More to the point, God subverted the wisdom and power of the world (1:19–20) by equipping believers, through the Spirit, with new epistemological lenses (2:10–16), enabling them to understand and appreciate God’s norm-defying criteria for distributing his eschatological resources.[26] The rulers, to be sure, see things κατὰ σάρκα (1:26), and from their distorted vantage point, they do, in fact, appear to possess one form of wisdom and power. Paul, however, would have believers view their existence ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ (1:30), and it is from within that epistemological location that one learns those concepts anew—that “[Christ] became wisdom for us from God [ὃς ἐγενήθη σοφία ἡμῖν ἀπὸ θεοῦ], righteousness and sanctification and redemption” (1:30; cf. 1:24). The much sought after wisdom and power of this world, then, while prized by the rulers of this age, have become obsolete for those who belong to the age to come. What truly matters is God’s revealed wisdom, spiritual discernment, and the mind of Christ (2:10–16), manifesting in power through weakness (2:1–5; cf. 2 Cor. 12:9–10; Phil. 2:5–11).
Paul, then, destabilizes the rulers’ dominance by forecasting their certain, future destruction (1 Cor. 2:6; cf. 1:28). The rulers of this age and the authority they possess are passing away (2:6), a perceived impossibility to those with executive power (2:8), but an inevitable reality to the God who decrees the end from before the ages (2:7). God’s supremacy over the rulers is, for believers, apparent in his ironic exploitation of the cross: rather than eliminating Jesus and thereby prolonging the status quo, the cross redefines wisdom and power as Christ crucified (1:18–25) and serves to redeem the very outcasts over whom the rulers exercise control (1:26–31). While those who embrace the folly of the cross are being saved, the world and its rulers are naively perishing as they relentlessly boast in their autonomy (1:18, 29; 2:6). The cross, then, symbolizes, for those with eyes to see, the transient nature of this world and the eventual demise of all who belong to it.
In sum, Paul’s apocalyptic discourse in 1 Cor. 2:6–8 (and adjacent texts) functions as discursive resistance, seeking in a way similar to Daniel’s apocalyptic message to expose the folly of the rulers of this age and the transience of their power. Nothing said here, however, advocates active resistance to the governing authorities. Rebellion would be at odds with the cross, and the shaming and neutralization of the aristocracy will occur at the final judgment (ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ, 1:27–29). Meanwhile, believers are to remain as they were called (cf. 7:20, 24), which, for most, means at the margins of society (1:26). All, however, should seek to embody the crucified Lord of glory as they await their own glorious redemption (2:7–9).
Resisting Unrighteous Judges
(1 Corinthians 6:1–11)
Following on his call to judge and discipline community members participating in sin (5:11–13), Paul turns his attention in 6:1–11 to those believers engaging one another in civil litigation. These cases, likely issuing from financial disputes,[27] were symptomatic of at least two greater spiritual shortcomings. First, the church was divided. Indeed, Paul’s principal complaint here is that there exist internal conflicts at all: “That you have lawsuits with one another is already a complete defeat for you” (6:7). Such fractures, Paul insists, should not occur between brothers in Christ (6:8). Second, the church was relying on outsiders (ἄδικοι, 6:1; ἄπιστοι, 6:6) to resolve their disputes. Rather than turning to the public courts, Paul instructs the community to handle its conflicts internally (6:4).
The adjudication of legal proceedings in the public court system is an obvious way in which rulers asserted their hegemony over their subjects. Judges were appointed by local magistrates, and injustices proliferated within the system as favorable verdicts were often awarded on the basis of social status and bribery.[28] Paul seems to acknowledge such injustices when he censures those believers who “dare . . . to be judged before the unrighteous” (τολμᾷ τις ὑμῶν . . . κρίνεσθαι ἐπὶ τῶν ἀδίκων, 6:1; cf. 6:9). To involve oneself in the public courts, then, is to place oneself under the authority of judges who represent the governing authorities and whose rulings tended to perpetuate inequity.
Paul, however, employs apocalyptic discourse to resist the power of these judges in at least two ways. First, Paul calls into question the supposed superior qualifications of local court justices by reminding the church of its own role in the future judgment of both the world and angels: οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι οἱ ἅγιοι τὸν κόσμον κρινοῦσιν; . . . οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι ἀγγέλους κρινοῦμεν; (6:2–3). Due to the rhetorical nature of these questions, Paul probably assumes the church is familiar with Dan. 7:22 (τὴν κρίσιν ἔδωκε τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῦ ὑψίστου, LXX) or a tradition influenced by it.[29] In any case, Paul’s point is clear: for the church to take its disputes before unbelieving judges is for believers not only to exaggerate the significance of their petty grievances; it is also to fail to recognize and put to use their own judicial competence in the resolution of these conflicts (6:2–5). For those properly oriented to the end, these are “trivial cases” (κριτηρίων ἐλαχίστων, 6:2) pertaining to mere “life issues” (βιωτικά, 6:3–4). Moreover, as those who have been washed, sanctified, justified, and given the Holy Spirit (6:11), the Corinthians are more than worthy (ἀνάξιος), wise (σοφός), and capable (δυνήσεται) enough to adjudicate their own disputes (6:2, 5), and therefore, they themselves should appoint as judges (καθίζετε) even “the despised in the church” (τοὺς ἐξουθενημένους ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, 6:4).[30] Appointing a private arbiter was indeed permitted in Greco-Roman antiquity, and thus would not have been viewed as active resistance, especially within a familial context.[31] By stressing, then, the judicial competence of the Corinthians in this way, Paul diminishes the significance and exceptionality of the “unrighteous” who preside over public courts. And having relativized the importance of ordinary lawsuits, Paul curtails the power these judges possess. They indeed have authority, but only over the mundane.
Furthermore, Paul challenges the authority of local judges by forecasting their certain, future demise. By highlighting the believer’s role in the judgment of the world (κόσμος), Paul anticipates a time when all political agents, including court justices, will cease to exercise authority. Furthermore, it is judges such as these who belong to the community of the “unrighteous” and will fail to inherit the kingdom of God (6:1, 9). The end of their tenure is approaching, and at that time their judicial authority will be seized and transferred to the saints (cf. Dan. 7:22, 27).
In sum, Paul’s apocalyptic discourse in 1 Cor. 6:1–11, again, functions as discursive resistance, but not active resistance. Paul urges the church to reevaluate the subject matter of their disputes and to reconsider the relative authority, competence, and permanence of local judges. But we must be careful not to assume that Paul sought to repudiate the authority of the public courts over believers entirely, as Horsley maintains.[32] Paul continues to recognize the role and rights of governing authorities (Rom. 13:1–7), and he would have probably expected that a dispute between a believer and an unbeliever, if requiring arbitration, would be settled through the public courts—for what has the church to do with judging outsiders (5:12)? The only proscription he gives here is for believers not to litigate against one another; when grievances do arise within the church, they should be settled internally. Paul, then, maintains the place for external systems of judicial authority, but he believes they are inappropriate channels for dealing with conflicts between those within the family of God.
Resisting Every Rule, Authority, and Power
(1 Corinthians 15:20–28)
First Corinthians 15 contains numerous apocalyptic themes, though explicit political terms and images are all but absent from the chapter’s earliest verses. Having begun his argument by reminding the church about t
he gospel he preached to them—a gospel founded on Jesus’ resurrection from the dead (15:1–11)—Paul then expresses concerns about those Corinthians who do not believe Christ’s followers will be bodily resurrected (15:12). Seeking to problematize their erroneous eschatology, Paul exposes the theological incoherence (15:13–19) and practical absurdities (15:30–34) that surface as a result of them doubting the resurrection of the dead.[33]
Sandwiched between these two arguments is a third proof based on administrative order (15:20–24a) and cosmic control (15:24b–28). That is, in his demonstration of the certain, future resurrection of all believers, Paul goes beyond projecting a basic sequence of eschatological events, by narrating Christ’s final defeat of all evil powers and God’s subjugation of all things to himself. The last opponent to be subdued is death (15:26), though prior to that climactic statement Paul refers also to God’s enemies as πᾶσαν ἀρχὴν καὶ πᾶσαν ἐξουσίαν καὶ δύναμιν (15:24). But who or what are these powers?
Although a few scholars consider the rules, authorities, and powers in 1 Cor. 15:24 to be exclusively human agents,[34] this view is untenable since, as the γάρ in 15:25 suggests, πᾶσαν ἀρχὴν καὶ πᾶσαν ἐξουσίαν καὶ δύναμιν is coextensive with πάντας τοὺς ἐχθρούς (15:25), the last enemy being death (15:26). For this reason, many have concluded that Paul here has suprahuman powers—both demonic and ontological—exclusively in view.[35] This position is largely defended by demonstrating the currency of ἀρχή/ἄρχων, ἐξουσία, δύναμις, and related language for celestial beings within early Jewish literature,[36] as well as similar uses in Pauline and other early Christian texts.[37]
Despite these parallels, a more compelling case can be made for these powers encompassing all evil authorities, both human and suprahuman.[38] This inclusive sense is supported in several ways. First, the repetition of πᾶς in 15:24 could easily broaden the referents of ἀρχή, ἐξουσία, and δύναμις to include every evil power irrespective of ontology.[39] Second, Paul’s mention of ἀρχή, appearing as it does at the end of the letter, would seem especially to include the human ἄρχοντες mentioned earlier in 2:6–8. This is strongly suggested by the shared use of καταργέω in both passages in forecasting the eventual destruction of God’s enemies. Moreover, as we saw in 6:1–11, Paul includes unrighteous human judges as those who “will not inherit the kingdom of God” (6:9-10), a statement echoed in 15:50 and probably implied in 15:24–28 as well. Finally, similar eschatological scenarios appear in other apocalyptic and eschatologically oriented literature. For example, both Daniel 7 and Psalms of Solomon 17 refer, in ways quite similar to 1 Cor. 15:20–28, to a human eschatological agent who will establish his reign (Dan. 7:27; Ps. Sol. 17:21, 30–36) after permanently destroying enemy political rulers (τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἀπολοῦσι, LXX Dan. 7:26; τοῦ θραῦσαι ἄρχοντας ἀδίκους, Ps. Sol. 17:22). In fact, the shared use of βασιλεία, ἀρχή, ἐξουσία, and τέλος in 1 Cor. 15:24 and the Greek versions of Dan. 7:26-27—terms not originating from the other scriptural passages alluded to in 1 Cor. 15:25–27 (LXX Ps. 8:7; 109:1)—strongly suggests that the book of Daniel and the resistance to earthly kingdoms it embodied lurk in the background of Paul’s discourse in 1 Cor. 15:24–28.[40] Given these evidences, Paul probably has in view both human and suprahuman powers in 15:24 when he forecasts their future and final destruction.
Paul does very little in this passage to establish the circumstances for resistance to specifically political authorities. He probably assumes his readers will recall the pretension and domination of the rulers and judges critiqued in 1:18–31, 2:6–8, and 6:1–11. Moreover, it is probably the case that Paul introduces these abstract powers in 15:24 not as a novum, but as a means of establishing familiar ground before his climactic revelation concerning the defeat of death in 15:26. Thus, while the offenses of these rules and authorities are ambiguous, their identity as “enemies” (ἐχθροί) who have failed to submit to Christ remains clear (15:25).
In the light of the foregoing discussion, we conclude that Paul’s apocalyptic discourse subverts the rules, authorities, and powers mainly by forecasting their certain, future demise as a result of the expansion of Christ’s reign over the world. Paul’s eschatological narrative envisions what Scott Lewis calls “God’s reconquest of the cosmos,”[41] and even resembles the “revolt and reconquest” model Portier-Young observes enacted by the Hellenistic kings.[42] “[T]he repression of revolt through the reenactment of conquest,” Portier-Young explains, “functioned to integrate the empire, providing kings with opportunities to consolidate power and assert a unifying system of order.”[43] This model of “revolt and reconquest” is a fitting way of conceptualizing God’s redemptive work in 1 Corinthians 15. To the degree that ancient rulers utilized local revolts as opportunities to re-conquer and re-create occupied territories, the eschatological defeat of God’s enemies in Paul’s apocalyptic discourse should also be read as envisioning God’s own re-conquest and re-creation of his contested possession—the cosmos.
The revolt Paul narrates begins with the invasion of death into the cosmos through Adam’s sin, followed by their shared occupation of the world (15:21–22, 55–56; cf. Rom. 5:12, 14, 17; 6:6–23).[44] Sin and death are not alone in their opposition to God; they have allied themselves with God’s other enemies to comprise those forces referred to as “every rule, every authority, and power” (1 Cor. 15:24). God’s enemies are involved in a variety of malevolent activity, but this cosmic revolt is most apparent in our passage in its somatic effects on the world’s inhabitants. The tyranny of sin and death has impacted the world such that all people in Adam have come to possess natural (ψυχικόν), feeble (ἀσθένεια), perishable (φθαρτόν) bodies and eventually die (15:42–54). Without God’s intervention on behalf of his people, all creation would remain indefinitely in subjugation to death’s destructive power (Rom. 7:24; 8:19–23).
God, however, has indeed responded, and done so decisively. By sending his son Jesus Christ not only to die, but to raise from the dead, God has begun to reconquer the cosmos, defeating the powers of sin and death and sharing that victory (νῖκος) with his subjects (1 Cor. 15:54–57). God’s rescue operation, however, remains in progress. Rather than abolishing death permanently through a single invasion, Jesus through his resurrection deposed death’s reign over himself and established his own rule over the world, though he has postponed the bodily resurrection of his subjects until the Parousia (15:23; cf. Rom. 8:18–23). Nor does Christ currently exercise his rule by immediately subjecting all people and every power to his own authority. Instead, Christ re-conquers and re-creates the world progressively as his followers proclaim and believe the good news that God has both forgiven sins (1 Cor. 15:3) and regained custody of creation.[45] Indeed, Christ “must reign until he has placed all his enemies under his feet” (15:25, citing LXX Ps. 8:7). Once death is finally and permanently defeated at Christ’s return (15:26), God will have “placed all things under his feet” (15:27, citing LXX Ps. 109:1) and Christ will both deliver his kingdom to God and be subjected to the Father (15:24, 28). Only at that time will the Father’s eschatological reign be actualized and his reconquest of the world be completed. The primary enemies to be defeated in this narrative are sin and death. But Paul also underscores the transient rule of human political authorities, who will be displaced by Christ as his reign overtakes the world.
In sum, Paul’s apocalyptic discourse once again functions as discursive resistance. Despite the momentary uprising of the forces of evil, Paul undermines their power by exposing their transiency and God’s supreme governance over the world, even as hostile powers remain in play. The tenure of all God’s enemies, including human political rulers, will indeed expire and be subjected to Christ, who will establish his reign in their place. Our passage, then, meets its rhetorical end by demonst
rating, in Käsemann’s words, “who owns the earth” (Wem gehört die Erde).[46] Nothing in the passage, however, advocates active resistance to governing authorities, nor is it suggested that political and hierarchical structures are to be repudiated altogether. Even as Paul anticipates the removal of all rules, authorities, and powers, he envisions their replacement by the supreme governance of the Son, and then that of the Father. Whether or not Paul here participates in a kind of ideological mimicry (to borrow a term from postcolonialism), it would seem that his concern, like that of the other NT authors, is about which kingdom people belong to, not about whether they in fact belong to one.[47]
Conclusion—Paul and Politics in 1 Corinthians
In the light of this investigation, we conclude that, as one might expect, apocalyptic and politics do in fact intersect in 1 Corinthians, and they do so repeatedly. As this study has shown, on no less than three occasions in the letter, Paul not only makes mention of governing authorities, but he does so while incorporating into the discourse several apocalyptic themes, including the existence of suprahuman powers, the revelation of mysteries, the periodization of history, resurrection, eschatological judgment, the messianic reign, and the kingdom of God—all of which, in 1 Corinthians, appear to have been heavily resourced by the book of Daniel (among other OT texts). In each instance, moreover, Paul’s apocalyptic discourse functions as discursive resistance—Paul issues criticisms against political authorities and forecasts their eventual demise (2:6; 6:1–2, 9; 15:24) while anticipating the eschatological blessing of believers (2:7, 9; 6:2–3, 9–11; 15:22–23).
Paul and the Apocalyptic Imagination Page 36