1 Corinthians 2:2

For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

It is the style among certain commentators to construe Paul's method in view here as a reversal of what he allegedly did in Athens. They say Paul tried to preach philosophically in Athens, sustained a miserable failure, learned his lesson and announced his return to a more simple advocacy of the gospel in these verses. Despite the popularity of such a view, however, there is nothing, either in the word of God or in history, to give the slightest credibility to it.

There is no hint whatever, either in this passage or in Acts 17, that Paul preached "Christ crucified" at Corinth because of a sense of failure of the philosophical approach in Athens. As a matter of fact, "His sermon at Athens was not basically philosophical."[5] He preached the resurrection of the dead, and when did that get to be philosophical? Furthermore, his preaching in Athens was in no sense whatever a failure. Dionysius the Areopagite, Damaris, certain men, and others with them were converted (Acts 17:34). An exceedingly large number of people in Athens became Christians. "The church in Athens was one of the strongest congregations in the empire in the second and third centuries,"[6] and Lange pointed out that "A Christian congregation in Athens flourished in an eminent degree."[7] The "others with them" of Acts 17:34 may not be construed as "a mere handful," except arbitrarily and with no logic to support it. It is also most probable that Sosthenes and his household were converted in Paul's work in Athens (see my Commentary on Acts, under Acts 17:34).

In the light of the above, we feel that comments to the effect that "There (in Athens) Paul had one of his very few failures";[8] "He feared a failure similar to that in Athens"[9] "Athens was a sad memory for Paul. He never mentions her name in an epistle. He sends no word of greeting to any of her children";[10] etc. - that all such notions are absolutely untenable. For example, how can it be known that Paul never wrote to the saints in Athens, there being at least one letter to the Corinthians which was lost?

Grosheide's views on this question are undoubtedly correct. He declared that:

The answer to the question of whether Paul had ever preached anything but Jesus Christ must of course be negative. The meaning is not that the apostle did not resolve to preach Christ until he came to Corinth ... but that he had to go on preaching Christ.[11]

Determined not to know anything ... has the meaning that Paul would rely upon no earthly wisdom for power in his preaching.

Save Jesus Christ and him crucified ... This cannot mean that Paul would henceforth leave off preaching the resurrection, the final judgment, the brotherhood of humanity, the unity of God, the sin of idolatry, etc.; but, as John Wesley said, that here, "a part is put for the whole,"[12] thus indicating that this is another New Testament example of the figure of speech called synecdoche in which a group of related things is denoted by the mention of one or two of them. What a shame it is that Wesley failed to see the same figure in "saved by faith."

[5] S. Lewis Johnson, Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 594.

[6] Don DeWelt, Acts Made Actual (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, 1958), p. 243.

[7] John Peter Lange, Commentary on Acts (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1866), p. 331.

[8] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 26.

[9] David Lipscomb, First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 39.

[10] T. Teignmouth Shore, Ellicott's Commentary on the Holy Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), p. 283.

[11] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 59.

[12] John Wesley, One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972), in loco.