 |  |
"Eye hath not seen, nor ear hear, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things
which God hath prepared for them that love Him. But God hath revealed them unto us by
His Spirit" (2: 9-10).
"Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but
which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual" (2: 13).
"The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are
foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned"
(2: 14).
"Are ye not carnal, and walk as men?" (3: 3).
"Therefore let no man glory in men" (3: 21).
"But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's
judgment" (4: 3).
Here we have man, his wisdom, his words, his walk and his judgment in direct
contrast with God, and it is this antipathy which forms the core of I Cor. 1:-4:, and
around which the whole doctrine and exhortation revolve. The first of these antonyms
which we are to consider is that of I Cor. 2: 13, "Man's words 5: The words of the
Holy Ghost". The detailed structure of I Cor. 2: must await exposition of the passage
when the whole epistle comes before us in due course. Its main subdivisions however
and the place in the structure of verse 13 can be seen by the following skeleton structure:
I Corinthians 2:
A1 | 1-5. Speech and Wisdom.
Not with enticing words of man's wisdom.
A2 | 6-12. Speech and Wisdom.
Not the wisdom of this world nor of the princes of this world
that come to naught.
A3 | 7-16. Speech and Wisdom.
Not in the words that man's wisdom teacheth.
Man's words are evidently taught by man's wisdom (I Cor. 2: 13) and if human
wisdom is utterly unable to comprehend the Mystery and the testimony of God, then of
necessity to adopt human argument and to use human phraseology will but increase the
darkness. Here then comes the necessity for inspired Scripture and for words `which the
Holy Ghost teacheth', words that are definitely selected by heavenly wisdom as the fit
vehicle for divine truth.
In the course of conversation, of preaching, or of exposition we are obliged at times to
expand as we expound, to use phraseology that is our poor attempt to illuminate the
sacred text. We have warrant for this in the example of the Apostle, who we find
`reasoning', `opening' and `alleging' as he dealt with the testimony of Scripture. In the
course of our witness, we have been compelled to adopt or invent certain phrases, such as
`Dispensational Truth' which we use to indicate that peculiar manner of dealing with men
at any particular period as distinct from `Doctrinal Truth' such as `sin', `death', or
`redemption' which underlies the whole fabric of revelation. In the same way we have
adopted the phrase `earthly Kingdom Truth' in order to enforce the necessary distinction
between the kingdom associated with Israel and the sphere and calling of the church
which is the Body of Christ. Yet these phrases, convenient as they are, must not be used