Category Archives: Theology

Edward Taylor, 28th Meditation.3

08 Thursday Oct 2020

Posted by in Edward Taylor, Grace, Martin Luther, Puritan

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Thou, thou my Lord, art full, top full of Grace,

The golden sea of grace whose springs thence come

And precious drills, boiling in every place.

Untap they cask and let my cup catch some

Although it is in an earthen vessel’s case

Let it no empty vessel be of grace.

This stanza begins with two stressed syllables separated by a pause: THOU — THOU my LORD…. The emphasis thus falls most heavily upon the addressee. This functions almost as a new invocation: he has asked to fill him, and here he repeats and makes even more emphatic the call for grace. 

In the second half of the line, Taylor does something similar where he repeats “full” with an emphasis falling on the second full (which is not merely full, but is “top full”). 

Although it is a “fault” with the line, it ends with an emphasized “grace”. The fault is that Taylor has put 6 stresses in a 5 stress line. Yet even though it is a technical fault, it helps underscore the desire of the poet. I truly need this. 

The second line smooths out with a fine alliteration of “g” from the end of the first line: grace … golden … grace.

The springs are rising up from the depth of the sea: the sea is so completely filled with grace, and grace wells-up continually so that the surface is “boiling” with rising streams of grace. And so matches the nature of the gospel of our grace: Our need is continual, but the grace of God in Jesus Christ is greater, inexhaustible. No matter the depth of our need, it cannot begin to exhaust the supply. 

A hymn has it

Grace, grace, God’s grace

Grace that is greater than all our sin.

The theology which underlies Taylor’s prayer in this poem: his own inability and need vs. Christ’s inexhaustive grace owes much to Luther’s statement in the Heidelberg Disputations no 18, “It is certain that one must utterly despair of oneself in order to be made fit to receive the grace of Christ.” Whether Taylor ever read the disputations, I do not know. But the theology set forth there was much developed by Lutheran and Reformed theologians and showed up theology which Taylor would have known.

He then uses the image of a cask filled with wine: He asks that the cask be tapped and that the grace flow into the empty, earthen vessel, until it is full:

Untap they cask and let my cup catch some

Although it is in an earthen vessel’s case

Let it no empty vessel be of grace.

Thomas Shepherd, Is Your Obedience “Evangelical” or “Legal”

03 Saturday Oct 2020

Posted by in Grace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

In The Parable of the Ten Virgin, Thomas Shepherd asks the question of  how to discern whether we are “married to the law instead of to Christ.” The understanding of this question gets to the matter of what the Puritans called “evangelical obedience.”  This concept seems paradoxical: if we are saved by grace, and if we are not under the law but under grace (Rom. 6:14), then why would one such as Shepherd write, “When I speak of being married to the law instead of Christ, I do not hereby exempt yourselves from obedient to the law after you are in Christ?” (36)

He starts with the question of how do we respond when we are tempted and fall into sin. First, assume you have been troubled by sin, “what hath cheered thee?” How do you find relief for a subjective sense for the damage of sin. (36-37) 

Let us say you think to yourself, “”I have forsaken them, and cast out Jonah, and there has been a calm.” If so, you are reliant upon the law for your peace of mind.

Or if you fall into sin again, how do you calm your conscience? “I have repented and been sorry for them and purposed to do no more.” But that still is not reliance upon Christ, “This is the life of the law still.”

What if the sin has been unshakeable, habitual, “you find sins prevailing againt you, and you cannot part with them”?  Well, my “desire is good” and my heart has been resolved against them. “This desire is but a work of the law.” 

What if you say, “I have trusted Christ.” The answer, “You have done it.”

The proposition, “As obedience to the law done by the power of Christ an evangelical work, so to perform any evangelical work from a man’s self is a legal work.” (37)

This obviously is not a comprehensive answer, but it does put us in the right direction.

Edward Taylor, Oh Wealthy Theme.4

01 Saturday Aug 2020

Posted by in Christology, Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

All office fulness with all office gifts

Embossed are in thee, whereby thy grace

Doth treat both God and man, brings up by hifts

Black sinner and white justice to embrace:

Making the glory of God’s justice shine

And making sinners to God’s glory climb.

Office:  At this point, Taylor is using the standard theological language of “office” to describe the work of Jesus Christ. It is a reference to particular aspects of Christ’s work as prophet, priest and king. The Westminster Shorter Catechism, questions 23-27 read as follows:

Q. 23. What offices doth Christ execute as our Redeemer?

A. Christ, as our Redeemer, executeth the offices of a prophet [a], of a priest [b], and of a king [c], both in his estate of humiliation and exaltation.

[a]. Deut. 18:18; Acts 2:33; 3:22-23; Heb. 1:1-2

[b]. Heb. 4:14-15; 5:5-6

[c]. Isa. 9:6-7; Luke 1:32-33; John 18:37; 1 Cor. 15:25

Q. 24. How doth Christ execute the office of a prophet?

A. Christ executeth the office of a prophet, in revealing to us, by his Word [a] and Spirit [b,] the will of God for our salvation [c].

[a]. Luke 4:18-19, 21; Acts 1:1-2; Heb. 2:3

[b]. John 15:26-27; Acts 1:8; 1 Pet. 1:11

[c]. John 4:41-42; 20:30-31

Q. 25. How doth Christ execute the office of a priest?

A. Christ executeth the office of a priest, in his once offering up of himself a sacrifice to satisfy divine justice [a], and reconcile us to God [b]; and in making continual intercession for us [c].

[a]. Isa. 53; Acts 8:32-35; Heb. 9:26-28; 10:12

[b]. Rom. 5:10-11; 2 Cor. 5:18; Col. 1:21-22

[c]. Rom. 8:34; Heb. 7:25; 9:24

Q. 26. How doth Christ execute the office of a king?

A. Christ executeth the office of a king, in subduing us to himself, in ruling and defending us [a], and in restraining and conquering all his

and our enemies [b].

[a]. Ps. 110:3; Matt. 28:18-20; John 17:2; Col. 1:13

[b]. Ps. 2:6-9; 110:1-2; Matt. 12:28; 1 Cor. 15:24-26; Col. 2:15

What Taylor means is that Christ fulfills the work of prophet, priest and king in the Incarnation, and that also Christ has the “gifts,” the abilities to fulfill such work.

Treat God and man: Christ, in his unique position as God Incarnate can deal equally with God and with Human Beings. He can communicate between the two as a bridge before the finite and infinite, the creator and creature. 

Justice and mercy: The concept which causes Taylor to so praise, is that Christ, by means of his unique position being God and Man, can reconcile two completely opposite demands. 

Justice by its nature requires satisfaction of the guilty party. If one is guilty, it is unjust for the law to ignore the demand. To understand this point, perhaps you need to feel it. 

Imagine that someone you dearly loved was victimized by a brutal criminal. This criminal was then brought before a judge, where the fact of the crime was unquestionably established. However, the judge simply determined to let the criminal free without any penalty. You would rightly be angry: the law was unjust in permitting the guilty to go free. 

Thus, God – to be God – must be perfectly just and cannot ignore crime. 

However, this presents an unsolvable problem for humanity. The wrong done to an infinitely perfect being does not permit an easy resolution. What could we possibly do to satisfy the justice of God? 

The prophet Micah put it this way:

Micah 6:6–7 (ESV) 

            6           “With what shall I come before the Lord,

and bow myself before God on high? 

                        Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, 

with calves a year old? 

            7           Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, 

with ten thousands of rivers of oil? 

                        Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, 

the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?” 

What we need is mercy from God. 

How then can God be perfectly just (fully punishing crime) and merciful (passing over crime)? 

Jesus as God and Man stands in for humanity. God’s justice is brought upon Jesus who suffers as a substitute and thus obtains mercy for human beings. In the act of faith and repentance, God transfers our guilt to Christ and Christ’s righteousness to us and so the sinner and justice “embrace.”

Edward Taylor Oh Wealthy Theme.3

24 Friday Jul 2020

Posted by in Christology, Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Oh! Wealthy box: more golden far than gold

A case more worth than wealth: a richer delph

Than rubies; cabinet than pearls here told

A purse more glittering than glory ‘tiself

A golden storehouse of all fullness: shelf

Of heavenly plate. All fullness in thyself. 

The box which holds the fullness of Christ, then must be Christ himself. He compares Christ to a box, a case, a cabinet, a purse, a storehouse, a shelf.  For each compared container, Christ is worth more than any earthy good which could be placed into the container; of more worth than gold, rubes, pearls, silver. 

Delph would be variant of a delft, a decorative box. 

Oh! Godhead fullness! There doth in thee flow

All wisdom’s fulness, fulness of all strength:

Of justice, truth, love, holiness also

And grace’s fulness to its upmost length

Do dwell in thee. Yea and thy Father’s pleasure

Thou art their cabinet and they thy treasure.

This stanza makes two points. First, it details the elements of the fullness, which is a summary of biblical statements about Christ. Second, there is a statement of the Father’s pleasure in the Son. 

This stanza is then linked up to the preceding argument by use of the word “cabinet”. Christ is the “cabinet” in which these virtues reside. And the Father then takes pleasure in the cabinet filled with treasure, which is the Son incarnate.

Wisdom:

Colossians 2:1–3 (ESV) 

For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face, 2 that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, 3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. 

Strength:

1 Timothy 1:12 (ESV) 

12 I thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me to his service, 

Justice:

Matthew 12:18–21 (ESV) 

            18         “Behold, my servant whom I have chosen, 

my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased. 

                        I will put my Spirit upon him, 

and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles. 

            19         He will not quarrel or cry aloud, 

nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets; 

            20         a bruised reed he will not break, 

and a smoldering wick he will not quench, 

                        until he brings justice to victory; 

            21         and in his name the Gentiles will hope.”

Truth:

John 1:17 (ESV) 

17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 

Holiness:

Romans 1:4 (ESV) 

4 and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, 

Grace

2 Corinthians 8:9 (ESV) 

9 For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich. 

Pleasure:

Mark 1:9–11 (ESV) 

9 In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. 10 And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.”

The pattern of biblical judgment

05 Friday Jun 2020

Posted by in Idolatry

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

Biblical judgment follows a consistent pattern: we judged on the basis of our idol 

Consider the plagues of Egypt. The Pharaoh orders the death of infant boys; one by one they are cast into the river, the Nile, that great god of Egypt. The Nile brings life in the desert: their water, their food, their safety are all bound up in that great god.

But when God sets his eyes upon Egypt, it is the Nile that fails. The blood of the boys wells and the river is blood. The life of Egypt has become a gushing artery of death. The Nile has been killed and kills in turn.

The sun was a great god, the source of life. And so, God in his turns, kills the sun. The sky grows dark at day.

The Pharaoh himself is the issue of the sun. The Pharaoh’s firstborn boy is likewise a god and the son of a god. Rather than turn their worship to the true Creator, the Egyptians gave their praise to the boy in his turn.

And so the Pharaoh who brought death to the son of his slaves finds death in his own home. 

There is a pattern here, the idol matches the judgment. One the type, the other the antitype. 

Our idols fail precisely in their promise. They promise life, but deliver death. 

The judgment need not be the end. When God first struck the Nile, the plea was for Egypt to turn. When God brought night and day, the proof was the Sun was no god. But persistence in rebellion is its own curse. And finally, the child of a lie, the promise which could not deliver, the god who is no God will fail. 

Chained to an idol

30 Thursday Apr 2020

Posted by in Ante-Nicene, Idolatry, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

14747415206_3fb6503527_o

For that wicked reptile monster, by his enchantments, enslaves and plagues men even till now; inflicting, as seems to me, such barbarous vengeance on them as those who are said to bind the captives to corpses till they rot together. This wicked tyrant and serpent, accordingly, binding fast with the miserable chain of superstition whomsoever he can draw to his side from their birth, to stones, and stocks, and images, and such like idols, may with truth be said to have taken and buried living men with those dead idols, till both suffer corruption together.

Therefore (for the seducer is one and the same) he that at the beginning brought Eve down to death, now brings thither the rest of mankind.

Clement of Alexandria, “Exhortation to the Heathen,” in Fathers of the Second Century: Hermas, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus, and Clement of Alexandria (Entire), ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, vol. 2, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 173.

This quotation is interesting on a few grounds. First, it contains a source for the not-uncommon image used in sermons particular on Romans 7:24 (who will deliver me from this body of death). But I note that even Clement didn’t have a definite source of the story beyond the indefinite “they say” (legousin, in the original).

Second, it is a striking description of the danger and evil of idolatry: “to have taken and buried living men with those dead idols, till both suffer corruption together.” To have an idol is to be shackled to an idol.

A similar image is used of addictions in our day, which is appropriate seeing addiction is another way to understand magic and idolatry. It is to be chained to, buried with.

Framing the Issue of the Spirit’s Indwelling and the Old Testament

23 Thursday Apr 2020

Posted by in Pneumatology, Theology, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Often we misunderstand a topic because we consider the issue in fundamentally the wrong way. Having taken up the question at the wrong end, the actual solution becomes invisible.

One such issue is the matter of the indwelling of the Spirit how that relates to OT believers. I Dr. Abner Chou’s paper at the November 2018 meeting of the ETS entitled, “Revisiting the Spirit’s Indwelling of OT Saints: Ezekiel’s Contribution to the Issue” provides a good example of how recasting the issue can provide a “way forward” to resolve a long-standing quandary.

The essay begins with a survey of the various potential ways to address the issue, ranging from total continuity, through varying degrees of discontinuity. But in this discussion, the underlying issue for the commentators seems to concern the question of regeneration: “At least in recent history, people cannot speak of the indwelling without speaking of regeneration.”

The issue has been how do we talk about the salvation or sanctification of OT saints if they were not indwelt by the Spirit? And I must admit as thought of the topic, without any particular study of the issue, I began the with the question of how salvation or sanctification took place without indwelling of the Spirit.

This leads to a primary element in Chou’s argument, “such a presupposed link is not necessarily required.”

As he rehearses the various positions, it becomes clear that the primary issue among those who have been discussing the issue is how salvation and sanctification took place before the coming of  the Spirit promised in John 14: Perhaps the OT saints were indwelt, but were merely not indwelt to the same extent as NT saints. Or the Spirits work was done by the Spirit presence’s in the Temple.

The discussion thus leads to an impass. The Scripture supports non-indwelling, but theology requires indwelling (or no one was saved before Christ).

Chou puts the problem at the level of definition: The discussion of indwelling has presumed that indwelling is necessary for salvation, therefore, we must nuance the concept of “indwelling”. The emphasis has thus been upon the results of indwelling rather than the nature of indwelling.

In effect, the issue has been grabbed from the wrong end.

Rather than beginning with the presupposition that indwelling effects salvation, Chou begins with what the Scripture says about indwelling. The issue of indwelling, or the Spirit is discussed in the OT but in terms of the Spirit filling the Temple. Thus, to understand the issue, we must the Temple: The Temple is indwelt with the Spirit: For instance, the Temple is “filled” with the glory of God.

The NT believers have taken over as the Temple, and thus believers are filled with the Spirit in the exhibition of the Glory of God.

The article is 29 pages of single space 12-point text, so plainly there is a great more to be found. The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society is available online

 

 

How the doctrine of God can lead to adoration

09 Thursday Apr 2020

Posted by in Augustine, Theology, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

In this quotation summarizing Augustine’s doctrine of God, we see how each aspect of the doctrine is the ground for praise:

Consequently, Augustine emphasized God’s immateriality, invisibility, and immutability. In God, he claims, there is no extension and no divisibility.5 God is everywhere without being the sum total of all geographic points. God cannot break or deteriorate, for God is simple; in God all the virtues are one, and God’s attributes and very being are one. Furthermore, God does not flit from one thought to another in a chronological sequence; rather, God comprehends everything past, present, and future simultaneously.6 Augustine associates the passage of time with the loss of the past and anxiety about the future. Therefore, it is a blessing that he can be assured that in God there is no temporal movement.7 These affirmations of God’s metaphysical perfections serve to reassure the reader that there is something in the universe that is immune to vacillation, anxiety, and disappointment. We humans may be harried by misfortunes and by our own fickle natures, but God is not. The unchangeableness of God is the antidote to the ephemeral nature of all earthly things. The existence of such a God grounds the possibility that one’s own self can come to participate in such a state of blessedness. To hint that God might be vulnerable or mutable would rob life of all hope for serenity and joy. To ascribe the perfections of immutability, self-sufficiency, and unity to God is to cultivate the longing for God’s truth, goodness, and beauty. For example, the refrain repeated throughout Augustine’s writings that all of God is everywhere functions to reassure the reader of God’s universal accessibility.8 Appropriately, in Augustine’s pages these metaphysical assertions about God are usually sandwiched between prayers of adoration. Philosophical speculation is motivated not by curiosity, but by a doxological impulse. God is the beauty and the splendor that will satisfy our mysterious yearnings for a joy that the world can neither give nor take away.

This quotation is from the marvelous book: Eros and Self-Emptying The Intersections of Augustine and Kierkegaard Lee C. Barrett

By way of contrast, I am reminded of this which I saw recently on twitter

Our desire to subvert the text

02 Thursday Apr 2020

Posted by in Bibliology, Scripture, Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,

In his essay, “God and the Bible,” in the volume The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures Peter F. Jensen, responds to proposition that the Scripture is a word about God. Or, he quotes Brunner, “The spoken word is an indirect revelation when it bears witness to the real revelation: Jesus Christ, the personal self-manifestation of God, Emmanuel.” To respond to this challenge, states the issue as whether the “classical position” that the words of Scripture are the word of God; or, is there a way in which we can, by means of the Spirit, come to Christ effectively bypassing the words in the book?

There is a profound temptation here to want not some words but a person. Indeed, when phrased in that way, the “classical position” sounds foolish and misguided. I will not recount his argument here, which is well-structured and persuasive. He effectively demonstrates that there is no gospel without holding fast to the “classical position.” I cannot do that argument justice without simply repeating what he wrote.

What do wish to underscore here is the nature of the temptation to go-around the text. The desire to go around the text seems to have two roots as referenced by Jensen. First, there is the matter of idolatry; an argument which he traces to Tyndale. Second, he locates the movement in a desire for autonomy.

Jensen notes that our forebearers sought for “godliness” by means of obedience (see page 494), while we moderns speak of “spirituality”. But a desire for “spirituality” can easily become a guise for autonomy. We are dependent creatures who must have a clear rule to be obedient. “ A human life lived without the rule of God would be like a game of tennis without a net.” (495).

But I would like to venture an observation on idolatry and the textual nature of Christianity. Idolatry is a desire for a god whom we can control; an object of technology and desire. The god created is a god whom conforms to my desire.

I am in place one. My desire is place two; but reality is place three. I use the god of my idolatry to coerce reality to conform to my present desire.

When one claims a spirituality which supersedes the text and goes-around the text, and does not need the text; then my desires will become the “prompting of the Spirit.” Getting what I want will be the will of Christ. It is the strategy which underlies so much doctrinal change (as if a vote of some denominational leaders had the power to rewrite the Bible).

Words are a brake on hazy thinking and deceitful desires. I am well-aware of the strategies to subvert a text and to torture words into saying what I like. That is it’s own conversation.

And yes, there can be difficult questions. But so little of the trouble in life comes from the difficult questions about the Bible.  The “you can make it say whatever you want” dodge is written by people who have no idea what the text says. That is merely a dodge for one who wants to ignore the text.

The words of the text stand athwart our desire to create our own god.  We have to play deceitfully with the words to justify our own deceitful desires. A “modern” stance which simply seeks a make-believe Jesus on the basis of a “Spirit” which is remarkably consistently with my personal inclinations at the moment (sometimes this shows up when a Christian embarks on a path of disobedience and justifies it on the basis that he feels “peace about it.”)

The pattern laid out in Scripture, from Adam on, is God speaks and we obey. Our obedience is bound up with both our knowledge of God and our love of God. Paul, in Romans writes of the “obedience of faith.” But, “such a piety of obedience clashes deeply with our Western contemporaries to promote human autonomy as the highest aspiration.” (493). And hence, the desire to subvert the text.

As for the entire book, highly recommended. This is a remarkably comprehensive work on the authority of Scripture at over 1200 pages; Jensen providing one of the many essays. Please do not confuse any limitations in my writing with the very fine work done by Jensen in his essay.

Kierkegaard on the Difference Between the Tragic Hero and Abraham

22 Sunday Mar 2020

Posted by in Faith, Faith, Kierkegaard, Kierkegaard, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

In Fear and Trembling, Kierkegaard draws an interesting contrast between Abraham and Agamemnon: both men are called upon to sacrifice a child: but Agamemnon is a tragic hero and Abraham is an example of faith. What then is the true distinction between the two?

The tragic hero is compelled to his end by an ethical demand. To fulfill his oath, Agamemnon must lead the force into war. The demand to sacrifice is daughter is tragic and painful, but it is compelled by the demand of his oath. His act is meaningful and ethical to the community.

But it is not so with Abraham. There is no ethical duty which is recognizable to anyone who watched Abraham. The soldiers who saw Agamemnon move to give up his daughter, would have a basis to understand and even sympathize with Agamemnon. But if one were to watch Abraham: his actions would make no ethical sense. There is no apparent duty.

A second and related comparison comes with the matter of disclosing his conduct.

In this section Kierkegaard first makes an observation about concealment and revelation. In the older Greek tragedies, the concealment was brought about by fate. Oedipus kills his father, but it is concealed to him. It is revealed afterward.

In the modern age, the act of concealment is brought about the character’s decision. He compares two types here. There is the esthetic concealment, where two lovers conceal to bring about their desired end. And to have the happy ending we enjoy such action.

Esthetics permits these actions, even if unethical:

But esthetics is a civil and sentimental discipline that knows more ways out than any pawnshop manager. What it do then? It does everything possible for the lovers. (75)

But ethics requires revelation: The concealment is a deception, and even if pleasing aesthetically it is repugnant to ethics. Ethics requires an explanation, a justification for the conduct. There must be a public rationale.

Abraham differs, because he cannot explain. What is there to say? He is seeking something absurd. Abraham is not merely doing something which seems outside of all ethics; he is doing something he knows cannot be true. He will kill Isaac and Isaac is the child of promise and God will fulfill his promise. This is not merely improbable; it is paradoxical.

There is no public rationale, because the wisdom of God is greater than man.

We go wildly astray if we think Kierkegaard says that faith is believing things which are untrue or improbable. That is what is often miscredited to him. Faith is not believing stupid or false things. Faith is believing that God is above human categories:

1 Corinthians 1:20–29 (ESV)

 20 Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. 22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26 For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.