§34 The Nature of Enthusiasm (1 Cor. 12:1–3)
This section addresses a new topic, namely, spiritual gifts (or the spiritual gifts of the spiritual ones). The modern reader of this passage may miss simple elements of Paul’s discussion because of the distance between the worldviews of the first century and the present day. No matter what one thinks about such matters at the turn of the twenty-first century, from what Paul wrote, it is clear that he assumed the reality of extraordinary spiritual experiences and understood that his readers would agree. If later readers have difficulty making this assumption, they should recognize that the difficulty is a hermeneutical problem for themselves, not for Paul and his original readers.
At this point in the letter, Paul battles a particular theological explanation that is given to the experiences, not the experiences themselves. The situation seems to be that the Corinthians are taking spiritual gifts as the grounds for comparison among themselves, and that is leading to ranking of gifts and boasting. Among the Corinthians the flamboyant gifts are more cherished and more highly esteemed. Remarkably, some people in Corinth seem to have become so elevated in their spirituality that they had no use for, and even expressed disdain for, the all-too-human Jesus who suffered the disgrace of dying on the cross. Paul will have none of this kind of spiritual expression; he disavows such activity and tells the Corinthians how to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate demonstrations of spiritual power.
12:1 / Verse 1 shows that the Corinthians brought this topic to Paul’s attention. The Greek word translated Now about (peri) has already introduced material at 7:1, 25; 8:1; and will recur at 16:1. In response to whatever question(s) the Corinthians directed to him, Paul states his wish that they not … be ignorant, which implies that the Corinthians do lack adequate information regarding the subject of spiritual matters (see 10:1).
Remarkably, it is not a lack of experience that may make the Corinthians ignorant. From Paul’s discussion one can see that spiritual gifts were manifested abundantly in the Corinthian congregation. The problem that Paul’s remarks reveal was the result not of a lack of experience, but of a lack of proper theological understanding and a lack of spiritual discipline. As Conzelmann remarks, “In the conception of the Spirit they [Paul and the Corinthians] are at one. The point at issue is the theological existence of the believers, their concrete determination by the Spirit” (1 Corinthians, p. 204).
12:2 / The way that Paul addresses the Corinthians, especially in conjunction with the misunderstanding and misappropriation of spiritual gifts, may indicate that he has a particular segment of the congregation in mind. He writes, when you were pagans, recalling a time and experience to which ethnic Jewish Christians would not relate. Paul’s statement accomplishes two things. He gives his readers an indirect but sarcastic reminder that they had been wrong before, and then, on the basis of this image of past pagan experience, he is able to form an analogy to the patterns of behavior in which they are currently engaged. Thus, interpreters often suggest that the difficulties that Paul is about to discuss in chapter 12—perhaps also regarding earlier and later matters in the letter—are the results of Christians who were previously pagans bringing patterns and attitudes from their former religious experiences into the life of the church. Such wholesale importing of pagan understandings and activities would cause serious lapses in Christian faith and practice.
Speaking of that former time, Paul highlights the uselessness or futility of pagan religious experience by saying, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols. Paul’s recollection of the Corinthians’ pre-Christian activity is not flattering. He is not concerned, however, with assessing that former religious life; rather, he is concerned to criticize problems in the life of the church and introduces non-Christian religious life only to form an analogy between it and the behavior in the church that he wants to bring to an end.
12:3 / This verse builds on the foregoing lines, looking back and moving forward with the word Therefore (Gk. dio; lit. “this is why”). Thus, after recognizing the topic brought to his attention by the Corinthians (v. 1) and conjuring up images of past pagan religious life (v. 2), Paul identifies the problem in even more specific terms. From the way that he describes and responds to the situation, the reader can infer that the problem in Corinth was the result of the practice of ecstasy. The Corinthians were getting caught up in the thrill of the emotional experience, rather than seeking to glorify God.
Ecstasy should be contrasted with enthusiasm to grasp Paul’s point. The issue is more than a matter of linguistic nuance; rather, the matter pertains to the genuine difference between two distinct forms of religious practice. While neither term (“ecstasy” or “enthusiasm”) occurs in Paul’s text, for theological purposes in understanding this passage, it is helpful to use that language in reflecting on Paul’s statements. Ecstasy is the effort to “stand outside” oneself (English from Gk. ekstasis = “displacement”), to grasp onto a vital power that provides one with an extraordinary experience. Enthusiasm is the result of one’s being indwelt by the power of God (English from Gk. enthysiaō = “to be inspired by a god”), so that one’s quality of experience is transformed. Paul realizes that it may be difficult or impossible to distinguish the frenzy of ecstasy from the empowering of enthusiasm. “Therefore,” he offers a criterion for making a valid distinction. According to Paul genuine enthusiasm affirms the lordship of Jesus, whereas the practice of ecstasy generates behavior contrary or hostile to the affirmation of Jesus’ lordship. The recognition of the lordship of Jesus is the criterion that forms the parameters of legitimate enthusiasm. The Holy Spirit moves the one under the power of the Holy Spirit to declare, “Jesus is Lord”!
Other NT authors and writings faced this same dilemma in the life of the early church, and while patterns of language vary in response to each distinctive situation, the solutions offered by the NT authors are remarkably consistent: see Mark 9:38–40; John 15:26; 1 John 4:1–3.
12:1 / The language at the outset of the discussion is ambiguous in Gk., but the basic sense of Paul’s remarks comes through however one decides to translate the Gk. word pneumatikoi—either “spiritual gifts” as in the NIV or “spiritual ones” as some commentators argue. One should notice that throughout the remainder of the section Paul continues the discussion by referring to charismata (translated “gifts”), clearly his own preferred manner of designating spiritual gifts. Some commentators argue that the difference in the words pneumatikoi and charismata reflects the language used by the Corinthians on the one hand and Paul on the other. Still other interpreters suggest that Paul used pneumatikoi pejoratively and charismata in a positive way. Yet others argue that pneumatikoi means “spiritual ones” whereas charismata means “spiritual gifts,” so that Paul subtly and shrewdly shifts the grounds of the discussion in the course of his correcting the Corinthians’ thinking—i.e., Paul takes the spotlight off the people and puts it on the gracious gifts of God. Conzelmann’s observation, however, is insightful: “In itself the translation ‘spiritual people,’ ‘men of the Spirit,’ is also possible, cf. 2:15; 3:1; 14:37. Yet, despite 14:37 the theme is not types of men but gifts” (1 Corinthians, p. 204 n. 1).
Whatever his meaning or motivation, Paul refers to the pneumatikoi only once in this chapter, and he continues the discussion using the word charismata in 12:4, 9, 28, 30–31. At a minimum, the use of charismata emphasizes that whatever spiritual gifts occur in the Corinthian congregation, those gifts are by God’s grace (charis).
12:2 / Cf. 10:19–20 to see that Paul is not brushing pagan belief and practice aside as mere illusions.
12:3 / The interpretation of Paul’s comment, no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” produces vigorous debate. To capture the sense of the statement in contemporary idiomatic English, one should understand the line to say, “To hell with Jesus!” Did Paul mean to suggest that someone said this, or is he only illustrating the absurdity of inappropriate behavior? Commentators disagree. Moreover, even among those who argue that Paul’s statement assumes the reality of the activity and does not speak of it as potential behavior, there is further disagreement. If there are those in Corinth who are saying this about Jesus, who are they? Are they non-Christian pagan ecstatics? Are they non-Christian Jews? Are they early Christian docetists? A definitive answer is impossible, but it is also unnecessary for following the main positive lines of Paul’s observations concerning the disposition of genuinely Spirit-inspired behavior. For further discussion, compare the essays by B. A. Pearson (“Did the Gnostics Curse Jesus?” JBL 86 [1967], pp. 301–5), N. Brox (“ANATHEMA IĒSOUS [1 Kor 12:3),” BZ 12 [1968], pp. 103–11), J. D. M. Derrett (“Cursing Jesus [1 Cor. 12:3]: The Jews as Religious ‘Persecutors,’ ” NTS 21 [1975], pp. 544–54), and J. M. Bassler (“1 Cor 12:3—Curse and Confession in Context,” JBL 103 [1982], pp. 415–18).
The Gk. word anathema that is translated be cursed is a startling term. The word becomes “anathema” in later church usage, although at this time it would have been recognized as a compound noun from ana (“up” or “again”) + tithēmi (“to put”), connoting something set aside—usually for a deity—and especially something cursed. An essay by R. Scroggs (“The Exaltation of the Spirit by Some Early Christians,” JBL 84 [1965], pp. 359–73) notes resemblances between Paul’s observations here and the discussion of blaspheming the Spirit in Mark 3:28–29, suggesting that the Corinthian phenomenon was not an anomaly.