A number of odd statements are found in First Corinthians 5:1-5. Paul addresses a case of immorality in the Corinthian community: a man is cohabiting with his father’s wife and the Corinthians are tolerating the situation. Paul considers their tolerance an egregious scandal! Readers are given no further information about the persons involved, but I note that Paul did not say that the lady was the man’s mother—so likely she was a step mother. Paul urges the community to expel the man!

     He says: “For though absent in body I am present in spirit, and as present [not “as if present”] I have already pronounced judgment” (5:3; compare Colossians 2:5, a similar statement that does not create the same difficulties). Paul further directs that when the community is assembled “and my spirit is present with the power of our Lord Jesus,” the man should be delivered “to Satan for the destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be saved…” (1 Corinthians 5:4-5). This latter statement clearly looks dualistic—i.e., human beings are comprised of a separate spirit/soul inhabiting a physical body—so the Greeks thought. Conventional thinking, however, is that Paul thought of humans as unified living beings (Genesis 2:7)—so the Hebrews thought.

     How might Paul have conceived of his own spirit “being present” although his body was absent? He says it twice (5:4). The temptation is to think that Paul has just been careless in his statement, and he meant to say something like: when you assemble and think like me about this situation (i.e., in this way I am psychologically present in spirit), you will pass judgment on this fellow (as I have already done), and deliver him over to Satan (meaning put him out of the community?—an odd way of putting it!). The New International Version of the Bible and Today’s English Version ignore the difficulty posed by the Greek text, and make Paul’s statement completely innocuous: “Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit, and have already passed judgment . . . just as if I were present.”

     One commentary (Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, 205), however, recognizes the oddity of the Greek text and thinks Paul’s presence in spirit has to do with unity in the Spirit: i.e., when the community is assembled the Holy Spirit is present—and “for Paul that means that he too is present among them by that same Spirit” (which is still an odd idea). Fee cautions his readers, however: “We must nonetheless not try to make Paul think or talk like us.” An excellent caveat! No one really knows what Paul thought. Paul’s statement on its surface actually sounds like some kind of “spirit travel.”

     Spirit travel is attested in antiquity and Paul clearly refers to it in 2 Corinthians 12:1-4: “I know a person . . . who was caught up into the third heaven (“three heavens”?—how odd!). Heavenly journeys are a common feature of ancient texts (see James Tabor, “Heaven, Ascent to,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 3.91-94). Here are a few references to the odd idea of “spirit travel” in Biblical texts. John was “in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day” (Revelation 1:10; 4:1-2), and he says: an angel “carried me away in the Spirit” (17:3; 21:10). Ezekiel also is carried away by the Spirit (Ezekiel 2:12-15; 8:3; 11:24-25; 37:1; 40:2). After the baptism of the Eunuch, the Spirit caught up Philip (physically?) and apparently took him to Azotus (Acts 8:39-40); perhaps “spirit travel” also plays a part in 1 Kings 18:12. Jesus told a story about a person inhabited by an “unclean spirit” that goes out of him/her and wanders in desert places, and later returns to the body (Matthew 12:43-45; Luke 11:24-26).

     These observations on 1 Corinthians 5 have taken an odd turn, evoking such ideas as astral projection, shamanism, and out of body experiences. I am basically very skeptical about such things, although a great deal has been written about them. It is difficult to know what to make of Paul’s statements in 1 Corinthians 5:3-4. Is he thinking of an ecstatic experience, like John of the Apocalypse, or perhaps more substantively like Ezekiel—and thus Paul thought he could be present with the Corinthians when he was in an ecstatic state? Or is he thinking of a divided spirit, part of which travels and part of which inhabits his body (I assume that the body needs its spirit/soul force to remain alive). But if part of one’s spirit travels, neither the spirit particle in transit nor the deficient part left behind can be thought of as an individual’s complete spirit; a divided spirit is something other than the usual condition of one’s spirit at rest in the body, it seems to me. Perhaps Paul is thinking of a “spirit twin” that could be projected at will?

     This passage requires a way of thinking foreign to a post-Enlightenment world (some would argue it requires spiritual discernment—compare 1 Corinthians 2:14), and it is little wonder that 21st century folk who are heirs of the Enlightenment (the 18th century rise of critical thought) would have difficulty with the odd ideas in it.

Charles W. Hedrick
Professor Emeritus
Missouri State University

Posted by Charles Hedrick at 10:07am
 

Hi Nathan:
Florida College, wow, I grew up just a mile or two from there, and my mother attended there for a couple of years. I thought I'd reply to your comment that "[b]ased on personal experiences and the testimony of every culture to ever exist on earth, I think it is safe to believe in the supernatural." I think it's important to note that, just because most everyone seems to believe X, that doesn't mean that X is true. For example, most people used to believe that Planet Earth was at the center of the Universe and was flat, but they were completely wrong in both cases.

You also mentioned personal testimony. The problem with this is that anecdotes don't make evidence. Whenever an amazing claim is made, a high level of evidence is necessary to back it up ("So and so said so" just doesn't cut it). Look for corroboration from multiple first-hand sources as well as unbiased (and, if possible, even hostile) ones. Otherwise, people can get away with saying just about anything. Also, if the alleged events really cannot be explained by natural means, then we should see if they can be duplicated and under what conditions this can be done.

So far, to my knowledge, no reliable data exists to support the existence of the supernatural. Does this mean it doesn't exist or that all efforts to study it should cease? No. But I think it does mean we shouldn't make any hasty assumptions about it. Rather, we should be very cautious about the level of confidence we place in supernatural claims.

All the best in your studies!
Posted by Lee Penya on 2/23/2013 at 4:55pm