Encouraging Student Leadership
Rev. Dr. Alfonso Espinosa
The Feast of the Ascension of Our
LORD, May 29, 2025
A simple and perhaps myopic way of
understanding “world view” might be the lens through which we peer upon the
world, to make sense of it, and as a result, to know how to best interact with
it. The way of the Lutheran Church would be to peer upon the world and all of
life christologically: Christ the King of both kingdoms, the kingdom of power
to the left, and the kingdom of grace to the right. Furthermore, we would also
perceive how the Creator of all things, the Divine Logos (Col 1:16),
has organized life in the estates of the family, the congregation, and the
state or greater society. And through all these estates our vocations are
marked by Christ to live in His love (the fourth estate streaming through the
other three), especially His agape love which is willing to bear the
crosses He places upon us in our vocations throughout all estates as we love
others as He has first loved us. (1 Jn 4:19)
If we are peering out upon the
world this way, then we must view university campuses as another place where
Jesus Christ dwells. His good creation firmly established there, and His
missionary heart pervading there, especially in some of the most unexpected
places, with some of the most unexpected students in His mind who might become
among His most powerful disciples in the 21st century.
And if some of these students
would be identified among the called and chosen of God in Christ, then should
it surprise us that among these, there would be the opportunity for the LORD to
raise up Christian leaders in the university?
Assuredly, Joel’s prophecy applies
to those who would be found in Christ on our university campuses:
2 28 “And it shall come to pass
afterward,
that I will pour out my Spirit on
all flesh;
your
sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
your old men shall dream dreams,
and your young men shall see
visions.
29 Even on the male and female servants
in those days I will pour out my
Spirit.
These potential student leaders can
gain the Spirit’s wisdom for the ability to contend for the faith once
delivered (Jude 3) while doing so without being contentious.[1]
Among other things, such leaders can be examples to others in conducting
Christian apologetics streaming from love for God and love for neighbor.
Such student leaders will
appreciate that St. Paul for example was a man of learning and letters. He is
the apostle to the Gentiles, but also the apostle to the university “educated
at the feet of Gamaliel according to the strict manner of the law of our
fathers…”. (Acts 22:3) It was this Paul who did not avoid the scholars but rather
pursued them. We have opportunity to identify and train university students to
be as St. Paul:
“St. Paul grabbed hold of
something he and the Athenians held in common. ‘So Paul, standing in the midst
of the Areopagus, said: ‘Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are
very religious’ (Acts 17:22).
St. Paul was not being patronizing…What
did they have in common? They both sought to be devoted and very religious.
There is debate about the characterization “very religious,” but rest assured
that St. Paul was not so dense as to begin his engagement by insulting the
Athenians. Whether the words are translated as religious or superstitious
or devoted, this was neither compliment nor insult: it was fact.
Given that, the opening was courteous
(Stott, The Spirit, the
Church, and the World, 284) and considerate of what the Athenians were.”[2]
In the meantime, as you know, St.
Paul demonstrates what leaders are willing to do: get into the shoes of those
around them in accord with all disciplines. In this case at Acts 17 it was to
know the philosophers and poets of the Athenians. St. Paul quoted them as he
spoke intelligently to them:
1)
“In him we live and move and have our being” (verse
28, probably from Epimenides of Crete)
And
2)
“For we are indeed his offspring.” (verse 28, from
Aratus’s poem “Phainomena”)
Thus, Christian leaders on campus will celebrate the
disciples as inroads for discussing the saving faith of Christ. This makes
sense especially as Cardinal Newman described his view in The Idea of a
University. The other disciples are not foreign to the Word of God, but in
an ultimate kind of way (not in a mechanical way) emanate from the Holy
Scriptures.
That is, while Holy Scripture does not teach physics, instructs on how to
repair kitchen appliances, or how to safely interact with A.I., it does provide
the basis, the source, the nature, and order for all things and all
disciplines.
How would we take this idea in application to Christians who faces non-believers
be they atheist, agnostic, or other none? While we will not rely upon reason to
do the work that the only the Holy Spirit can do to call, gather and enlighten
through witnessing to the Gospel of Christ, the power of God unto salvation for
all, it is also important that student leaders on campus would demonstrate why
Christians ought never be intimidated by the culture on campus. From “Contending
for Christ through the Creed”:
“It is wrongheaded for a Christian to assume that they have the
responsibility—much less the ability—for trying to prove that God is real. No
one does. If God is God, then he is quite capable of leading anyone to know him
and trust in him on his own.
Furthermore, even to assume that it is possible to “prove” God, leading
to faith, is antithetical to faith itself. God himself has established the
standard of faith for knowing him. Thus, God does not and will not rely on
human reason to convince anyone.
At the same time, since God is God, it should not surprise us that his
existence is not antithetical to what is observed in the cosmos he created. To
the contrary, one should expect that what is known about the universe
demonstrates complementarity with its Creator. That is, observation and reason
do not contradict faith in God.
Alister McGrath explains the right approach for considering what is
observable about the world and cosmos while reasonably expecting that these
observations would align with the God who is there: “One cannot therefore speak
meaningfully of natural theology ‘proving’ God’s existence; it is, however,
entirely appropriate to speak of a ‘resonance’ between theory and observation,
in which it is confirmed that the fundamental themes of the Christian faith
offer the best explanation of what is seen.”[3] For example,
God’s word teaches that his creation is an extension of his love toward
humanity. This creation, therefore, should demonstrate conditions which promote
and preserve life. And this—in accord with all reasonable observation—is
exactly what we detect. It is not surprising then that the resonance McGrath
posits is consistent with what others have argued about design in the universe.
William Paley, in his Natural Theology (1802), argued that design
in the observable order (such as the design in the human eye) is evidence of a
Designer/God. The rebuttal was that perceived designed is only observed and
inferred, but not at all—necessarily—innate in the thing observed.
McGrath explains, however, that “design is not an empirical datum, but
reflects the interpretation of what is observed.”[4] In
other words, Christians may offer design not as reason to believe, but what
one would expect to recognize if the things of God’s word are true. He also
points out that it was John Henry Newman who said, “I believe in design because
I believe in God; not in God because I see design.”[5]
“Newman rightly saw that the idea of design was not ‘given’ within the
realm of nature, but was acquired by observing and interpreting nature through
the inhabitation of the Christian vision of reality.”[6]
That is, the Christian faith is not a project for proving that God
exists, but it is entirely a consistent logical and cohesive view of the
universe. McGrath chose a good word to describe this relationship between God
and the cosmos: they resonate which is another way of saying that the
teaching of God’s word and observation are consistent or are in tune with one
another.
A magnificently designed cosmos is consistent with God the Father who
created the universe for defined purposes: for life to be extended and for his love
to be known.”[7]
In all this Christian leaders on campus can approach their academic
colleagues in celebration of the resonance of the Christian faith with the rest
of the universe considered at the university.
“Paul Copan presents the phenomena we observe in the universe in a column
alongside two other columns. One column represents a theistic context, that God
is real. The other column represents a naturalistic context. In every instance,
the phenomena either have rich meaning in relation to the theistic context or
to the naturalistic context rendering the phenomena as arbitrary and (if
naturalism were true) irrelevant and insignificant. In other words, if God is
real, then many assumptions about morals are meaningful, but if God is not
real, then these observations are meaningless and without value. This means
that any “value” assigned would be imagined by the observer. A theistic view,
however, affirms
·
humans
have self-consciousness;
·
personal
beings exist;
·
humans
make free personal decisions and choices;
·
our
senses and rational faculties are generally reliable in producing true beliefs;
·
human beings
have intrinsic value/dignity and rights;
·
objective moral
values exist;
·
beauty exists
(e.g., not only in landscapes and sunsets but in “elegant” or
“beautiful” scientific theories);
and
·
the universe is
finely tuned for human life (known as “the Goldilocks effect”—the
universe is
“just right” for life).[8]
That
is, the heavenly Father in every phenomenon listed above fills our lives with
real meaning and thus, for every person reading this, assures each reader that
they too have meaning and value. One is wise to consider the revelation of God
pointing ultimately to the heavenly Father. In and through him every phenomenon
listed is a gift that we might know his love.
If,
on the other hand, the phenomenon listed are viewed as accidental
characteristics of naturalism, then it is small wonder why so many resist God.
But if they do so, they do it not because anyone has proven that God is not real
but because it suits them to live for themselves and be their own authority.[9]
Still, the task for witness and
apologetics can seem ominous; intimidating to say the least, but if a potential
student leader feels this way, then we are already witnessing a sign of a good
student leader indeed.
In my parish, whenever it is time
after much prayer and discussion with the elders of the church for us to
reverently approach a man in the congregation, asking him to prayerfully
consider becoming an elder, there is a first response I am praying for, and I
assure you that the response I am not praying for is, “Well, it’s about
time I was asked!” But rather something like this, “I don’t know if I’m
qualified.”
The good pattern about
identifying leaders is put forth in Holy Scripture. The account of Moses is
spectacular in the “who am I?” category of response!
Moses to the LORD God Almighty:
·
Ex. 3:11:
“Who am I that…?”
·
Ex. 3:13:
“But I don’t know Your Name!”
·
Ex. 4:1:
“…they will not believe me…!”
· Ex. 4:10: “…I am slow of speech…!”
·
Ex. 4:13:
“…please send someone else!”
Moses’ reaction is complemented
by Isaiah: 5 And I
said: “Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in
the midst of a people of unclean lips…”. (Isaiah 6:5) And Jeremiah depicted
this way as well: “Then I said, “Ah, Lord God! Behold, I do not know how to
speak, for I am only a youth.” (Jeremiah 1:6) And certainly St. Paul knew, but
St. Paul also knew why God calls such people:
1st
Timothy 1:12-16: “I thank him who has given me
strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged me faithful, appointing me
to his service, 13 though
formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received
mercy because I had acted ignorantly in unbelief, 14 and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with
the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. 15 The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full
acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am
the foremost. 16 But
I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ
might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe
in him for eternal life.”
We might say, therefore, that the
chief qualification for becoming a student leader in the faith is being a
sinner, and a great one at that.
We are seeking men and women who
have been granted a proper humility. These are being put in the position to
discover that what may come from them, will not come from them. We want
potential leaders to be called like St. Matthew. I have this image of St.
Matthew in my mind when he was called by Christ: he just might have turned
around to make sure that the LORD Jesus was talking to him.
And the glorious qualification at
this stage for potential leaders is St. Matthew’s record of these words of our Master
Christ: “For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Matthew 9:13)
The things of faith are not of
sight nor within the confines of rational evaluation when it comes to the
surprising people the LORD would raise up. For example, Father Jesse may have
been quite perplexed:
1
Samuel 16: 6When [the
sons of Jesse came before Samuel], he looked on Eliab and thought, “Surely the
Lord’s anointed is before him.” 7 But
the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his
stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees: man
looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.” 8 Then Jesse called
Abinadab and made him pass before Samuel. And he said, “Neither has the Lord
chosen this one.” 9 Then
Jesse made Shammah pass by. And he said, “Neither has the Lord chosen this
one.” 10 And Jesse
made seven of his sons pass before Samuel. And Samuel said to Jesse, “The Lord
has not chosen these.” 11 Then
Samuel said to Jesse, “Are all your sons here?” And he said, “There remains yet
the youngest, but behold, he is keeping the sheep.” And Samuel said to Jesse,
“Send and get him, for we will not sit down till he comes here.” 12 And he sent and
brought him in. Now he was ruddy and had beautiful eyes and was handsome. And
the Lord said, “Arise, anoint him, for this is he.” 13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed
him in the midst of his brothers. And the Spirit of the Lord rushed upon David
from that day forward. (1 Samuel 16:6-13b)
But as we serve university
students, we lack the position of immediacy of the Holy Spirit that Samuel had
with the LORD, so is there another way God might show us for raising up leaders?
(besides the characteristics we have already put forth 1) That there is an
inherent appreciation for the fact that the saving faith possesses complementarity
with the other academic disciplines; and 2) That there is an inherent awareness
of sin and doubt about being qualified to lead).
Indeed, the two most important
qualities get back to what must stream from within all vocations and throughout
all the estates: the love of Christ.
This manifests in two ways in
potential leaders on campus:
1) The leader must love the LORD
Jesus Christ. And therefore, as a necessary corollary will love the LORD’s
Word.
And
2) The leader must love the
people for whom Jesus died, rose, ascended, and currently prays for at the
right hand of the Father.
These two qualities are
non-negotiable, and the good news is that these will not come from the potential
student leader, but they always come from God. Furthermore, the order of these
two qualities is essential. We cannot love our neighbor and then God but must
first love God and then our neighbor otherwise we put ourselves in the
compromising position of trying to please the neighbor at the expense of
compromising God’s Word. Indeed, one can only properly love the neighbor in
accord with the Word of Christ.
It is good a thing when the
potential student leader relates to Psalm 119 as we learn that love for God and
love for His Word are inextricable:
7: “I will praise you with an
upright heart as I learn your righteous laws.”
10: “I seek you with all my
heart; do not let me stray from your commands.”
11: “I have hidden your word
in my heart that I might not sin against you.”
16: “I delight in your
decrees; I will not neglect your word.”
24: “Your statues are my
delight; they are my counselors.”
32: “I run in the path of your
commands, for you have set my heart free.”
35: “Direct me in the path of
your commands for there I find delight.”
43: “Do not snatch the word of
truth from my mouth, for I have put my hope in your laws.”
47: “for I delight in your
commands because I love them.”
49: “Remember your word to
your servant, for you have given me hope.”
57: “You are my portion, O
LORD; I have promised to obey your words.”
64: “The earth is filled with
your love, O LORD; teach me your decrees.”
71: “It was good for me to be
afflicted so that I might learn your decrees.”
77: “Let your compassion come
to me that I may live, for your law is my delight.”
81: “My soul faints with
longing for your salvation, but I have put my hope in your word.”
88: “Preserve my life
according to your love, and I will obey the statues of your mouth.”
89: “Your word, O Lord, is
eternal; it stands firm in the heavens.”
92: “If your law had not been
my delight, I would have perished in my affliction.”
97: “Oh, how I love your law!
I meditate on it all day long.”
103: “How sweet are your words
to my taste, sweeter than honey to my mouth!”
105: “Your word is a lamp to
my feet and a light to my path.”
114: “You are my refuge and my
shield; I have put my hope in your word.”
133: “Direct my footsteps
according to your word; let no sin rule over me.”
Therefore, we must catechize
and catechize and catechize and let the Spirit and the Word have free reign in
the formation of love for the Word of Christ. This calls for our walking with
our students and emphasizing not secular principles for leadership – not that
these have no value – but rather emphasizing the inculcation of the
Word. Recall our emphasis in our sacred tradition: read, hear, learn,
mark, and inwardly digest. This is the key: for the Word of the LORD to
fill the heart of the leader.
I find our LORD chastising the
Sadducees fascinating: “You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures
nor the power of God. (Matthew 22:29) Inherent in his rebuke is the one-to-one
correspondence of the Scriptures and the power of God.
With the Spirit and the Word
having free reign to form a heart of flesh which loves the Word of Christ, then
there is the second sign of the one who may be called to be a leader in the
Name of the LORD: the love for people.
In our great tradition with
its appropriate prioritization of the Word when it comes to our mighty fortress
and sure foundation, it is easy to take a short-cut in Christian leadership. It
is true that the true disciple of Jesus is first a hearer of the Word. Indeed,
it should be our goal to be as Mary sitting at the feet of Jesus for the one
thing needful. (Luke 10:38-42)
Both the LORD and Mary represent
what leaders do (no offense to Martha), but to the point here: Christian
leaders teach the Word and Christian leaders are always hearing and learning
the Word. The first definition of “disciple” before we get ahead of ourselves
with the concept of “following” which comes with the presumption of our doing
(certainly included in discipleship in accord with the active righteousness of
Christ in and through His people), but the first order of business is to be a
receiver of the Word of Christ and then to love it and thereby love God while
avoiding the misdirection’s of biblicism.
That is, we see what potential
leaders need: they need Christ to come to them from without just like all
sinners need Christ this way. Thus, we emphasize in our sacred theology extra
nos.
Christ comes to us to justify us
by grace through faith in Him and as a result, we love Him and to love Him
again is to love His Word “And his commandments are not burdensome.” (1 John
5:3b)
I mention extra nos, however,
to properly launch into the second qualification: the love of neighbor. While
the Holy Spirit does His work within us, our focus and preoccupation is not to
be with what is within us, but we are rather to know the extra nos of
sanctification: having received the Word and the love of God flowing from a
living faith/fides viva, we now continue in the flow of extra nos…our
love becomes outward oriented upon the neighbor.
Here, we must discipline
ourselves in our Lutheran tradition: just as we are to invest in the Word of
God, we are called to invest in our neighbor. St. John’s first epistle, the
love letter of the Bible, has as a basic lesson: “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’
and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom
he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen.” (1 John 4:20)
But how do we “invest” in our
neighbor? We turn back to St. Paul. Is the potential student leader
demonstrating a behavioral trajectory in line with this?
An Attitude That Gets Into
People’s Shoes[10]
“The Holy Spirit led St. Paul to
write what is probably one of the most important Scripture texts on how we
approach people for the sake of engaging with the Gospel. It describes the
attitude that reaches people for Christ.
For though I am free from all, I
have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. To the Jews I
became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one
under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those
under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not
being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win
those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I
have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do
it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.
(1 Corinthians 9:19–23)
It’s true that all people are the
same and different at the same time, so when it comes to the engagement
attitude, we are focusing on discovering both. The goal should be to
capitalize on what is the same. We can speak naturally to this since there is
instant common ground. On the other hand, we also want to be aware of what is
different. We do this not to be agitated by those differences or to judge them,
but rather that we might respect them even if we cannot understand them or
agree with them. By highlighting what is the same and respecting what is
different, we can begin to build engagement bridges that demonstrate we value
and care about the person we are engaging with.
The best way to do this is by
asking questions and then listening very carefully. Indeed, one of the most
important things we can possibly do in engagement is active listening. Not acting
like we’re listening but listening to optimally get to know the person
speaking to us. This means that we take a sincere interest and that we aren’t
serving an agenda. We are
loving them. Our listening says, “You’re important to me,” and they should be,
because they are important to God.
When we really listen and learn,
we start to relate to the person more and more. This is what we mean by
“getting into their shoes.” If we get to “walk” in someone else’s shoes, then
we have a better idea about the person’s life. When this happens, our engagement
becomes much more fulfilling and meaningful. It also says the whole time: “I
care about you!” And we ought to, because God cares about them too!
Being Servant To All
Back in college, I had the privilege of serving on a summer
youth ministry team. One of our destinations that summer was Hawaii. When we
arrived at our host congregation in Hilo, we were blown away by the amazing
feast the people had prepared for us. They insisted, of course, that we be
first in line. The food looked so delicious that I think we were all
salivating.
I was having difficulty knowing just what to put on my plate
when one of our hosts came up to me and said, “Be sure to try the poi.” You
might know that poi is a Hawaiian dish made from the fermented root of a
tropical native plant called taro that is baked and pounded into a
paste. Poi is a traditional staple of the native cuisine of Hawaii.
Before continuing this story,
allow me to insert this subplot: To say I’m a fan of Mexican food would be an
understatement. In fact, Mexican food is part of my ethnic heritage. As far as
I’m concerned, Mexican food outranks the manna the Lord gave to the Israelites
(though I guess I really can’t say this since I’ve never tasted manna). If
there was ever any other food that came down from heaven, then it’s
Mexican food. I can’t think of a better cuisine, though Chinese comes in a
close second. One day I was out with friends and we tried a local Mexican hole
in the wall. It had a great reputation. We all ordered these
scrumptious-looking plates of Mexican food. I thought the food was outstanding
and was jubilant to have discovered this little place. When the waitress came
by to get our plates, I hadn’t noticed, but my friend sitting next to me didn’t
eat his refried beans and Spanish rice! I can’t begin to tell you how much
this bothered me. I felt as though he had just slapped me in the face by
rejecting some of the delicious staples of my culture! What was wrong with my
friend? Did he need counseling or individual absolution or both?
Well, back to Hawaii. I can tell
you that as far as I was concerned, just the look of the poi was
disconcerting. It didn’t look right. Consider, however, the circumstances:
these gracious hosts had just gone all out to produce this incredible feast.
They welcomed us with open arms as we had come to share the Gospel with their
Vacation Bible School, which included not only members of the congregation but
also people from the community. And finally, one of our generous hosts made it
a point to remind me not to forget the poi, which this host seemed especially
proud of. She may have made it herself for all I knew.
What was I going to do? Even
though I was just a young man at the time, I knew instinctively that we were
there to build bridges with people, get to know them, and be in the best
possible position to serve them. So, I smiled at my host as I gladly took some
poi, and not a modest portion, because I wanted to please my host. I didn’t let
on to anyone, but when I tasted it, I knew I would do everything in my power to
run away as fast as I could if I ever saw poi again. At that moment in time,
however, I ate the poi, and it built bridges between me and our hosts. I
was just praying I wouldn’t see it for lunch the next day!
When St. Paul states at verse 19 that
he made himself a servant to all, that he might win more of them, Paul was
stating his willingness to make personal adjustments for others so that nothing
would unnecessarily get in the way of people receiving the Gospel he preached.
“The changeless Gospel empowers us to sacrifice our own rights, tastes,
interests, and preferences so that others might hear the message of Christ in
all its power” (TLSB, p. 1958). What was St. Paul really doing? He
“showed himself a model of missionary adaptability.”[11]
This attitude of adaptability imitates what our Savior did for us all:
“For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet
for your sake He became poor, so that you by His poverty might become rich” (2
Corinthians 8:9). St. Paul had what was an “apparently chameleonlike stance in
matters of social relationships.”[12]
The Early Church theologian Ambrosiaster was magnificent in his observations:
“Did Paul merely pretend to be
all things to all men, in the way that flatterers do? No. He was a man of God
and a doctor of the spirit who could diagnose every pain, and with great diligence
he tended them and sympathized with them all. We all have something or other in
common with everyone. This empathy is what Paul embodied in dealing with each
particular person.”[13]
St. Augustine states flatly that
St. Paul wasn’t pretending to be what he was not, but rather he was showing
compassion.[14]
He illustrated: “A person who nurses a sick man becomes, in a sense sick
himself, not by pretending to have a fever but by thinking sympathetically how
he would like to be treated if he were sick himself.”[15]
Since the Lord Jesus did more than have compassion on us, but sympathized to
the extent that He took our very sin upon Himself, then what’s a little poi?
[1] To
be released this July is Contending for Christ Through the Creed:
Apologetics for Loving Answers on the Christian Faith (Wipf & Stock,
2025). This was a labor of love for me, and I think might be a good resource
for Christians on university campuses.
[2] Espinosa,
Faith That Engages the Culture, (St. Louis: CPH, 2021), 90.
[3] McGrath,
Fine-Tuned Universe, 20.
[4]
McGrath, Fine-Tuned Universe, 30.
[5]
McGrath, Fine-Tuned Universe, 30.
[6]
McGrath, Fine-Tuned Universe, 30
[7]
Espinosa, Contending for Christ through the Creed, 54-55.
[8]
Copan, “Moral Argument,” in To Everyone an Answer: A Case for the Christian
Worldview, 109 and 117.
[9]
Espinosa, Contending for Christ through the Creed, 61-62.
[10]
Espinosa, Faith That Engages the Culture, 69-70.
[11] Gregory
J.Lockwood, 1 Corinthians, Concordia Commentary (St.Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 2000), 314.
[12] Gordon
D.Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, rev.ed., The New
International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: William
B.Eerdmans, 2014), 467.
[13] Gerald
Bray, ed., 1–2 Corinthians, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture,
New Testament VII (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 86.
[14] Bray,
1–2 Corinthians, 86.
[15] Bray,
1–2 Corinthians, 86.
