07 Knowledge and Transformation: towards a ‘Pentecostal Paideia’

---

Introduction

Some 20 years ago, Gordon Fee, in discussing the character of Pentecostal hermeneutics, made two very salient observations. In the first place, he noted that their attitude towards scripture regularly included a disregard for scientific exegesis; ‘scripture is the word of God and is to be obeyed. In place of scientific hermeneutics there developed a kind of pragmatic hermeneutics – obey what should be taken literally; spiritualise, allegorise, or devotionalise the rest.’[1] Secondly, he argued that ‘in general, the Pentecostal’s experience has preceded their hermeneutics. In a sense, the Pentecostal tends to exegete his or her experience.’[2] This was certainly true 20 years ago, but as has been recently pointed out in this journal, is still true today

Pentecostal culture has a reputation (deserved or otherwise) for its reluctance to engage in the task of critical reflection, and this reluctance is particularly acute in Australia, with its critique of criticism itself, and its relentless insistence on positive thinking. This culture, derived from the fundamentalist response to the liberal takeover of institutions of higher learning, and expressed in “word of faith” and “prosperity” doctrines, declares that “negativity is an enemy to life.”[3]

It would be superfluous to point out the tension within Pentecostal churches between the ‘lay person’ and the ‘academic.’ The perception of Pentecostals by those outside our denomination as having a ‘shallow theology’ is also in many ways stereotypical. This all requires little spelling out. What this paper proposes however – maybe a little audaciously – is a challenge to this situation.

The Pentecostal approach to scripture is fairly simple, ‘the bible is the basic rule of faith and practice and supplies the corrective and interpretive authority for all religious experience... a central question in biblical study is “how do we live a Christian life according to the scriptures?”’[4] The underlying ethos of this approach is a desire to obey God and live according to His will. This much is clear. However in adopting such an approach, many of us, in a sad irony, have overlooked clear instruction towards deeper critical engagement. In what follows, I wish to investigate several passages within Paul’s letters that would seem to challenge us towards a Christian ‘higher education.’ Looking at some of Paul’s language in relation to Greek paideia (education), I propose that what Paul has in mind for his churches is a form of ‘Christian paideia,’ with its ministers charged with the responsibility to instruct, and indeed transform, its members. We begin our investigation in 1 Corinthians.

Knowledge and transformation

In 1 Corinthians 1-4, Paul is attempting to resolve divisions (schismata) in the church; these have come as a result of members taking sides over Paul or Apollos as to who their preferred teacher is. Paul begins the letter by addressing this problem as it is no doubt the most pressing issue the church faces and one which, if left unresolved, will unravel everything Paul has accomplished in the city. He begins his argument in 1.10 with the following

I implore you brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you speak the same language and that there may not be divisions among you; but rather that you be made complete (katērtismenoi) in the same mind (noi) and in the same purpose (gnōmē).[5]

The term here katērtismenoi comes from the root word katartizō and refers to putting something in order or to put into proper condition.[6] In Galatians 6.1, Paul tells the church that if anyone is caught in sin, the ones who live by the Spirit (hoi pneumatikoi)[7] are to restore (katartizete) that person. In 1 Thessalonians 3.10, Paul desires to return to the church after being separated from them so that he can supply (katartisai) what is lacking in their faith. The author of Hebrews prays that God himself will equip them (katartisai) with everything good for doing His will. Finally, in Luke 6.40, Jesus reminds his disciples that a student (mathētēs) is not above their teacher (didaskolos), but a student that is fully trained (katērtismenos) is like their teacher.

Examples abound, but we can see from this brief selection that a prominent motif in the NT is transformation and development by means of instruction. Paul’s desire for the Corinthians is that they be made complete as a church; that is, they must resolve their divisions so that they can become a unified church. But for this to happen, they must be united in both mind and purpose. These two terms both have educational connotations. The first term nous, typically translated ‘mind,’ refers to the intellect, understanding or way of thinking.[8] Similarly, the second term gnōme, here translated ‘purpose,’ has, among other nuances, the sense of opinion, judgement, or way of thinking about an issue.[9] In other words, Paul sees as a solution to the Corinthian divisions, instruction in regards to things of God.

Greco-Roman paideia

This correlation between instruction and transformed behaviour was familiar in the first century. In Greek paideia, the students were set on a course towards maturity; it was the goal of education to turn a boy into a man[10] who would embody the ideal values of the culture and ultimately lead the masses who could not afford this training. The famous teacher of rhetoric Quintilian, says that the young (or for that matter, any age) should strive with all their hearts and devote all their efforts to the pursuit of virtue and eloquence; ‘and perchance it may be granted to us to attain to the perfection that we seek.’[11] He sees the gradual levels of study as being much the same as a child who is gradually able to handle increasingly more solid food

I have no objection to a little exuberance in the young learner. Nay, I would urge teachers too like nurses to be careful to provide softer food for still undeveloped minds and to suffer them to take their fill of the milk of the more attractive studies. For the time being the body may be somewhat plump, but maturer years will reduce it to a sparer habit.[12]

He argues that the passing years will ‘skim off much of the froth, reason will file away many excrescences, and something too will be removed by what I may perhaps call the wear and tear of life.’[13] Philo, the Jewish philosopher and contemporary of Paul, uses a similar idea

Do you not see that our bodies do not use solid and costly food before they have first, in their age of infancy, used such as had no variety, and consisted merely of milk? And, in the same way, think also that infantine food is prepared for the soul, namely the encyclical sciences, and the contemplations which are directed to each of them; but that the more perfect and becoming food, namely the virtues, is prepared for those who are really full-grown men.[14]

The Greek philosopher Epictetus also uses this analogy in the context of education, specifically in regards to the maturing of our judgements. He says ‘it is not the things themselves that disturb men, but their judgements about these things.’ He insists that when we are hindered, or disturbed, or grieved, we should not blame anyone but ourselves, in other words, our own judgements. According to him, it is the part of an uneducated person ‘to blame others where he himself fares ill; to blame himself is the part of one whose education has begun; to blame neither another nor his own self is the part of one whose education is already complete.’[15] He encourages his listeners thusly

Are you not willing, at this late date, like children, to be weaned and to partake of more solid food, and not to cry for mammies and nurses, old wives' lamentations? “But if I leave, I shall cause those women sorrow?” You cause them sorrow? Not at all, but it will be the same thing that causes sorrow to you yourself, bad judgement. What, then, can you do? Get rid of that judgement, and, if they do well, they will themselves get rid of their judgement; otherwise, they will come to grief and have only themselves to thank for it.[16]

We can see clearly a recognised process whereby the learner was gradually matured and over time exposed to heavier and ‘meatier’ study. However, this was not always the case for some of the students; in fact a major concern was with students who came to school to learn, but were easily distracted or not there to be changed by what they heard. Philo complains that some who attended lectures, though they were in attendance, had their minds elsewhere: some to marine and mercantile affairs, others to rents and agriculture, some to public honours and affairs of state, others to revenging themselves upon their enemies; but as far as the subjects of the discussion were concerned, they were completely deaf, present with their bodies only. Worse still, he complains, when they did attend, they would sit all that time only listening, and, having departed, not recollect a word of what was said.[17] These ones then, were more concerned with a career than being transformed through virtue.

According to Epictetus, some would resort to the philosophers merely because they wanted to make a display at a banquet of their knowledge, he asks ‘what else is he doing but trying to win the admiration of some senator sitting by his side?’[18] He says elsewhere, ‘that is why the philosophers admonish us not to be satisfied with merely learning, but to add thereto practice also, and then training.’[19] He argues that ‘to store away bread and wine in a pantry is one thing, and to eat it is another.’ The reason, he suggests, is because

What is eaten is digested, distributed, becomes sinews, flesh, bones, blood, a good complexion, easy breathing. What is stored away [on the other hand] you can readily take and show whenever you please, but you get no good from it except in so far as you are reputed to possess it.’[20]

Plutarch says the same

Some of these beginners, like birds, are led by their flightiness and ambition to alight on the resplendent heights of the Natural Sciences; while others go in for the disputations, knotty problems, and quibbles; but the majority enter a course in Logic and Argumentation, where they straightway stock themselves up for the practice of sophistry.[21]

In other words, the teaching of philosophy was aimed towards transformation in the listener. It was meant to be understood and applied in order to inform and transform behaviour permanently, according to the values and beliefs of the particular school. The problem however, was some of the students were only after ‘sound bite’ philosophy; mere phrases or extracts of philosophical systems so that they would sound sophisticated and impress at dinner parties. This obviously flew right in the face of the teachers, since, as far as they were concerned, it wasn’t enough to simply attend a lecture, you also needed to be changed by it too. Seneca, the Roman orator and also contemporary of Paul, refers to these students as ‘squatters,’ people who regard the philosopher's lecture room ‘merely as a sort of lounging-place for their leisure.’ He says ‘they do not set about to lay aside any faults there, or to receive a rule of life, by which they may test their characters; they merely wish to enjoy to the full the delights of the ear.’ He says moreover that some arrive ‘even with notebooks, not to take down the matter, but only the words, that they may presently repeat them to others with as little profit to these as they themselves received when they heard them.’[22]

In other words, education in antiquity was intended to be the means by which a person was shaped and their behaviour informed. The products of paideia were obvious, they were typically the elite orators and sophists, the noted philosophers or the statesmen and high officials of the community. In practise, oratorical displays and political speeches in the forum or the theatre were at their core a competition in paideia, whereby the most eloquent was deemed the most educated. Gleason demonstrates that in this culture, paideia, for both Roman and Greek gentlemen, was a form of symbolic capital. It reflected the time and effort spent in receiving a rhetorical education, thus eloquence was the essential precondition of its display. The performers who attracted the largest crowds valorised paideia by making it appear to be the prize of a bruising competition for status dominance.[23] Moreover, this rhetorical performer embodied his culture’s idea of cultivated manliness. That is, the physical control of his voice, carriage, facial expression and gesture and control of his emotions under competitive stress were all vital parts of his self presentation and overall evaluation as a man.[24] Thus it was commonly understood in the first century that education equalled transformed behaviour. Paideia was the process of ‘enculturation’ into the community’s particular values and beliefs. But what does this have to do with the church?

Christian paideia

It has been convincingly argued in recent scholarship, that the ekklēsia would have resembled a type of philosophical school.[25] Indeed the members of the church would have, in some respects, identified themselves in this way. The classicist E. A. Judge notes

In asserting a new source and method of knowing about the ultimate realities of the world, and about how one should live in it, Paul is occupying the territory that belonged to higher education. He is promoting a new kind of community education for adults.[26]

Judge defines this ‘Christian school’ in the following: ‘What we are observing is a matter of adult education, or indeed, as the apostles might have put it, a kind of higher education “in Christ,” which is the complete development of man.’[27] In other words, for Paul, one dimension of the church, as he understands it, is as a form of ‘Christian paideia’ whereby its members are taken along an educational path towards spiritual maturity. Indeed, this understanding seems to be causing the problems in Corinth. In 1 Corinthians 3.1-3, Paul has deemed their divisive behaviour as childish and immature and that they themselves are ‘mere infants in Christ’ (nēpioi en Christō); he tells them that he is unable to teach them the ‘meatier wisdom’ they so desire, but can only give them milk because they are not yet mature (teleiois). The educational imagery is obvious, particularly in light of the above discussion. Moreover, in 2.9 he refers to the church as theou oikodomē (God’s building) and himself as the sophos arkitektōn (wise master builder) committed with the task of epoikodomeō (building upon) Christ as the foundation. There is little doubt from this, that Paul understood his role as a teacher and builder of the body. His role was to instruct the church towards transformation and maturity. This is also demonstrated in other passages.

In Philippians 1.9-10, Paul prays that the church’s love would abound increasingly in knowledge (epignōsei) and depth of insight (aisthēsei); as a result of this, they will be able to discern what is best and be pure and blameless for the day of Christ. Again we see a correlation between knowledge and behaviour. The first term epignōsis, as a cognate of the familiar term gnōsis, is typically understood as knowledge of information.[28] The second term, aisthēsis, only turns up once in the NT, and refers to the ability to discern knowledge.[29] This knowledge and discernment, he prays, will lead to holiness and readiness for Christ’s return. In Colossians 1.9-10, Paul[30] prays the following

We continually ask God to fill you (plērothēte) with the knowledge (epignōsin) of his will through all the wisdom (sophia) and understanding (synesei) that the Spirit gives, so that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge (epignōsei) of God.

This prayer comes in response to an imminent threat from possibly Jewish heretics in the church. Paul makes clear that the only way to overcome such a threat is to be filled (plēroō) with the knowledge of God in all wisdom (sophia) and understanding (synesis); both prominent terms in Greek education. In Ephesians 3.18-19, Paul[31] again prays that the church would be able to grasp the full dimensions of Christ’s love; that they would know (gnōnai [root: gynōskō]) this love that surpasses all knowledge (gnōsis), and may be filled with all the fullness (plērōma [cognate: plēroō]) of God.

We can see then an educational ideal in Paul, and indeed, the whole NT. The means to counter heresy, the method of producing maturity, the process by which we attain the fullness of God is all found in ‘Christian paideia.’ Moreover, in Ephesians 4.11-14, we see this constellation of terms come together in a beautiful picture of what Paul (and indeed Christ) desires for the church

So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip (pros ton katartismon ‘towards the completion [of]’) his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up (eis oikodomēn) until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge (epignōseōs) of the Son of God and become mature (teleion), attaining to the whole measure of the fullness (plēromatos) of Christ. Then we will no longer be infants (nēpioi), tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming.[32]

Paul sees his role as not just an apostle, but also as a teacher (didaskolos) of a ‘Christian paideia.’ He desires that the members of the body grow and mature in greater knowledge of God; moreover, that their lives reflect the values and beliefs of Christ’s ekklēsia. This can only come through instruction in the things of God.

Concluding thoughts

The challenge seems clear. The Pentecostal ethos is towards transformation, this is pointed out as being a work of the Spirit in the believer’s life. Indeed, this ethos is one of the great strengths of our movement and something that must be held at the forefront of our mission. However, as we can see from only a few brief passages, part of this transformation is a direct result of knowledge and instruction. Certainly what is in mind in these texts is a serious critical engagement of the bible on the part of both the pastor/teacher and the church member. Moreover, it is not one at the cost of the other (i.e. knowledge or ‘life of the Spirit’), rather it is both. In fact it would not be a stretch to say that the absence of one is the inevitable weakness of the other. We as Pentecostals therefore, have an obligation to our own hermeneutic; if we desire to ‘read the bible and do what it says,’ then we must take seriously the passages that instruct us to be instructed. We cannot jettison our desire to be led by the Spirit, but we must also incorporate with this serious reflection of the biblical text; in doing so, perhaps we will begin to move closer towards a ‘Pentecostal paideia.’

---

[1] Gordon D. Fee, Gospel and Spirit: Issues in New Testament Hermeneutics (Baker Academic, 1991), 86.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Shane Clifton, “Editorial: The Courage to be Prophets,” Australasian Pentecostal Studies 12 (2009): 5.

[4] Scott A. Ellington, “Pentecostalism and the Authority of Scripture,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 9 (1996): 19.

[5] Translation mine

[6] BDAG

[7] The term hoi pneumatikoi is synonymous in Paul with hoi teleiois ‘the mature;’ cf. 1 Cor. 2.6, 15

[8] BDAG

[9] BDAG

[10] Education almost ubiquitously a male domain.

[11] Quintilian, Inst. 12.1.31

[12] Quintilian, Inst. 2.4.1

[13] Quintilian, Inst. 2.4.7

[14] Philo, De Cong. 19; on another occasion he says: ‘seeing that for babes milk is food, but for grown men wheaten bread, there must also be soul-nourishment, such as is milk-like suited to the time of the childhood, in the shape of the preliminary stages of school-learning, and such as is adapted to grown men in the shape of instructions leading the way through wisdom and temperance and all virtue;’ De Agr. 9

[15] Epictetus, Enc. 5

[16] Epictetus, 2.16.40

[17] Philo, De Cong. 65-66

[18] Epictetus, 1.26.9

[19] Epictetus, 2.9.13-14

[20] Epictetus, 2.9.18

[21] Plutarch, Mor. 78F

[22] Seneca, Ep. 108.3-7

[23] Maud Gleason, Making Men: Sophists and Self-Presentation in Ancient Rome (Princeton University Press, 2008), xxi.

[24] Ibid., xxii.

[25] See for example H. Conzelmann, “Paulus Und Die Weisheit,” New Testament Studies 12, no. 3 (1966): 231-244. Thomas Schmeller, Schulen im Neuen Testament? (Herder, Freiburg, 2001). Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul, 2nd ed. (Yale University Press, 2003), 81-84. James R. Harrison, “Paul and the Gymnasiarchs: Two Approaches to Pastoral Formation in Antiquity,” in Paul: Jew, Greek, and Roman, ed. Stanley E. Porter (Brill, 2009), 141-178. Et al.

[26] E. A Judge, “The Reaction Against Classical Education in the New Testament,” Journal of Christian Education 77 (1983): 12.

[27] E. A Judge, “The Conflict of Educational Aims in the New Testament,” in The first Christians in the Roman world: Augustan and New Testament essays, ed. E. A. Judge and James R. Harrison (Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 697.

[28] See for example 1 Tim. 2.4; Tit. 1.1; et al.

[29] BDAG

[30] I take Colossians to be a ‘genuine Pauline letter;’ however the conclusion of this debate is not pertinent to the present discussion.

[31] I take Ephesians also to be a ‘genuine Pauline letter;’ though as above, authorship is not pertinent.

[32] TNIV