Chpt. 25 - I Cor. 4: 15

"I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you. For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me. For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church."


Hassell wrote:

"Therefore, when the Apostle Paul calls himself the father of the Corinthian Church (I Cor. 4:15), he means, as he himself explains his language, not their spiritual, but only their ministerial father (II Cor. 3:3), the minister by whom, or under whose preaching, they first believed the gospel, even, he says, as the Lord gave to every man; he was, under God, the founder or planter of that church (I Cor. 3:5, 6) and it was sinful "carnality" for them to say that they were "of him" (I Cor. 3:4)."

By this "logic" of Hassell it is clear that he does not connect "spirituality" with being a "minister" of Christ. He alludes to the words of Paul who stated that he was a "minister by whom you believed, even as the Lord gave to every man." If they were made "believers" by his preaching the gospel to them, then he was a means of them being saved, for we are "saved by grace through faith." (Eph. 2:8,9)

He also seems to think that when Paul, in the first chapter, says that it was wrong for the Christians in Corinth to say "I am of Paul," that he therefore was denying that he was in any sense a means in their regeneration and salvation. But, again, why cannot he not see the difference between being born "of" God and being born "through" a means? Paul does not deny that he was the means in their regeneration, but he never asserts that they were born "of Paul," but "through" Paul. If "source" be ascribed to Paul, the agent or means, then it is always clearly understood that it is intermediate source in view, the second cause.

He seems to think, like all Hardshells, that a man cannot be born "of" any but God. But, is this so, in every way? Do we not, as I have argued, have a "mother" in the new birth? Does the "Bride" not say "come" when the Lord says the same? Yes, strictly speaking, we are begotten of the father but through the mother. But, sometimes, we may be said to be both "of" the father and the mother.

"For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man." (I Cor. 11:8)

"Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God." (Vs. 11,12)

So, as I said, strictly speaking, we are "born of God by" the Bride, the "heavenly Jerusalem," who is "the mother of us all," (by the word of God preached by her). In natural birth it is more proper to say we are born of our fathers and through our mothers. Both are necessarily involved, but one is viewed as the producer of the "seed." Still, it can be allowed, by accomodation, to speak of birth as being "of" that secondary or instrumental cause. Thus, as I said in the previous chapter, one can be a "child of God" and also a "child of Abraham." Hardshell "logic" would say that they could not be both.

So Paul says, as a means, or agent, "I have begotten you..." You are my children and you are God's children. You are my follower and the Lord's follower as he says in the next verse. Again, I do not see why the Hardshells think they have such a great argument here.

Beebe wrote:

"Now the simple question is, in what sense does Paul claim to have begotten the Corinthians through the gospel? If, as Arminian cavilers contend, their regeneration, as subjects of saving grace, was effected by the efforts of Paul in preaching the gospel to them as a means of grace, it must then follow that they were as Christians begotten and born, not of the Spirit, but of Paul, and consequently not the children of God but of Paul; not heirs of God, but heirs of Paul." (emphasis mine)

Oh is that not glorious "logic"? Such "ignorance" resembles so much the "ignorance" of their parents, men like Daniel Parker and his "ignorant" and "arrogant" "frontier preachers." But, more on that in later chapters.

Beebe says further that the Corinthians were -

"...figuratively born into the more full understanding of the gospel; It was in this sense that Paul called Timothy his son, and the beloved John claimed all the scattered saints as his little children. In this application of the figure, Paul appealed to the members of the Galatian churches who had received the Spirit, and who had run well, saying, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again, until Christ be formed in you, etc. (Galatians 4:19).” If he travailed of them again, he had travailed of them before. As an anxious parent earnestly desiring that they might bear the image of Christ, to which end his former travail and labor had been successful; now that error, in the form of legality, meanism and Arminianism had bewitched them, again he travailed in birth, that their former beauty might be restored, and Christ, not Moses, be formed in them, so that they might again reflect his lovely image. By his administration of the gospel, which is Christ to them, Christ was reflected or formed understandingly in their hearts, so that in the exhibitions of their faith they presented Christ, and not Moses or Old Testament doctrine." (Elder Gilbert Beebe, Middletown, N.Y., February 1, 1866. Editorials Volume 6 –– pgs 290-294)

The two passages, I Cor. 4:15 & Gal. 4:19 are not exactly alike. In the former Paul is viewed as "siring" or "fathering" the Corinthians, but in the latter, he is viewed as mothering or delivering them to a birth. Both do contemplate regeneration, but under different figures. It is interesting that Beebe argues as do the Campbellites relative to the latter passage. But, I wish chiefly to call attention to the fact that Beebe argues that the word "begotten" is figurative of the teacher pupil relationship. This is the standard view. Let me cite a source that elaborates further upon this interpretation.

by Elder Zack M. Guess, Memphis, TN

"In the first place, it would have been blasphemy for the Corinthians to refer to Paul as a father in the sense that He was the means of bringing eternal life to them. No man can receive this honor because God alone is to receive the credit and glory for the salvation of His people. Christ instructed us, "And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven" (Matt 23:9). This is one of the gross errors of the Roman Catholic Church by having the priests addressed as "father." So it is certain that Paul was not the father of the Corinthians in the sense that he, by preaching the gospel to them, had had a part in their spiritual birth."

And again:

"The Meaning of Begotten"

First, let us see how this word "begotten" was commonly used at the time of the writing of the New Testament. J. H. Thayer, in his Greek-English Lexicon of New Testament Words, p. 113 says, "In a Jewish sense, of one who brings others over to his way of life." Commenting on the same word in the same passage, John Gill, in his Commentary On The New Testament quotes the Jerusalem Talmud as follows: "If one teaches the son of his neighbor the Law, the Scripture reckons this the same as if he had begotten him."

Arndt and Gingrich, in their Greek-English Lexicon, p. 154 say of the same word, "Figuratively of the influence exerted by one person on another...of a teacher on pupils." H. Cremer, in his Biblical-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek, p. 146, says of this word, "Peculiar is the use made by Paul in some passages of the word to denote an influence exerted on some one, moulding his life, as in Galatians 4:24; 1 Corinthians 4:15; Philemon 10."

If we put all this together and sum it up, it becomes immediately apparent that Paul was not even hinting to these Corinthians that he had preached the gospel to them and that they had thereby been born again.

Paul is rather saying this, "By my use of the gospel I have brought you over to my way of life: I have taught you the Scriptures; I have exerted an influence on you as a teacher on his pupils; I have helped to mold your life." This, and only this, is what Paul had done to those Corinthians by preaching the gospel to them."

And again:

"A look at the Word "Father"

Now let us briefly examine a very common way in which the word "father" was used in New Testament times. Thayer says, p. 495, "Metaphorically...one who stands in a father's place, and looks after another in a pastoral way: 1 Corinthians 4:15." W. E. Vine in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Vol. II, p. 82 says-"...of one who, as a preacher of the Gospel and a teacher, stands in a father's place, caring for his spiritual children, 1 Corinthians 4:15." So, here again, Paul is not saying that he was an instrument in giving spiritual life, but his responsibility was to help the life that had already been implanted by the Holy Spirit to develop. There is not even a hint of the new birth here."

And again:

"Paul is saying further that he is a father to these Corinthians. By this he means that he preached the gospel to them and turned them from error to truth. He thus became their spiritual teacher and they became learners or disciples. By his teaching he had great influence on them and helped to mold their lives. In this sense he was their father and they were his children. But only in this sense. If they had not previously been born again his teaching would have had no effect on them in a positive way."

("What Does This Mean?" A Study on 1 Corinthians 4:15 - http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Index/index14.htm)

It is very easy to destroy this "novel interpretation" of I Cor. 4:15. It is "novel" because you will search in vain to find a Baptist writer, prior to the "rise of the Hardshells," who will affirm the "interpretation" that the Hardshells place on these words of Paul. It has always been affirmed that it was a reference to "regeneration" or to the "new birth." Why this new "interpretation"? Why did no one come up with these view on the passage till the Hardshells came along?

Elder Zack Guess, a supporter of Elder Bradley and of the modern "liberal wing" of the Hardshell cult, says that the view of our Old Baptist forefathers is "blasphemy." He says further that the passage has "not even a hint of reference to the new birth" I suppose that all our Baptist forefathers were just plain deluded and stupid for not seeing how it could not possibly be referring to the "spriritual birth" in Christ? Our forefathers were all "blasphemers" because they all did not believe as do the Hardshells on this passage?

Father DOES NOT = Teacher

In the "interpretations" given by the Hardshell writers above, it is clear that they equate the term "teacher" with the word "father. They do this in spite of the fact that Paul shows that they are not the same, he EVEN EMPHASIZING THIS FACT! He says,

"For though you have ten thousand teachers in Christ, yet have you not many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel."

If the Hardshell "interpretation" were correct he would be saying they have then thousand teachers and ten thousand fathers, for they have equated the terms where Paul distinquished between them, except in regard to himself. He was both their teacher and father, for he had initially preached the saving message of Christ to them. Every Christian who leads another to Christ has been used to "beget," instrumentally, to "father" to that soul in the same sense as was Paul. It takes no glory away from God to use means in resurrection and in bringing others to Christ for life and salvation. I know the Hardshells will pretend that they are protectors of God's "glory" and "sovereignty" in denouncing the "gospel means" position, but they are simply attacking a "straw man," as I have shown.

Gill ON I Cor. 4:15

"yet have ye not many fathers; as it is in nature, so it is in grace; how many masters and instructors soever a child may have, whether together or successively, he has but one father; and so how many after instructors, either nominally or really, believers may have to lead them on, or who pretend to lead them on to a further knowledge of Christ; yet have they but one spiritual father, who has been the happy instrument and means of their conversion, as the Apostle Paul was to the Corinthians;

"for in Christ Jesus have I begotten you through the Gospel"; - which is to be understood of regeneration, a being born again, and from above; of being quickened when dead in trespasses and sins; of having Christ formed in the soul; of being made a partaker of the divine nature, and a new creature; which the apostle ascribes to himself, not as the efficient cause thereof, for regeneration is not of men but of God; not of the will of the flesh, of a man's own free will and power, nor of the will of any other man, or minister; but of the sovereign will, grace, and mercy of God, Father, Son, and Spirit. The Father of Christ beget us again according to his abundant mercy; and the Son quickens whom he will; and we are born again of water and of the Spirit, of the grace of the Spirit; hence the washing of regeneration, and renewing work are ascribed to him: but the apostle speaks this of himself, only as the instrument or means, which God made use of in doing this work upon the hearts of his people; and which the other phrases show: for he is said to do it "in Christ"; he preached Christ unto them, and salvation by him, and the necessity of faith in him; he directed them to him to believe in him, and was the means of bringing of them to the faith of Christ; and it was the power and grace of Christ accompanying his ministry, which made it an effectual means of their regeneration and conversion: and which were brought about "through the Gospel"; not through the preaching of the law; for though by that is the knowledge of sin, and convictions may be wrought by such means; yet these leave nothing but a sense of wrath and damnation; nor is the law any other than a killing letter: no regeneration, no quickening grace, no faith nor holiness come this way, but through the preaching of the Gospel; in and through which, as a vehicle, the Spirit of God conveys himself into the heart, as a spirit of regeneration and faith; and God of his own will and rich mercy, by the word of truth, by the Gospel of grace and truth, which came by Christ, so called in distinction from the law which came by Moses, begets us again as his new creatures; which shows the usefulness of the Gospel ministry, and in what account Gospel ministers are to be had, who are spiritual fathers, or the instruments of the conversion of men."

I challenge the Hardshells to cite one leading Baptist writer, prior to the 19th century, who espoused your views on I Corinthians 4:15. I also challenge them to show proof from the context of I Corinthians chapter 4 that forces one to believe as you all do on thhis passage.

Will you all continue to claim John Gill as being one with you in your heretical "anti-gospel means" position?