1 Corinthians Overview

As I have explained in the past, one of the reasons I am doing this blog is I am curious to see what kind of messages one might get from reading the bible. What might one learn as a take-away. Here is my quick summary of the good and bad from 1 Corinthians.

The Good

4:3 Don't be quick to judge

9:12 It is better to save a soul than make some money (see chapter 16:2 below)

12:25-26 Help each other out

13:1-3 Love is very important

The Bad

2:15 We can judge you, you can't judge us

6:18 sex is bad

11:3 Women should be subordinate to their husbands

14:34-35 woman should be submissive, it is shameful for them to speak in church

16:2 Undoes my good item from chapter 9

1 Corinthians 15 & 16

The Resurrection of Christ

If you listen to the gospel that I [Paul] preach and you believe you will be saved "unless you believed in vain".

This is an interesting bit of scripture right off the first 2 verses. It sounds to me like this is saying that if you believe what I am saying there are 2 possibilities: 1. you will be saved, 2. you have believed in vain and you will not be saved. Although this is how it sounds to me, it doesn't seem like something that Paul probably meant. 

I looked up in vain and one way it is used is what I was thinking of "Not yielding the desired outcome; fruitless: a vain attempt.". But there is another way to use it which seems like a more reasonable guess as what Paul meant "In an irreverent or disrespectful manner". So basically, he is saying that if you are believing in a somewhat fake manner, you will not be saved. I think this is what the verse is supposed to mean.

Paul retells the resurrection story and mentions all of the people that Jesus visited after he was resurrected. Included in this story is the mention that Jesus appeared to more than 500 people at one time.

I don't remember the 500 people incident, I did a quick search and it seems that the only place the 500 number comes up is here.

The Resurrection of the Dead

You say that no one has been raised from the dead, if no one has been raised, not even Christ has been raised and our preaching has been in vain and your faith has been in vain.

hmm, I take back what I said up top. Perhaps my first read of that was correct.

But Christ has been raised from the dead, and so will you in good time. Otherwise what would being baptized on behalf of the dead mean? etc.

Basically, he wants it to be true or all of his preaching is false, pretty circular.

Mystery an Victory

At the end of time, God will play the last trumpet and we will all be raised from the dead, God will conquer death.

I'm not really sure what this is supposed to mean. Although I do find it interesting that there is no heaven mentioned here. It talked of us waking up, as if we are dead in the ground and God brought us all back to life. Doesn't mesh well with the way we currently conceptualize things.

The Collection for the Saints (ch 16)

During the first day of each week, you should put some money aside that I will collect for the saints when I visit there.

I deserve your money but I'm not going to take it to save more souls...also, give me your money

Plans for Travel

Paul gives his travel itinerary

Yawn

Final Instructions

Be prepared for visitors. Be watchful, strong, and do things in love.

Sounds good.

Greetings

The churches of asia send you greetings, greet one another with a holy kiss.

Sounds good.

If anyone has no love for the lord, let him be accursed.

So basically, greet anyone with love and be welcoming and what not, unless they disagree with us, fuck those guys.

For the Overview

Bad:

16:2 Undoes my good item from chapter 9

When you can interpret the Bible any damn way you please...

I was reading a post on the Superfine Apostate's blog which shows a video where a Christian uses the bible as justification for rape. The guy reads a passage from the bible, says that it means you are going to get raped, he says he is going to do it and he is going to like it. It's fucking disgusting.

After the video, SA says the following "When you can interpret the Bible any damn way you please, other people will interpret the Bible any damn way they please." This to me really should be the takeaway of the video (obviously I think it is brilliant, I stole this quote for the title of this post). This is the problem with the bible being a big book of multiple choice, it really does seem like you can justify any position with it. I have heard many people say that Jesus only teaching peace and love, I have heard people say "what's the harm?", well here it is. This guy used the same book to justify rape! You might say "well that's old testament", well this guy doesn't seem to have any qualms about using the old testament to justify his atrocities. The old testament is in your book, and assholes don't seem shy about using it.

This actually reminds me of separation of church and state a bit. People who don't want separation of church and state assume that their religion will be the one associated to the government. They assume that other religious people are just like them. It doesn't occur to them that some religious people, even some Christians, believe things vastly different from them. Some sects don't go to doctors at all, they just pray and let God sort it out. What if they got in power, would they outlaw hospitals? Seems a bit out there, seems a bit crazy right? You know what else sounds crazy? Justifying rape with the bible.

It's a Miracle!

I had completely forgotten about this until a few days ago, but when I was a Christian I interpreted a minor event as a miracle. I used to deliver newspapers, the fastest way was to go on my roller blades, but rain was very bad for them, so on rainy days I had to use another means (a bike or having my mom drive me around).  One day I was out on my route and right near the end it started to sprinkle, so I really pushed myself to finish and get home as fast as I could. As soon as I walked in the door it started pouring outside. (In reality, the timing probably wasn't quite this tight, but to me it felt like it went from nothing to torrential rain the moment I crossed the threshold.) I remember thinking that God must have held the rain back for me so I could get home relatively dry. This was my miracle.

Thinking about it later, I realized how self centered I was being. Rain is something that affects a large number of people at the same time. Making a change that would help one person out could have repercussions that would hurt another. If it starts later it would have to end later (or rain harder I guess). Or maybe it would have to rain in a slightly different place. On the other hand, God is pretty big, surely he can help me without hurting someone else. But why would God go to all that trouble just to help some kid not get his roller blades wet? I went back and forth like this for a while.

My other thought in regards to this event calls back to the fact that the rain affects a large number of people at the same time. Let's say for the sake of argument that 100,000 people got rained on that day, odds are that someone will narrowly miss the rain. If everyone had been thinking like me that day, someone would have thought they experienced a miracle, whether or not there is any kind of a deity.

So what really happened that day? Was I randomly just a lucky person who narrowly avoided some water, or did God help me out? The funny thing is, there is no way to know for sure, but that is part of the problem. I can never prove that God didn't help me out that day, but it seems more reasonable to me that I was just lucky.

1 Corinthians 13 & 14

The Way of Love

If you don't have love, your other accomplishments amount to nothing. Love is patient and kind, and it has a lot of other really nice properties. Love never ends while everything else passes away.

This is a good passage, focus on love is a good message. If people focused on things they loved instead of things they hated for instance the world would be a much better place.

Prophecy and Tongues (ch 14)

Prophecy and speaking in tongues are both good, you should do both, but know what that when you speak in tongues you are talking to God and when you are prophesies you are building up the church. Speaking in tongues is not helpful to anyone except the person doing it unless there is an interpreter.

I suppose this makes sense, if you speak in a language no one can understand it will be worthless to them.

Speaking in tongues is a sign for unbelievers and prophecy is a sign for believers. For if an unbeliever comes into a church where everyone is speaking in tongues they will say you are all out of your minds. On the other hand, if an outsider comes into the church and prophecy is being spoken, he will be convinced.

This sounds backwards to me, what am I not understanding? It says that speaking in tongues is a sign for unbelievers, and yet it says that an unbeliever who views speaking in tongues would call them nuts and turn away. On the other hand, it says that prophecy is for the believers, then it says that an outsider who sees prophecy will be convinced. This looks like an error to me, it makes no sense this way. If a friend of mine wrote this and had me proofread I would show him this and point out that he must have mixed up believers and unbelievers in one part or the other. Am I missing something here?

Orderly Worship

If speaking in tongues during church, have 3 people at most speaking in tongues, each in turn with someone interpreting. If there is no one to interpret they should stay quiet and speak only to himself and to God. If someone is speaking prophecy, let him speak and let others consider what is said. If someone else has a revelation while he is speaking, he should be quiet and let the other man speak.

Generally these seem to be rules to keep service orderly and worth while for everyone. Sounds good.

v.34-35 "the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."

I don't even know what to say here. This is horrible. This is very explicit, much worse than yesterdays bit of misogyny. How could any enlightened woman follow this book? 

I'm trying to imagine how I would have reacted to this when I was a Christian and I honestly have no idea. I was never confronted with this stuff back then. If someone had just told me this was in the bible I think I would have called them a liar. If they had persisted and shown me the actual verse, I just don't know how I would have responded. I probably would have assumed there is something here beyond my understanding that must make this ok, but I think I would have a hard time with this. 

For the overview post

Good

13:1-3 Love is very important

Bad

14:34-35 woman should be submissive, it is shameful for them to speak in church

1 Corinthians 11-12

Head Coverings

[edit: In the comments of this post there was a good discussion of this section. Commenter Kristen has clearly thought about this passage a lot and has a good detailed section about it on her webpage. Anyone who is interested in this should go check it out]

This section is completely bizarre to me, I'll break it down as best I can, but it seems to me that it is just a cultural relic.

The head of a man is Christ, the head of Christ is God, and the head of a wife is her husband.

I'm going to assume that being the head of someone means they are subordinate to you or something. A good example of sexism in the bible. I'm not sure how God being the head of Christ fits in with the whole trinity thing, although I've never really understood the trinity so I'll move past this. Another interesting thing here is it doesn't mention unmarried women. I suppose unmarried women were thought of as property of their fathers and not worth bringing up.

If a man prays or prophesies with his head covered he is dishonoring Christ, but if a woman prays or prophesies without her head covered, she is dishonoring her husband.

I don't understand why there would be a difference, is a head covering an honor or a dishonor? This is what I mean when I say it must just be some cultural relic.

If a wife will not cover her head, then she should cut her hair short, but this is a disgrace so she should cover her head. A man should not cover his head for he is the image and glory of God.

What?

Woman was made from man but we are all born of women, so women should wear a symbol of authority on their head.

I really don't understand what these things have to do with one another.

If a man wears long hair it is a disgrace, but if a woman has long hair it is her glory.

So why do we cover it up? This whole section makes no sense to me. It seems to me that it is simply reflecting the preferences of the person speaking and/or the style of the time and simply claiming that God wants it that way too.

The Lord's Supper

When you come together as a church to eat the bread and drink the wine, do so properly or you will bring judgement on yourself. You should not have factions in your church. You should not come to church hungry, you should eat at home first.

I understand the idea of not having divisions in the church. That seems like a good thing, cliques are bad and whatnot. I don't really get the part about being hungry. Perhaps it used to be a full blown meal that was done there and people were taking advantage? I don't really know.

Spiritual Gifts (ch 12)

Paul is talking to Pagans, he says that different people have different spiritual gifts, yet they all come from the same spirit. The spiritual gifts include: utterance of wisdom, utterance of knowledge, faith, healing, working miracles, prophecy, the ability to distinguish between spirits, speak in tongues, and interpretation of tongues.

My understanding is that Pagans have a different God for each action that a God might do. In this context, this section makes sense if he is talking to former pagans, he's trying to explain how their old religion was wrong.

One Body with Many Members

Everybody is part of the body of Christ. We all rejoice together or suffer together. It is like one person is the foot, another is an eye, we need each other. Some people seem less important, but God made it that way.

Interesting metaphor I guess, we should help each other out is always a good message.



For the Corinthians Overview Post:

Good:
12:25-26 Help each other out

Bad:
11:3 Women should be subordinate to their husbands

1 Corinthians 10

Warning Against Idolatry


Our fathers all "drank the same spiritual drink" and yet God was not happy with most of them. We must not indulge in sexual immorality, put Christ to the test, or complain as many of them did and were destroyed. If you are tempted do not think it is unique to you, temptations are all common. But don't worry, God won't temp you beyond your ability to escape.

That makes no sense. If he won't temp you beyond your ability to handle it then why are people tempted and then destroyed when they fail? I suppose the answer would be that they 'could have' avoided the temptation but didn't, but isn't that what we mean when we say it is beyond their ability to handle it?


He then says that idolatry is bad and we shouldn't associate with the pagans during their rituals.

This just seems like he is trying to separate people from the other religion. Force people to make a choice, us or them. I don't like this at all.


Do All to the Glory of God


All food is ok to eat, you can eat whatever is sold at the market. If you go to dinner with an unbeliever you can eat whatever is served to you with a clean conscience. But if they say it is a sacrifice then you shouldn't eat it.

I'm not completely sure what he is getting at here. My best guess is he is trying to say not to worry about things like the kosher laws. If someone serves you pork don't worry about it. However if someone serves you food that is from a sacrifice don't eat it, I guess because it is involved in idolatry or something.


This is a tough one for me to follow.