Ashamed of the Gospel? by Mike Oswald
(Reprinted from Focus Magazine: http://www.focusmagazine.org)
A very interesting verse appears in Romans 1:16: For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
The first clause of this verse is more challenging than we might at first think. Why would anyone think that Paul would be "ashamed" of the gospel of which he was an apostle?
Difficulties in answering this question have led some scholars to what is an often an easy and quick escape for challenging verses: Just retranslate the text. These scholars say that Paul doesn't really mean "ashamed" as you and I use this word in modern parlance. They claim that he is using a Greek rhetorical technique and what Paul really means is a positive confession. In other words, what Paul is saying is, I have complete confidence in and I acknowledge and confess the gospel. While this is certainly a true statement of Paul's beliefs, is that what he is saying here?
Why would Paul say that? Of course, an apostle would acknowledge and confess the gospel for which he previously said he was set apart. Why would he be set apart for something and then, drum roll, say "and I confess this gospel!" The text means something more than this truism and this is no solution to the problem. Perhaps the answer lies in the words used in the text and not some external solution.
The word we find translated in all our versions as "ashamed" also appears in the same Roman epistle at 6:21 where it clearly does not mean "confess" but simply "ashamed." Indeed, this word is commonly used in the New Testament for "ashamed" with no subtle meaning. See Luke 9:26. Therefore, linguistically, one has to conclude that the text means just what it says. So we are forced to answer our original question: Why would anyone think of saying that Paul would be ashamed of the gospel?
Some might say that Paul would never be ashamed of the gospel and that no modern Christian could ever be ashamed either. But if it were impossible for Paul or one of us to be ashamed, why would Paul address the issue at all? Not only does he mention it, but he gives a rather detailed explanation as to why he is not ashamed. Given Pauline techniques of argumentation, this suggests that Paul thought it a serious possibility for a Christian to be ashamed of the gospel.
So we are still faced with our original hard question: Why would any Christian, particularly Paul, think of actually being ashamed of the gospel? Think for a moment about the word "gospel" means in this context. This is one of Paul's favorite words. It appears 76 times in the entire NT but 60 of those are in Paul's writings. It appears 12 times in the Roman epistle, more than any other Pauline writing and 6 of the 12 are in the first chapter. Not only that, but it is used in the very first verse of this epistle and Paul does not use it in the opening verse of any other epistle. Clearly, the word is important both for the epistle as a whole and this particular verse. Therefore, the meaning of word deserves some study.
Outside of the scripture, the word gospel or uagellion was associated in the Roman Empire with proclamations relating to the Emperor cult, such as the birth of an heir to the emperor or his accession to the throne. Interestingly, the archeological records about the accession to the throne talk about a new era which brings peace to the world; therefore this is "good news" for men.
In the Septuagint, there is not frequent use of the word. It
does not appear in the singular and only appears once in plural,
at 2 Sam 4:10: "When one told me, saying, 'Behold, Saul is
dead,' and thought he was bringing good news, I seized him and
killed him in Ziklag, which was the reward I gave him for his
news."
In the New Testament, the word seems to have two meanings. First,
in some contexts it continues the idea of a good message as in
the Septuagint. For example, in 1 Cor. 15:1, it refers to the
message about Christ, his life and reason for coming. In other
contexts, however, Paul seems to give it a broader meaning so
that it means more than the message and seems to become close
to the salvific content of the message. In other words, "gospel"
is not just the proclamation of the message, but refers to God's
intervention for man through Christ and his sacrifice. For example,
see Eph 3:6: …the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members
of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus
through the gospel.
It seems the second meaning is what Paul has in mind in this Roman epistle and particularly in the first chapter. Earlier, he had said he was set apart for the gospel, meaning not that he was set apart just to be a messenger. It is a broader meaning. Paul meant there that his life is totally dedicated, not just to being a messenger, but to Gods works, including God's act of salvation in Christ. Moreover, in the second half of the verse, Paul tells us that the gospel is the "power" of God. As we will see, this indicates it is more than the message itself; it is the saving process itself that the message proclaims.
This is no small linguistic point because it makes Paul's statement about being "ashamed" all the more remarkable. It is one thing to suggest that one might be ashamed of carrying a message that is viewed as odd; it is a totally different thing to suggest that one might be shamed of being saved by God's grace and the sacrifice of his Son. But it seems that it is the latter that Paul has in mind here. He is indeed suggesting that one could reasonably think that he could be ashamed of being saved by Christ through God. But this doesn't answer our original question; it only magnifies the importance of our question: Why?
The answer to our question has been answered recently in the
newspapers and on the television. Jesse "The Body" Ventura
(a name which might lend support to those philosophers who argue
that bodies and minds can have no connection whatsoever), the
governor of Minnesota gave an interview to Playboy Magazine. It
received wide coverage for many of Ventura's remarks but the one
of our focus is his statement that religion was a "crutch"
for the weak. While he received extensive criticism for this and
some other provocative remarks, if a Christian were to focus on
just this fragment of Ventura's statements, he or she would have
to agree that he was actually right if he was referring to Christianity.
God's intervention through Christ is a crutch for the weak. One
needs a crutch because he cannot get where he wants to go without
it. He may try to limp along in his independence but eventually
he will have to give up, short of his goal. In this same way,
a Christian cannot be saved without God's intervention through
Christ. Accordingly, the gospel, as defined, is a "crutch"
and Christians are weak persons who need that crutch.
The problem is that human beings just do not want to be seen as
weak. From earliest times, men have wanted to be seen as self
sufficient, as able to take care of themselves, as independent.
Men who are not independent, who can't take care of themselves,
are usually seek as weak and pitiful. Those who are the recipients
of this pity are usually ashamed of being weak and dependent on
someone else. In America's frontier culture as shown in the western
movies, the hero is the strong, independent man in the white hat
who comes into town and saves the weak and defenseless farmers
from the bad guys. Of course, the farmers are usually ashamed
of needing his salvation. And this is not a new story. The mythology
of all cultures usually includes similar stories of great heroes
who come into the village or town and save the weak from the bad.
While the weak are usually grateful, their gratitude is usually
mixed with some shame at needing the hero's help.
This same concept applies in the religious world as well. In this Roman epistle, Paul is dealing with Jewish Christians who still apparently believed that they could work their way into heaven without God's grace and Christ's sacrifice.
As we know, one of the primary messages of this epistle is that no one can work his way into heaven by himself. In 3:20, we read that "no one will be declared righteous" through works. In other words, Paul tells these former Jews that they can't do it themselves and that they are weak
But in his first chapter, even before he tells these readers that they are weak, Paul is telling them that he is not ashamed of his weakness. In the second half of this verse, to be discussed in a subsequent article, Paul explains to his readers why he has no shame even though he is weak. If they had read his earlier epistles, however, they would know the answer. In 2 Corinthians 12:9, Christ himself told Paul that His "…power is made perfect in weakness." How could anyone have any shame in manifesting God's power?
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
"You teach best what you have learned best."
"Never does the human soul appear so strong and noble as
when it foregoes revenge, and dares to forgive an injury."
"It is not fair to ask of others what you are not willing
to do yourself."
"People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those
who are doing it."
MARK YOUR CALENDARS
Our weekly services are held at 1318 Griffin Road, Leesburg, Florida
34748.
Phone: (352) 365-9946 for times of services.
Web site: http://www.careydillinger.com/cocbs/cocbshp.htm
MONTHLY BIBLE READING: The Major and Minor Prophets
SUMMER LECTURE SERIES: July 13-18
Raising Kids Who Turn Out Right
Speaker: David Banning of Orlando, Florida
Sunday
The Good News About Raising Kids
Does It Take A Village?
It All Begins With Me
Monday - Friday
Overcoming The Pitfalls: (1) Problems With Peers; (2) Corrupt
Entertainment; (3) Materialism; (4) Sex Too Soon
Letters From Death Row
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
BIBLE INSIGHT is published for the members of, and
visitors to, the Church of Christ at Beverly Shores, Leesburg,
Florida, USA.
Carey Dillinger is the editor. He can be reached at the church
address or via e-mail: webmaster@careydillinger.com