Calvary Road Baptist Church
“THE BODY OF CHRIST:
Metaphor Not Myth” Part 5
This is the fifth of a series of eight messages, a unique endeavor in my ministry. I am delving into the profound contents of the meticulously crafted book titled “THE BODY OF CHRIST: Metaphor Not Myth,” authored by the esteemed Baptist pastor Charles L. Hunt. This book, I firmly believe, is not just a pivotal but a transformative role in our understanding of the body of Christ metaphor.
As I have previously stated, my purpose in explaining the book to you is based upon two convictions. First, I am convinced this book is the best treatment of a matter of significance to a right understanding of the Biblical doctrine of the Church that I have ever read, the body of Christ metaphor. Equally important, I am deeply concerned about the alarming and widespread misunderstanding of the body of Christ metaphor. It is so prevalent that when the correct body of Christ metaphor is presented, it often leads to cognitive dissonance.
Allow me to explain. Cognitive dissonance is a mental state of discomfort when two or more modes of thought or ideas contradict each other. The clashing cognitions may include ideas, beliefs, or an awareness of someone behaving in a certain way.
The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people are averse to inconsistencies in their thinking. It explains why people sometimes try to adjust their thinking when their thoughts, words, or behaviors clash. When someone becomes aware of new information that challenges a deeply held or comfortable belief, for example, or acts in a way that seems to undercut a favorable self-image, that person may feel motivated to resolve somehow the negative feeling that results—to restore cognitive consonance, to make the conflicting thoughts subside.
Though a person may not always resolve cognitive dissonance, the response to it may range from ignoring the source of the mental disturbance to changing one’s beliefs or behavior to eliminate the conflict of incompatible thoughts. Cognitive dissonance frequently results when the familiar is preferred to the true. I have found that to be the case with the body of Christ metaphor, with people (and, sadly, many pastors) feeling so much more comfortable with the familiar than with the true. Cognitive dissonance is such a problem with respect to the body of Christ metaphor that I can think of no better way to prepare you to help others with the problem than this approach, continuing tonight.
We are committed to dealing with one chapter of the book at a time, giving you ample opportunity to not only satisfy yourself that the material presented to you is accurate but also to help you reflect on how to help others who have been taught the prevailing but incorrect understanding of the body of Christ metaphor in the New Testament.
If this is your first time reading the book or if you have missed some of the previous chapter explanations, I urge you to review the sessions at https://www.youtube.com/live/uFA_57kPaVM?si=cjFBnTVKhKHBcI_g.
Please turn to chapter 5 in your copy of the book, where we begin reading.
Chapter V
THE CONSIDERATION OF SELECTED PASSAGES
Introduction
At first reading, there are passages in the Bible that appear to teach and support the common but incorrect view of Christ being an organic head to his body, the church. This is especially true where the influence of the unscriptural universal invisible church teaching has created a bias toward the organic union concept. In this chapter we wish to examine some of the passages that are thought to teach the universal invisible church concept which fosters the incorrect interpretation of the head-body metaphor.
I Corinthians 6:15
J. Michael Brubaker, the author of Soma In Pauline Theology, states the first mention of the church as a body is found in 1 Corinthians 6:15:30 This statement is thought by many to be the case, but it shall be shown that this passage speaks only of the physical body of individual believers. We believe that if we approach this passage without a bias toward the unscriptural notion of the universal invisible body of Christ, it yields a meaning that is in complete agreement with what we have presented in earlier chapters. The verse reads:
“Know ye not that your bodies are the members of
Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them
the members of an harlot? God forbid.” (1 Cor. 6.15)
To arrive at a correct understanding of 1 Corinthians 6.15, it is necessary to examine the larger context of the Epistle.
Diversity in Unity
The Apostle easily establishes the fact that there is unity in Christ in chapter one of 1 Corinthians by simply asking the question, “Is Christ divided?” This is a rhetorical question in which the answer is so obvious there is no need for him to actually answer it. The answer, of course, is no. When thinking of being “in Christ,” it is easily realized that all true believers have unity in Christ. All in Christ are one, equally receiving full redemption through his blood. But on the other hand, believers are diverse people and have diverse spiritual gifts. How can one demonstrate diversity in Christ, when, as we have already seen that “no” is the answer to the rhetorical question of “Is Christ divided?”
Many believe that 1 Corinthians 6:15 resolves this dilemma by presenting the foundation for Paul’s development of the universal invisible body of Christ. This passage is erroneously thought by many to teach that each believer is a member of the mystical body of Christ. Such a view which pictures our unity as members of a mystical body with Christ its organic head actually pictures diversity in Christ himself, which is a blasphemous notion. It shall be shown that it is not here where Paul resolves the dilemma of how to demonstrate the existence of diversity in believers when there is only unity in Christ. This is done in 1 Corinthians 10:17 and 12:12.
1 Corinthians 10.17
First, the Apostle uses the Lord’s Supper in I Corinthians 10:17 to accomplish his goal:
“For we being many are one bread, and one body: for
we are all partakers of that one bread.”
Our Lord has already established that the bread (loaf) and the cup are metaphorical of his body and blood. They are neither the real body and blood nor the mystical body and blood, but the metaphorical body and blood. Therefore an easy transference is made from a single loaf, to the body metaphor which represents Christ’s body which cannot have diversity, being assimilated by an assembly of diverse and diversely gifted believers. Hence, through their joint participation in the body of Christ, they are spoken of as one body.
Partaking in the one loaf representing the body of Christ through the Lord’s Supper is the ground upon which the assembly is unified into one body. It is not the fact that the Lord’s Supper exists, but the experiential participation of an assembly in the Lord’s Supper that manifests the real unity of an assembly metaphorically spoken of now as a body based on this joint participation. By representing Christ’s body, the unity of the loaf is such that it confirms the unity of the Spirit among all who participate in the eating of the one loaf.
I Corinthians 12:12
First Corinthians 12:12 further develops the concept of unity in diversity establishing a second metaphor. The verse reads:
“For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the
members of that one body, being many, are one body:
so also is Christ.”
In this verse the Apostle presents a physical body as the basis for a metaphor. There is nothing mystical about his reference to “the body.” He is speaking of an ordinary body in a generic sense as some would say “the body” is a beautiful creation of God with all its different organs, systems, and members, and yet it is a unity. When he states, “So also is Christ,” the metaphor is established. There is something about a human body that is true of Jesus Christ. The Apostle is in no way seeking to establish a mystical body of Christ. The baptism of verse 13 (“For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.”) is properly understood to be water baptism if context is allowed to play its proper role. This ordinance confirms and constitutes unity in a very real and practical way, as does the Lord’s Supper. This is a unity that can be seen and experienced. Just as Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:16, 17 referred to the bread, (note that he did not refer to the one cup, only the one loaf) now he refers to the one drink. The nature of the observance of the Lord’s Supper as given by Christ causes the participants to be made to drink one cup. The cup represents the drinking in one Spirit as the loaf represents the partaking of one body.
The Local Visible Church
The confirmation that a visible local body is being built up is seen three ways. First, Christ is not the organic head, but rather a member of the church of Corinth is head:
“And the eye cannot say unto the hand,
I have no need of thee: nor again the head
to the feet, I have no need of you.”
(1 Cor. 12:21)
Second, God sets the members in the body:
“But now hath God set the members
every one of them in the body,
as it hath pleased him.”
(1 Cor. 12:18)
If there were no members there would be no body. In this context this metaphorical body has no existence outside the church at Corinth. Third, there is the practical aspect of suffering and being honored:
“And whether one member suffer, all the
members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all
the members rejoice with it.”
(1 Cor. 12:26)
Verse 26 here has no practical and real application outside of the local assembly of Corinth. How does a Christian in the United States suffer when a Nigerian believer suffers, such as this verse suggests if such a thing as a universal invisible body of Christ existed.
Diversity of Spiritual Gifts
The question then comes, has the Apostle solved the dilemma of existing diversity of those who have unity in Christ? In 1 Corinthians, chapter 12, Paul, by developing this metaphor, resolves how diversity can coexist with unity. He first establishes the metaphor that equates a human body with Jesus Christ. He establishes that a human body has diversity and unity and then transfers this quality metaphorically to Christ. The diversity in Christ though is that of His gifts, not of His being and person. It is the diversity of His spiritual gifts that is then developed throughout the chapter. Therefore, diversity of Christ’s gifts is equated with the diversity of the human body and yet just as the body is one in its unity, Christ is maintained as one in whom there is no division.
The Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 6:15
The question must be answered what then is 1 Corinthians 6:15 teaching? To understand this message, three considerations must be made. First, do not read into the text the universal invisible body teaching, which is not supported by the context. Second, note the singular use of body everywhere except verse 15, which are verses 13, 16, 18, 19, and 20. Thirdly, keep in mind Paul’s use of “members” as he does in Romans 6:13, 19, with “members” here and there being references to your body parts.
The physical body of the believer is in view throughout this text. Verse 13 of 1 Corinthian 6 states, “The body is not for fornication but for the Lord.” Note the lack of parallelism in verse 15 if “members” refers to the different individual members of the church of Corinth. How can the members (plural) be the members of an harlot (singular)? If the individual members of the church were each a member of Christ then the members would be joined to harlots. Also, how can Paul state rhetorically in the first person singular shall “I” then take the “members” of Christ? How can one member of Christ take more than one member and make them the members of one harlot? Careful attention to singular and plurals establishes that Paul is referring here “members” as being body parts and not individual people.
One might think that the plural “members” is used in the sense that if one member of Christ’s mystical body joins himself to a harlot then he obviously in some sense involves the other members because they are members of the same body of Christ. In consideration of this read verse 13 carefully. His sin, in this context, is spoken of as against his own body. Surely if the universal invisible church view is in this context it would have mentioned his sin against the body of Christ. This helps establish the point that this text is not developing an ecclesiastical metaphor of the church as Christ’s body; it is a reproof against individual believers of the assembly of Corinth for each offender using the members of his individual body, his body parts, to sin in joining them to a harlot. The body which is for the Lord (v. 13), will be raised (v. 14), joined to the Lord’s spirit (v. 17), indwelt by the Holy Spirit, (v. 19), which body is not their own (v. 19), and in which body they are to glorify the Lord (v. 20) is the body whose members some were joining to a harlot constituting one flesh. He addresses the whole congregation by using the plural “your bodies are the members of Christ,” but the admonition is received severally “joined to an harlot.”
This passage becomes clear when one realizes each of the many bodies that constituted the church of Corinth individually has members, or body parts, of his own body. This is the same use that Paul presents in Romans 6:13. Each individual believer is to yield the different members, or body parts, of his body to Christ. First Corinthians 6:19, 20 tell us that the Holy Spirit dwells in us and that our bodies are not our own. Does it not make sense that each believer’s individual members, or body parts, of his body are Christ’s members? If an individual believer joins the members of his body, body parts that Paul does not want to name, to a harlot he is taking members, body parts, that belong to Christ and joining them to a harlot. This is the reproof and argument.
Consideration of Ephesians 2:14-16 and Colossians 1:20-24
Next, two passages are selected to be considered together:
“For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby.” (Eph. 2:14-16)
“And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body’s sake, which is the church.” (Col. 1:20-24)
There is an obvious parallelism between Ephesians 2:14-16 and Colossians 1:20-24. The phrase “one body” in Ephesians 2:16 is the key phrase to be examined. It is erroneously thought by many that this “one body” in which the Jew and Gentile are reconciled is the universal invisible body of Christ. Poole mentions the popular view and then favors that the “one body” is Christ’s physical body:
In one body either both people united as one mystical body, or rather this one body, here, is the body of Christ offered up to God as the means of reconciliation, Col. 1:22. By the cross; i.e. by the sacrifice of himself upon the cross.
The German textual scholar Johann Albrecht Bengel (1687–1752) states, “en eni swmati (in one body) fixed to the cross... By His death, He slew the enmity against God Himself en autou (in Him), viz. in His body.” This interpretation is consistent with the context and perfectly parallels the references to Jesus in Colossians 1:20-22:
And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable In his sight.
In Ephesians 2:14-16 the context is similar in that Jesus’ body of His flesh is in view as the means of peace and reconciliation. Therefore, there is a perfectly good and consistent contextual interpretation that once again does not acknowledge the mystical body of Christ as a reality.
Consideration of Colossians 2:19
Finally, Colossians 2:19 must be given attention:
“And not holding the Head, from which all
the body by joints and bands having nourishment
ministered, and knit together, increaseth
with the increase of God.”
This is only considered because the KJV translation needs some explanation. In English it appears that the word “which” has “head” for its antecedent. This would isolate head as a metaphorical part of the body and justify the mystical body of Christ’s teaching. But this is not the case. The Greek underlying this is quite clear. The word “Head” (kefau) is feminine in gender and “from which” (ex ou) is either masculine or neuter and cannot have head for its antecedent. From which should be translated from whom and has Christ as a person as it antecedent.34 Yes, Christ is the Head, but not as the metaphorical head organically connected to the mystical body. Christ is Head over the body as the husband is head over his wife, or as Christ is head over man or head over all things. Christ enriches all the body just as a husband cares for and enriches his wife.
Note the words “not holding the Head.” “Holding” is translated “holdfast” in other passages. A body, of course, does not hold the head. The Colossians are to “holdfast” to the doctrine and fellowship of Jesus Christ as head over the Colossian body-which was a complete body. Not holding the Head is a warning against failure to do what Christ commands and failure to believe what His word teaches. Other passages could be interpreted without the influence of the universal invisible body teaching, but these verses should suffice to provide a pattern.
This fifth chapter samples arriving at a correct understanding of passages that are frequently misinterpreted for three reasons. First, there is a failure to employ good grammar and understand that the antecedents of pronouns have to agree in number and gender. Second, there is a failure to recognize the context in which a passage is set. Finally, the subject of this book is a failure to understand the body metaphor as it is used to describe the Church.
The problem that arises with so many is one of conformity. So many people embrace a wrong notion of the body of Christ, imagining it to be a universal, invisible body, that they employ unsound interpretive practices to achieve comfort with the familiar instead of accuracy regarding what is true.
Concerning the topic before us, and with every other attempt to understand and apply God’s Word, we do well to heed the Savior’s words in John 8.32:
“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
Let us be careful to opt for freedom rather than comfort, freedom rather than the familiar.
Question? Comment?
Would you like to contact Dr. Waldrip about this sermon? Fill out the form below to send him an email. Thank you.