I think some of our translations have done us a disservice in 1Cor 1:17 and 2:1-15 by using terms like eloquence which shift the focus of Paul’s argument from the content of his message to the method in which he spoke it. While Paul’s point certainly implies something about his method of speaking, his focus in these verses is primarily the content of the message – where 1:18 is the controlling verse. 

Let’s walk through it.

17 For Christ … sent me to preach the gospel—not with the wisdom of an idea, so that the cross of Christ would not be emptied, for the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God

In 1:17 Paul simply states that he has been sent to preach the gospel – but “not with the wisdom of an idea” (οὐκ ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου). Paul uses this slightly odd phrase to distance his gospel message from the Greek wisdom (philosophy) of the day. He is not bringing just another wise reflection or good council (see λόγος in TDNT). Rather he goes on in v18 to refer to the content of his preaching; the message of the cross. His point is that he did not bring them yet another attempt at human wisdom, but rather a word that sounds foolish to the wise of the world.

So, should we use the word ‘eloquence’ here in 1:17? Let’s see how Collins English Dictionary (2006) defines eloquence;

1 ease in using language to best effect,
2 powerful and effective language,
3 the quality of being persuasive or moving”.

If that’s what the English word eloquence means, then putting that into v17 would suggest that Paul did not preach with ease in using language, or that he did not preach in a manner that was effective or persuasive or moving. Really?!? The problem is Luke tells us Paul spoke so effectively that a great number of Jews and Gentiles believed (Acts 14:1) and that Paul tried to persuade them about Jesus (Acts 23:28). Paul himself says he spoke to persuade people (2Cor 5:11) and he asks the Colossians to pray that he would speak clearly as he should (Col 4:4).

So using eloquence in 1:17 is extremely unhelpful. Verse 17 in not suggesting that faithful gospel preachers avoid effective language or persuasion.

The next section 2:18-31 highlights how the gospel doesn’t need to special worldly endorsement, which brings us to chapter 2:

2:1 Brothers, when I came announcing the secret of God to you, I did not come with superior words or wisdom. 2 I made up my mind to know nothing among you except Jesus; the Messiah crucified. 3 I came to you in weakness and in much fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not in seductive wisdom but in a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 in order that your faith would not be in human wisdom but in God’s power.

In 2:1 Paul simply states that he did not come “with superior words or wisdom”. The word superior (ὑπεροχή – again often translated ‘with eloquence’) just means authority or raised-above (TDNT, cf 1Tim 2:2). Paul is contrasting the “low-ness” of how the message sounds to the world (1:28) with the “high-brow” or “elitist” message of the Greek world. Again, translating this as ‘eloquence’ unhelpfully shifts the focus to suggest Paul spoke the message with a stutter or in some hard-to-understand way. 

In verses 2-3 Paul identifies how his primary concern is the content of the message; the Messiah crucified. Paul is highly aware he is but a ‘weak’ servant – low both in the eyes of the world (1:28) and in the eyes of God (1Cor 15:9, Eph 3:8, 1Tim 1:16). However he is still responsible for proclaiming ‘God’s secret (or testimony)’ (2:1) and so he does this with appropriate ‘fear and trembling’ (see 2Cor 5:11). Again, I don’t think Paul is suggesting he had a trembling voice, or was timid and scared as he preached—that’s certainly not the image Luke gives us in Acts either.

Furthermore in 2:4 Paul wants to be clear that he did not use “seductive wisdom”. Again, Paul’s focus is on the type of wisdom he’s proclaiming; not the enticing wisdom of the world, but Christ crucified who is himself God’s hidden wisdom (1:24, 2:7). That is, Paul is saying he was not tempted to change the message to make it more persuasive. This is essentially the same idea as he puts forward in 2Cor 4:2-3;

…we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God. And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing.

Paul’s whole point is summed up in 1Cor 2:5; he doesn’t want anyone to put their faith in human ideas (human wisdom), but rather he wants them to trust solely on God’s power and God’s wisdom; who is in fact the crucified Messiah (1:24). Jews will find this message a stumbling block because they expected a messiah to overthrow the Romans, and Greeks find this foolish because the gods do not dabble in the flesh, let alone allow themselves to be nailed to a cross (1:23). So Paul does not give them what their itching ears want to hear. He doesn’t tell the Jews that their precious city of Jerusalem will rise up against the Romans, and he doesn’t appeal to Greeks that they will someday be free of their mortal coil. That would be to use human wisdom; that would be using seductive and enticing wisdom of the world. Rather, Paul confidently asserts in 2:7;

On the contrary, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.

All this is to say that in 1Cor 2:1-5 Paul is not primarily telling us about his communication style, and he’s certainly not suggesting that preaching with eloquence is bad (as eloquence is generally understood in English).

Paul certainly does care about the style and manner in which he communicates the gospel; but that is the focus of other passages more than this one.