Kingship and Thrones for All Christians: Paul’s Inaugurated Eschatology in 1 Corinthians 4–6

The kingship of the Corinthians is an issue of identity

The reason why Paul’s rhetoric is powerful in 1 Cor. 4:8 is that the audience can agree with him, even if only for a moment. It is likely that they initially agreed that they were defined by success and sufficiency as he listed these three qualities: (A) already you have all you want, (B) already you have become rich, (C), without us you have become kings. The series of statements in 1 Cor. 4:8a–c provides several deictic or temporal markers that indicate that this is the present tense: (ἤδη… ἤδη… χωρὶς…). The adverbial word ἤδη indicates “now, already, by this time.” ¹³ The third statement in 1 Cor. 4:8c (“Without us you have become kings!”) uses the aorist tense verb βασιλεύω. As an aorist, this is semantically undefined (lacking semantic encoding) as the aorist relies on the pragmatics and context to determine temporal reference. ¹⁴ The context leads to the grammatical conclusion that the aorist in the third statement should be understood in the present tense: the Corinthians are currently kings.

The adverb “already” (ἤδη) has been used to argue that the Corinthians were in error of having an over-realized eschatology or a “belief that the kingdom of God had already arrived in all its fullness.” ¹⁵ According to some, the Corinthians’ problem was that they believed that the “kingdom had already arrived.” ¹⁶ However, this does not fit well with the inaugurated eschatology that characterizes much of Paul’s thinking. ¹⁷ In Paul’s theology of judgment, “the verdict of the future is enacted in the present.” ¹⁸ For example, Christ is the “firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Cor. 15:20). Nor does this explain how Paul can state, a few paragraphs later in 1 Corinthians 6, that the Corinthians should indeed reflect on their status as future eschatological judges of the world—a point taken up in the next section of our study. The problem Paul is addressing with his irony is not the timing of the kingdom of God, but the nature of the kingdom of God.

The transition to Paul’s deeply ironical contrast between the apostles and the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 4:10–13 is marked by another surprising statement. Paul states, “And would that you did reign, so that we might share the rule with you!” (1 Cor. 4:8d–e). Paul’s statement can be taken “somewhat sourly” or rhetorically because the pattern is deeply ironic. ¹⁹ The statement “without us you have become kings” (1 Cor. 4:8c), might be understood as a reference to their supposed spiritual growth without the presence of Paul. Although Paul founded the church in Corinth (Acts 18:1–18), he did not stay but a year and six months (Acts 18:11)—an incredibly long time, by Paul’s standards. The following two statements in 1 Cor. 4:8d–e set up the transition to follow. He wants them to reign as kings because that is what their identity truly is in Christ and he earnestly desires to share in their identity as co-regents (συμβασιλεύω). ²⁰ But, as they will soon find out, this kingship is not what they think it is.

The kingship of the Corinthians is an issue of irony

Although Paul’s statements in context are highly rhetorical, this does not mean that he is not using the truth in service of his pastoral and apostolic discipline. To suggest that Paul’s rhetoric and multiple references to “kings” and “co-regency” are “hyperbole” is to misread this text as an overly simplistic contrast. ²¹ Paul does create an extended contrast between the Corinthians and the apostles in 1 Cor. 4:10–13 that consists of foolishness vs wisdom, weakness vs strength, honor vs dishonor, sufficiency vs need, clothed vs homeless, etc.. Paul concludes that “We have become, and are still, like the scum of the world, the refuse of all things” (1 Cor. 4:13). But the complexity in Paul’s contrast is easy to miss. First, Paul acknowledges the truth of their claims to prosperity and kingship in 1 Cor. 4:8–9; they do indeed have these qualities. Then, in 1 Cor. 4:10–13, Paul turns these truths into an epistolary “rod” of discipline (cf. 1 Cor. 4:21). ²² The contrast between the Corinthians and the apostles is evident in the way they live, and their identity does not match up with the reality of the apostles who truly imitate Jesus and the glory of the cross.

The irony is “still total”. ²³ If the apostles are weak, it is because “they align themselves with the ‘weakness’ of God that is in fact stronger than all human strength”. ²⁴ If the Corinthians are truly kings they must draw this identity from Christ and imitate him. They are already rich and have become kings—but not in the way that they think. The three qualities of sufficiency, wealth, and kingship as identified in 1 Cor. 4:8 are only true because they are “in Christ.” Their view of leadership is secular because the cross of Christ does not define what these qualities mean. ²⁵

It is possible that Paul was overturning philosophical notions of kingship as he progressed in his rhetoric against the Corinthians. It is possible that the Corinthians had imbibed some of their Greco-Roman cultural trappings and concluded that they were self-sufficient. ²⁶ For example, they may have been following the thought of Philo of Alexandria, who stated that the virtuous and wise person is like a king: “But the kingdom of the wise man is bestowed upon him by God; and the virtuous man receiving it is not the cause of evil to anyone, but is rather the author to all his subjects of the acquisition and also of the use of good things, proclaiming to them peace and obedience to the law” (Philo, Abr. 261). In the Platonic philosophical tradition, the “king” is “the chief image of highest principle.” ²⁷ This idea of kingship carried over into both Stoic and Cynic philosophies. Epictetus stated, “Who, when he lays eyes upon me, does not feel that he is seeing his king and master?” (Diss. 3.22.49). If the Corinthians viewed themselves as “wise” they only reflect the wisdom of the world and not the wisdom of the cross. What Paul is doing with his reference to kingship is to present identity in Christ as the solution to the social and cultural morass in which they are entangled. They are to redefine kingship and thus redefine themselves. Paul is trying to communicate that wisdom, kingship, kingship, honor, virtue, and maturity are all defined by Christ and the cross alone.

In summary, Paul is speaking the truth to the Corinthians about their identity as kings in an ironic way. They are indeed kings because of their union with Christ but they are not acting the part. Scholars continue to debate whether the Corinthians were over-emphasizing the role of eschatology, ²⁸ or denying that they had any definite eschatology at all. ²⁹ For our purposes, it is enough to state that the Corinthians had misunderstood Paul’s eschatology in some manner. This study focuses on their self-perception and identity as their core issue and Christ-centered inaugurated eschatology as the solution. Whether the Corinthians viewed their present status as “kings” in connection with first-century philosophy or other sources, it was not according to Christ. This is why Paul’s statement about their identity as “kings” is ironic: it is both true and false at the same time. It is true that they are kings in Christ but it is false that they are kings according to God’s true wisdom, knowledge, maturity, and possessions. If they truly understood Christ’s kingship they would follow and imitate him. This is why Paul contrasts his work as an apostle with their kingship. From the vantage point of inaugurated eschatology, the Corinthians do possess kingship in Christ (already), just not in its fullness (not yet). In other words, they are not presently displaying the virtues of their future eschatological roles. Because their actions do not match their identity, they are subject to Paul’s caustic irony as a form of discipline. ³⁰ They are kings acting like spiritual paupers.

The Corinthians are judges of each other (the church)

Paul utilizes the images of “insiders” and “outsiders” to create identity boundaries around the church. This is most clear when he rhetorically asks: “For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you” (1 Cor. 5:12–13). This series of rhetorical questions identifies the church at the center of one’s identity. Either a person is inside the church (a rudimentary form of church membership) or outside the church. This identity leads to responsibility. Those who are outside are judged by God and their actions lay outside the purview of the church. Hans Conzelmann states, “Paul is not excluding his own person altogether from the function of judging, but is explaining that he and those who belong to the community are not competent where ‘the outsiders’ are concerned.” ³¹ But those who are inside the church are to judge each other by removing evil people from their midst.

The Corinthians will be judges of the world

Paul reinforces his desire that matters be dealt with inside the church rather than have legal and public lawsuits between Christians. Here we see that the Corinthians will be judges of the world (κόσμος). Here, the cosmos does not mean “nature” but the totality of all created things subject to God’s judgment. ³² His argument is a classic Jewish argument that moves from the greater to the lesser. He rhetorically asks, “Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? (1 Cor. 6:2). The logic works this way: if the Corinthians will judge that which is greater (the world) then they should be able to judge that which is lesser (themselves).

The Corinthians will be judges of angels

The next object of the Corinthians’ judgment is angels (ἄγγελος). Paul continues his line of rhetorical questioning: “Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!” (1 Cor. 6:3). This ratchets the argument up another notch as Paul moves from the even greater to the lesser. If they are so wise, as they claim to be, then they should be able to avoid solutions that involve Christians taking each other to a secular court (1 Cor. 6:6). The extent to which Paul goes into the future about the judgment of angels in the eschaton goes to further the point that the Corinthians were not wrong to view themselves as kings or possessors of the kingdom of God. They simply needed to balance that with the truth that this possession is part of a reality that has only begun and it is not yet complete.

In summary, the Corinthians are identified judges in the present and in the future

Thus far, we have observed that Paul considers the whole church as judges of themselves, the world, and angelic beings. These acts of judgment can be broken down into those acts of judgment which Paul expects to happen in the present and those in the future. The judgment of those inside the church is in the present as indicated by Paul’s displeasure with lawsuits among the church members. But the judgment of the world and angels are both described using future active indicative verbs in 1 Cor. 6:2–3. These future actions seem to refer to an eschatological context, in which angels and people are both present to each other in a way they are not now. But these futuristic dimensions do not prevent Paul from applying them to the present. What will happen in the future eschaton should create an experience in the present that reflects the in-breaking of the kingdom of God. That is how Paul is able to ask, “How much more, then, in matters pertaining to this life!” (1 Cor. 6:3). Inaugurated eschatology drives Paul’s pastoral theology and ethics. Indeed, Paul’s pastoral ethics are motivated by his eschatology. Paul views the present age as “passing away” (1 Cor. 7:31). The use of the present tense verb παράγω to describe this passing is evidence that “Paul’s inaugurated eschatology is clearly at work.” ³³ The heart of the matter in 1 Cor. 6:1–1 is that praxis much match their identity in Christ. This parallels the link between identity and praxis in Paul’s references to kingship in 1 Cor. 4:1–13. They possess the identity of eschatological judges but they are not acting out of this identity in the present.

First, kingship and judgment are unified by application to all of God’s people

Paul’s letter addresses the Corinthians as inclusive of both Jew and Gentile. Like many other issues, the nature of Paul’s concern with schism and factionalism has been polarizing, with some arguing for factionalism at every point and some denying that it was an issue at all. ³⁴ In chapters 4–6, there is nothing in the context of chapter four or chapter six that would lead the reader to conclude that his references to kingship or judgment are directed toward any single group, either Jew or Gentile, strong or weak, etc.. Leon Morris points out that in 1 Corinthians 4, “There is no indication at all that Paul is addressing a different audience here.” ³⁵ The epistle was meant for the whole church and because both chapters four and six lack any indicators of a change in audience, the whole church would have ideally applied it to themselves.

Second, kingship and judgment are unified by their contextual proximity in the letter

The two topics occur within a relatively short distance from each other in the text of 1 Corinthians. The discussion of judging in the eschaton lies relatively close to the context for the more difficult verses about kingship. They are only separated by the three pericopes that make up 1 Corinthians 4. In support of this point is the “linear nature” of Paul’s letters. As linear texts, Paul’s letters are like pieces of music that gradually unveil their secrets through time as the performance unfolds, relying on repetition, recollection, themes, phrases, and other rhetorical forms in the process. ³⁶ This means that Paul’s references to kingship in chapter four are perhaps explained and developed by the clearer verses about judging in chapter six. There are rhetorical units and sections of thought to be sure, but these are not so deep that all continuity is lost to a normal reader. Even if one maintains that an important shift in focus takes place in 1 Cor. 5:1, this shift is not so great as to lose all connections between chapters 4 and 6. It is this author’s belief that the shift in 1 Cor. 5:1 has been magnified out of proportion so that other connections are overshadowed. This point does not stand on its own but is supported by the following point about thematic connections between 1 Corinthians 4 and 6.

Third, kingship and judgment are unified by the kingdom of God

The kingdom of God is an important thematic connection between the pericopes referencing kingship in 1 Cor. 4:8–21 and judgment in 1 Cor. 6:1–11. The theme of the “kingdom of God” appears in both 1 Cor. 4:20 and 1 Cor. 6:10. In both instances, Paul draws from the Corinthians’ relationship to the “kingdom of God” in order to support his ethical imperatives. In the first example from chapter four, “power” cuts both ways because it is something that accompanies both authentic Christian leaders and Paul’s fatherly discipline. In the second example in chapter four, Paul twice states the “kingdom of God” is something that will be withheld from those who are outside of Christ and lack the qualities of being sanctified, washed, and justified (1 Cor. 6:9–11). Both of these brief examples demonstrate that Paul is concerned about the Corinthians’ worldly thinking and acting because it is not commensurate with their participation in the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God and participation in it form an important part of the unifying connection between kingship and judgment.

Fourth, kingship and judgment are unified by inaugurated eschatology

Are the Corinthians judges now or in the future? The answer is “yes” on both accounts. The same is true with respect to the state as kings (1 Cor. 4:8). Even if one avers that judgment in Paul is totally distinct from kingship, the only way to account for Paul’s interest in connecting the present and the future is to acknowledge the centrality of inaugurated eschatology. Inaugurated eschatology is evident in the fact that Paul refers to the kingdom of God as present in 1 Corinthians 4 and future in 1 Corinthians 6. In the first example from chapter four, Paul refers to the present quality of the kingdom of God being evident in not “in talk but in power” (1 Cor. 4:20). In the second example from chapter six, the kingdom of God is something that will be inherited in the future by those who reflect the justified status of being “washed” in Christ (1 Cor. 6:10). The Corinthians are already kings (in the present) and they will one day judge the world and even angels (in the future). This combination creates an “already/not yet” tension with practical and pastoral implications.

Fifth, kingship and judgment are unified by Christ

It is not because they are wise that they are kings. In fact, according to Paul’s disciplinary rhetoric, they are kings in spite of their lack of wisdom. Central to Paul’s argument is that the Corinthians have received much. But everything they have received is because of God’s grace. That is why Paul rhetorically asks, “What do you have that you did not receive?” (1 Cor. 4:7). Again, this question provides a Christological answer to their problems. They have received everything that they have “in Christ.” ³⁷ Neither kingship nor the ability to judge allows anyone to boast because it is all derived from Christ’s gracious gift. This stands in contrast with philosophical views of kingship. For example, the fourth century Neo-Platonist Sallustius stated: “Souls that have lived in accordance with virtue have as the crown of their happiness that freed from the unreasonable element and purified from all body they are in union with the gods and share with them the government of the whole universe” (Sallust. Deor. et mund. 21). ³⁸ Sallustius does have a concept of ruling over the “government of the whole universe” (τὸν ὅλον κόσμον συνδιοικοῦσιν ἐκείνοις) as part of one’s growth in Platonic states. ³⁹ But in Paul’s thought, it is Christ who is the only wise king over the universe and those who reign as eschatological kings do so as they are in personal union with him. On this identity as co-judges with Christ, Conzelmann comments, “In Christianity the office of judge is transferred also to Christ. And thus those who are ‘in Christ’ also have part in it.” ⁴⁰ Thus, when Paul calls for mimesis or imitation, he does so in relation to Christ: “That is why I sent you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ” (1 Cor. 4:17). The act of judging is connected to kingship vis-à-vis Christ, who is both. ⁴¹