Yet, while the Apostle rebukes and resists the superficial aocpla of the Corinthians, he also has his wisdom by which he relates the fact of Christ and ' the word of the cross ' to his general view of the world : 'unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, [we preach] Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God' (1 Co 1^). Thus he appro- priates for the Crucified the ' power ' and ' wisdom ' of God, terms which were recognized ' synonyms of the A6yoi in the Alexandrian-Jewish specula- tions' (EOT, in loc.). But, since the Corinthians were no philosophers (1 Co 1-"), 'we speak wisdom among them that are perfect' (2*), i.e. his philo- sophy is intelligible only to the initiated and to the spiritually mature. To them all the things that God hath prepared are revealed. There is a wisdom ; it is a revelation, not a discovery but a recognition (cf. Hebrew Wisdom, ut supra) ; it is mediated to men by the Spirit, and otherwise it cannot be discerned. This wisdom the Apostle would have proclaimed ab initio, for it is no esoteric doctrine ; but how could he ? The Cor- inthians were Christians, they had believed (3'') but they had not yet (oi/Vw) reached the stage of a purely spiritual appreciation. ' There is nothing esoteric in Christianity, but the presentation of it has to be adapted to the capacities of those who are taught' (J. E. McFadyen, the Epistles to the Corinthians, London, 1911, p. 46). Or some things our Lord said to the Twelve, ' Ye cannot bear them now ' (Jn 16'^), and He pointed them to the reveal- ing Spirit who would bring them into the full knowledge of the truth. Similarly, concerning the preaching of the true wisdom, St. Paul says, ' I was not able (ovx -qSm-fie-qv), because ye were not yet able (ofliru iSwaade) ' (1 Co S'-^).
3. Humanism versus Christianity. — Apart from its application to the experience of the Apostolic Church, St. Paul's discussion of wisdom has timeless interests in its bearing on the evan- gelization of the world, and on the true nietliod oi what is called evangelical preaching. R. Flint
[Sermons and Addresses, Edinburgh, 1899) raises the subject in a discourse on the text ' Christ is made unto us wisdom.' 'There were people,' ho says, 'who thought he [Paul] might prolilably have imitated admired philosophers and popular orators ; that he should have had a wider range of subjects and used more enticing words. Those foolish Corinthians have many successors among ourselves, who fancy that the pnlpit would gain greatly in power if ministers would only discourse more about science and philosophy, natiire and history, political and social reform, and the various so-called questions of the day. . . . The power of the pulpit will most certainly not be increased by ministers forsaking their own glorious work, the direct preaching of Christ, for the lecturing on lower themes. . . . The power of the pulpit lies in preaching Christ, and will be strong or feeble according as He is faithfully and zealously or faithles.sly and coldly preached' (p. 217). The persuasions to depart from the centre which Flint, himself a great preacher, so energetically repudi- ates meet every minister on the very threshold of his office, and are echoed again and again in the more or less strident voices of the world. There is always the aversion of men of taste to evangelical religion, from Corinth to the present day. ' If our connection with Christianity is nothing better than a mixture of captious criticism and transient enthusiasm, with a dash of graceful posing tlirown in, we are in danger . . . of just playing with Christ's religion — playing, too, in the marketplace, sur- rounded by the realities of life and death, where business has to be done with God. The grace and gospel of Jesus are too serious to be thus trifled with. Their genius and office are not to be pro- faned by OBsthetic handling either in the pulpit or in the pew ' (J. Moliatt, Reasons and lieasons, London, 1911, p. 137). One does not need to be an obscurantist or illiberal in turning back again to St. Paul as he contends for the purity and sim- plicity of the gospel message and vindicates its power. In every generation there will be found some who decry it as 'weak and foolish,' yet history has abundantly justified the power of the word of the Cross, and also the apostolic method in the delivery of the message. The victory over the world has never been with ' moonlight theology ' or 'extra-mural Christianity.' Philo was a con- temporary of St. Paul, but Philonism did not save the world ; it was the simple, unafi'eeted word of the Cross from a preacher such as St. Paul that won the Roman Empire, and brought — what Greek philosophy had failed to bring^a real knowledge of God to bond and free. If a system is to be judged by its fruits, if a method of preaching is to be so judged, one may well endorse the words, ' I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ : for it is the power of God' (Ro 1'"). If Humanism and Christianity be placed on their trial as instruments for the regeneration of the mass of mankind, Christianity has no need to blush for its rec'ord, while philosophy, as regards the mass of mankind, has been a light only to itself and an ornament. The contrast between St. Paul and the Corinthian seekers after wisdom is seen in historical ex- amples ; in the message of Luther and Erasmus ; the Evangelical Revival, ' by its intense reality, its earnestness of belief, its deep tremulous symjiathy with the sin and sorrows of mankind, did what no intellectual movement could, it changed in a few years the whole temper of English Society ' (J. R. Green, A Short History of the English People, London, 1882, p. 718). Thomas Chalmers draws a sad picture of the failure of his earlier ministry, when lie preached apart from the Centre, or, as St. Paul would say, laid another foundation for life than that which had been laid. When the