What were the "hidden wisdom" that Paul wouldn't divulge in 1 Corinthians?

[Vance]

The church had not been fully developed yet, neither its structure, nor even the idea of a church.

Really? So what was Jesus talking about in Matt 16:18?

The church as an institution continued, and continues, to develop as an institution.

An institution without an organization, right?

[mfbukowski]

I agree that whatever the "mystery" is that Paul is talking about, it can only be understood through the Holy Spirit.

You know, I think you are a good guy.

I wish just for 30 seconds or so, we could do a mind meld and let you see it as I do. There really is so much more here- layers and layers of meaning.

I suppose you might interpret that as a put-down of some kind, but honestly, it is not my intention to do that at all. I really wish there was a better way to communicate this stuff.

[Hoops22]

Really? So what was Jesus talking about in Matt 16:18?

17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter,[c] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[d] will not overcome it.[e]

Building the church on the revelation that Jesus is The Christ. Note He said: I will build my church - not my church has been built.

19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[f] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[g] loosed in heaven." 20Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.

a better rendering of this verse would be "... what you loose on earth has already been loosed in heaven... etc."

An institution without an organization, right?

I wouldn't expect that at the end of Paul's ministry churches by the hundreds would magically pop out of the sand, complete with sunday schools, church socials, and wednesday evening buffets - would you? The establishment of the church - the way God chose to draw gentiles to Himself - is the establishment of the belief in Jesus as the Christ. To expect man to immediately embrace various church administrations and offices to fulfill its mission does not make sense to me. Perhaps I'm misreading your point.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

17Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. 18And I tell you that you are Peter,[c] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[d] will not overcome it.[e]

Building the church on the revelation that Jesus is The Christ. Note He said: I will build my church - not my church has been built.

No one said it was built at the time he uttered those words. IT would seem that he did build it some time after those words. WE know that from other verse of scripture from Paul you know things about "A foundation of apostles and prophets with Christ being the cheif corner stone".

19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[f] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[g] loosed in heaven." 20Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.

a better rendering of this verse would be "... what you loose on earth has already been loosed in heaven... etc."

Uh, expect that verse of scripture doesn't say what you want it to that "loose on earth has already been loosed in heaven... etc."

So care to try again. It is quite plain that what so ever (denotes endless possibilites inculding marriage) you bind on earth will be bound in hevean and what so ever you loose on earth will be loosed in hevean.

what you loose on earth has already been loosed in heaven... etc."

What you stated above is not remotly supported by by this verse of scripture.

[Hoops22]

No one said it was built at the time he uttered those words. IT would seem that he did build it some time after those words. WE know that from other verse of scripture from Paul you know things about "A foundation of apostles and prophets with Christ being the cheif corner stone".

That's what I thought the above poster was writing. Still... of course He built the church some time afterward. And the church is the mystery to which Jesus through Paul is referring. To a jewish audience, one coming from an OT perspective no less, the idea of any mechanism that will draw gentiles to God would, indeed, be a mystery. This is the mystery spoken of "from the creation of the earth."

Uh, expect that verse of scripture doesn't say what you want it to that "loose on earth has already been loosed in heaven... etc."

So care to try again.

NO, this try will suffice. I believe what I have written is a better translation of the greek than what is given here. There are others here who are much more adept at greek than I, but, having received this from one who IS an expert in greek, I stand by my conclusion. I can not elaborate more than that, which is why I couched my statement the way I did. You might want to look it up and see if, in fact, I am grossly wrong.

It is quite plain that what so ever (denotes endless possibilites inculding marriage) you bind on earth will be bound in hevean and what so ever you loose on earth will be loosed in hevean.

I realize that lds MUST have this verse read the way you want it to, but perhaps we should find out if it actually does read that wa.

What you stated above is not remotly supported by by this verse of scripture.

Completely supported. Even utterly supported.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I realize that lds MUST have this verse read the way you want it to, but perhaps we should find out if it actually does read that wa.

Completely supported. Even utterly supported.

I haven't read anything into the verse. It says "what so ever" you bind on earth will be bound in hevean. How does that preclude marriage? I am all ears. lets "actually find out what it does mean".

Even if I give you your "greek translation" so what.

[Hoops22]

I haven't read anything into the verse. It says "what so ever" you bind on earth will be bound in hevean. How does that preclude marriage? I am all ears. lets "actually find out what it does mean".

Even if I give you your "greek translation" so what.

Give me the greek translation and it is significant. I seem to recall you castigating me about context regarding a comment I made regarding the bom. Rhetorically, is this only good for the bom? We'll assume not.

The passage is directly referring to Peter's mission to preach Jesus as the Christ/Messiah to the Jews. This mission has already been ordained/directed/"Loosed" in heaven. And that, coincedentally, he has the power (miracles, judgement, etc.) to bind on earth as well. And, I believe, he had until his passing. Peter had a special, unique role in preaching the Kingdom and the establishment of the church (which, as you know, are two different things). I see no indication, particularly when we know from other passages, that marriage should continue beyond this life.

[T-Shirt]

Give me the greek translation and it is significant. I seem to recall you castigating me about context regarding a comment I made regarding the bom. Rhetorically, is this only good for the bom? We'll assume not.

The passage is directly referring to Peter's mission to preach Jesus as the Christ/Messiah to the Jews. This mission has already been ordained/directed/"Loosed" in heaven. And that, coincedentally, he has the power (miracles, judgement, etc.) to bind on earth as well. And, I believe, he had until his passing. Peter had a special, unique role in preaching the Kingdom and the establishment of the church (which, as you know, are two different things). I see no indication, particularly when we know from other passages, that marriage should continue beyond this life.

From some one who understands Greek far better than I do:

The expression "shall be bound in heaven" and its parallel "shall be loosed in heaven?"

are formed by a very rare construction in gr, the periphrastic future perfect. The

future middle indicative verb ἔσται estai "will be" works together with a perfect passive

participle δεδέμενον dedemenon "has been bound." If understood temporally, the

expression would mean "shall have been bound," which would oddly seem to suggest

that the binding in heaven would actually precede the action taken to bind on earth,

which would be problematic. The correct way to understand the construction is to

emphasize the stative aspect of the perfect: "whatever you shall bind on earth shall

stand as bound in heaven." This translation emphasizes the finality and lasting effect

of decisions made on earth with apostolic authority.

It would appear that your translation is not accurate.

Best,

T-Shirt

[Hoops22]

From some one who understands Greek far better than I do:

It would appear that your translation is not accurate.

Best,

T-Shirt

If understood temporally, the

expression would mean "shall have been bound," which would oddly seem to suggest

that the binding in heaven would actually precede the action taken to bind on earth

I would appear that my understanding undergirds my point quite well. The only reason this mystery author gives us to understand it his way is.... wait, he doesn't give us one. Perhaps we should take the text as it is.

[Ron Beron]

In 1 Corinthians, Paul talks of "the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory." (1 Corinthians 2:7)

A few lines later, apparently discussing the same concept, he tells the Corinthians that he "could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ." (3:1). He tells them that he is feeding them with milk, and not with meat (3:2).

As a non-LDS Christian, what do you believe the "meat" was that Paul refused to share with the Corinthians? Why did Paul refuse to share it? Is 1 Corinthians representative of the New Testament, or is the "meat" found somewhere else in the Bible? If so, where?

Edit: Apparently I can't edit my topic title but just pretend that that "were" is actually a "was".

While it hasn't been suggested it would certainly be germane to suggest that Paul was reflecting a viewpoint that is distinctly Gnostic which incorporated within itself the concepts of 'mystery' and 'wisdom' or sophia. Elaine Pagels has argued that while Paul speaks as a Gnostic he probably wasn't only echoing the concepts of the time. What is interesting is his usage of Wisdom/Sophia in connotation with that of Jesus which is distinctly Jewish and even old world Jewish.