 seem barely related at all with the first verse and neither did the two verses seem to have anything to do with the spiritual gifts spoken of so much in the remainder of the chapter. Since the sense of continuity was not there, it appeared necessary to study on these two verses and find out why they are there.

Verse 1 begins this section by saying: Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.

Then Paul writes: 2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led. 3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

What does their having been idolaters and whether or not a man says Jesus is Lord or the other have to do with the giving of spiritual gifts by the Holy Spirit?

Of course, we could say that no one who is an idolater could have the Holy Spirit and therefore couldn't receive the gifts from Him. Neither could any one call Jesus accursed who had the Holy Spirit.

Ok, but how do the two bits of information Paul gave so far, ie, that they once were idolaters and what one calls Jesus make them any less ignorant about spiritual gifts?

I looked these verses up in John Gill's Exposition of the Bible. He indicates that the word "gifts" is not actually found written in verse 1 but was added by translators, probably because the rest of the chapter is so manifestly about spiritual gifts.

Now if verse 1 were written in that way it would read "Now concerning spiritual, brethren, I would not have you ignorant."

For it to make sense in English we could safely add either "the" before spiritual or "things" after, as easily as the translators added "gifts" and then the verses following make perfect sense since they speak of spiritual matters.

And we can see that Paul begins to tell them of spiritual things by reminding them that some of them were once ignorant of the truly spiritual, having been deceived by serving false gods, and even, Gill says, "the unconverted Gentiles, who knew nothing of Jesus but by report; which report they had from the Jews, his enemies; and by that report he appeared to them to be a very wicked and detestable person, who was put to death by the means of his own countrymen, was hanged upon a tree, and so to be counted and called accursed".

Gill writes that he thinks that Paul probably referenced this in particular because some of the Corinthians might have "called him (such) before their conversion" or else, he goes on to say, Paul spoke these words to "the Jews, who not only, whil(e) Jesus was living, blasphemed him, but continued to call him accursed after his death".

So, it would seem that the most important thing Paul wanted them to learn here was that some had been deceived into following after idols and therefore were ignorant of spiritual things, having much to learn about the workings of God, and for others that the proof of ignorance is in calling Jesus anything but the Son of God, the Most High God, and the giver of the Holy Spirit as well as of His gifts.

Now, what do you think?

(By the way, to access John Gill's Exposition online, the url is http://bible.crosswalk.com/. Type in the verse you want information on, click on the "Include study tools" box, enter the version of the Bible you want, and click "Find". Once you have the verse up you'll see the study tools list on the right, click on "Gil" for John Gill or any other on the list and see what was written about your verse in the new window.)

[The Unassumed]

I looked these verses up in John Gill's Exposition of the Bible. He indicates that the word "gifts" is not actually found written in verse 1 but was added by translators, probably because the rest of the chapter is so manifestly about spiritual gifts.

Now if verse 1 were written in that way it would read "Now concerning spiritual, brethren, I would not have you ignorant."

For it to make sense in English we could safely add either "the" before spiritual or "things" after, as easily as the translators added "gifts" and then the verses following make perfect sense since they speak of spiritual matters.
The Greek text refers to pneumatikwn (pneumatikon). The form of the word is either masculine (and probably means 'spiritual people'), or neuter (and probably means 'spiritual things'). The context of the passage determines the meaning, as Gill notes. And the context quite clearly supports "spiritual things."


What does their having been idolaters and whether or not a man says Jesus is Lord or the other have to do with the giving of spiritual gifts by the Holy Spirit?
There are a few suggestions on the nature of Paul's reference to their pre-conversion experience with dumb idols. Perhaps Paul is calling the bluff on those who claim to be spiritual – noting that they were earlier led astray by dumb idols? In keeping with his earlier rebuttal of the Corinthians' claim to be 'super-spiritual', Paul also manages to relativize all such claims to greater spiritual attainment, by saying everybody who merely says 'Jesus is Lord' has the Spirit. Various hypothetical backgrounds have been suggested for the saying 'Jesus is cursed': a persecution setting, an ecstatic utterance, a Jewish cry against Christians. But it possibly is only provided as a contrast with 'Jesus is Lord', with no particular reference.

[commonman]

The study began because verses 2 & 3 of 1 Cor 12 seem barely related at all with the first verse and neither did the two verses seem to have anything to do with the spiritual gifts spoken of so much in the remainder of the chapter. Since the sense of continuity was not there, it appeared necessary to study on these two verses and find out why they are there.

Verse 1 begins this section by saying: Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.

Then Paul writes: 2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led. 3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

What does their having been idolaters and whether or not a man says Jesus is Lord or the other have to do with the giving of spiritual gifts by the Holy Spirit?

Of course, we could say that no one who is an idolater could have the Holy Spirit and therefore couldn't receive the gifts from Him. Neither could any one call Jesus accursed who had the Holy Spirit.

Ok, but how do the two bits of information Paul gave so far, ie, that they once were idolaters and what one calls Jesus make them any less ignorant about spiritual gifts?

I looked these verses up in John Gill's Exposition of the Bible. He indicates that the word "gifts" is not actually found written in verse 1 but was added by translators, probably because the rest of the chapter is so manifestly about spiritual gifts.

Now if verse 1 were written in that way it would read "Now concerning spiritual, brethren, I would not have you ignorant."

For it to make sense in English we could safely add either "the" before spiritual or "things" after, as easily as the translators added "gifts" and then the verses following make perfect sense since they speak of spiritual matters.

And we can see that Paul begins to tell them of spiritual things by reminding them that some of them were once ignorant of the truly spiritual, having been deceived by serving false gods, and even, Gill says, "the unconverted Gentiles, who knew nothing of Jesus but by report; which report they had from the Jews, his enemies; and by that report he appeared to them to be a very wicked and detestable person, who was put to death by the means of his own countrymen, was hanged upon a tree, and so to be counted and called accursed".

Gill writes that he thinks that Paul probably referenced this in particular because some of the Corinthians might have "called him (such) before their conversion" or else, he goes on to say, Paul spoke these words to "the Jews, who not only, whil(e) Jesus was living, blasphemed him, but continued to call him accursed after his death".

So, it would seem that the most important thing Paul wanted them to learn here was that some had been deceived into following after idols and therefore were ignorant of spiritual things, having much to learn about the workings of God, and for others that the proof of ignorance is in calling Jesus anything but the Son of God, the Most High God, and the giver of the Holy Spirit as well as of His gifts.

Now, what do you think?

(By the way, to access John Gill's Exposition online, the url is http://bible.crosswalk.com/. Type in the verse you want information on, click on the "Include study tools" box, enter the version of the Bible you want, and click "Find". Once you have the verse up you'll see the study tools list on the right, click on "Gil" for John Gill or any other on the list and see what was written about your verse in the new window.)

I think you have properly deduced the context of the passage. Congratulations!