Text -- 1 Corinthians 1:10-17 (NET)

Divisions in the Church

1:10 I urge you, brothers and sisters, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to agree together, to end your divisions, and to be united by the same mind and purpose. 1:11 For members of Chloe’s household have made it clear to me, my brothers and sisters, that there are quarrels among you. 1:12 Now I mean this, that each of you is saying, “I am with Paul,” or “I am with Apollos,” or “I am with Cephas,” or “I am with Christ.” 1:13 Is Christ divided? Paul wasn’t crucified for you, was he? Or were you in fact baptized in the name of Paul? 1:14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 1:15 so that no one can say that you were baptized in my name! 1:16 (I also baptized the household of Stephanus. Otherwise, I do not remember whether I baptized anyone else.) 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel– and not with clever speech, so that the cross of Christ would not become useless.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: 1Co 1:10

Now I beseech you ( parakalō de humas ).

Old and common verb, over 100 times in N.T., to call to one’ s side. Corresponds here to eucharistō , I thank , in 1Co 1:4. Direct appeal after the thanksgiving.

Robertson: 1Co 1:10

Through the name ( dia tou onomatos ).

Genitive, not accusative (cause or reason), as the medium or instrument of the appeal (2Co 10:1; Rom 12:1; Rom 15:30).

Robertson: 1Co 1:10

That ( hina ).

Purport (sub-final) rather than direct purpose, common idiom in Koiné[28928]š (Robertson, Grammar , pp.991-4) like Mat 14:36. Used here with legēte , ēi , ēte katērtismenoi , though expressed only once.

Robertson: 1Co 1:10

All speak ( legēte pantes ).

Present active subjunctive, that ye all keep on speaking. With the divisions in mind. An idiom from Greek political life (Lightfoot). This touch of the classical writers argues for Paul’ s acquaintance with Greek culture.

Robertson: 1Co 1:10

There be no divisions among you ( mē ēi en humin schismata ).

Present subjunctive, that divisions may not continue to be (they already had them). Negative statement of preceding idea. Schisma is from schizō , old word to split or rend, and so means a rent (Mat 9:16; Mar 2:21). Papyri use it for a splinter of wood and for ploughing. Here we have the earliest instance of its use in a moral sense of division, dissension, see also 1Co 11:18 where a less complete change than haireseis ; 1Co 12:25; Joh 7:43 (discord); Joh 9:16; Joh 10:19. "Here, faction, for which the classical word is stasis : division within the Christian community"(Vincent). These divisions were over the preachers (1:12-4:21), immorality (1Co 5:1-13), going to law before the heathen (1Co 6:1-11), marriage (7:1-40), meats offered to idols (1 Corinthians 8-10), conduct of women in church (11:1-16), the Lord’ s Supper (11:17-34), spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12-14), the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15).

Robertson: 1Co 1:10

But that ye be perfected together ( ēte de katērtismenoi ).

Periphrastic perfect passive subjunctive. See this verb in Mat 4:21 (Mar 1:19) for mending torn nets and in moral sense already in 1Th 3:10. Galen uses it for a surgeon’ s mending a joint and Herodotus for composing factions. See 2Co 13:11; Gal 6:1.

Robertson: 1Co 1:10

Mind ( noi )

, judgment (gnōmēi ). "Of these words nous denotes the frame or state of mind, gnōmē the judgment, opinion or sentiment, which is the outcome of nous "(Lightfoot).

Robertson: 1Co 1:11

For it hath been signified unto me ( edēlōthē gar moi ).

First aorist passive indicative of dēloō and difficult to render into English. Literally, It was signified to me.

Robertson: 1Co 1:11

By them of Chloe ( hupo tōn Chloēs ).

Ablative case of the masculine plural article tōn , by the (folks) of Chloe (genitive case). The words "which are of the household"are not in the Greek, though they correctly interpret the Greek, "those of Chloe."Whether the children, the kinspeople, or the servants of Chloe we do not know. It is uncertain also whether Chloe lived in Corinth or Ephesus, probably Ephesus because to name her if in Corinth might get her into trouble (Heinrici). Already Christianity was working a social revolution in the position of women and slaves. The name

Robertson: 1Co 1:11

Chloe

means tender verdure and was one of the epithets of Demeter the goddess of agriculture and for that reason Lightfoot thinks that she was a member of the freedman class like Phoebe (Rom 16:1), Hermes (Rom 16:14), Nereus (Rom 16:15). It is even possible that Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus (1Co 16:17) may have been those who brought Chloe the news of the schisms in Corinth.

Robertson: 1Co 1:11

Contentions ( erides ).

Unseemly wranglings (as opposed to discussing, dialegomai ) that were leading to the schisms. Listed in works of the flesh (Gal 5:19.) and the catalogues of vices (2Co 12:20; Rom 1:19.; 1Ti 6:4).

Robertson: 1Co 1:12

Now this I mean ( legō de touto ).

Explanatory use of legō . Each has his party leader. Apollō is genitive of Apollōs (Act 18:24), probably abbreviation of Apollōnius as seen in Codex Bezae for Act 18:24. See note on Act 18:24 for discussion of this "eloquent Alexandrian"(Ellicott), whose philosophical and oratorical preaching was in contrast "with the studied plainness"of Paul (1Co 2:1; 2Co 10:10). People naturally have different tastes about styles of preaching and that is well, but Apollos refused to be a party to this strife and soon returned to Ephesus and refused to go back to Corinth (1Co 16:12). Cēphā is the genitive of Cēphās , the Aramaic name given Simon by Jesus (Joh 1:42), Petros in Greek. Except in Gal 2:7, Gal 2:8 Paul calls him Cephas. He had already taken his stand with Paul in the Jerusalem Conference (Act 15:7-11; Gal 2:7-10). Paul had to rebuke him at Antioch for his timidity because of the Judaizers (Gal 2:11-14), but, in spite of Baur’ s theory, there is no evidence of a schism in doctrine between Paul and Peter. If 2Pe 3:15. be accepted as genuine, as I do, there is proof of cordial relations between them and 1Co 9:5 points in the same direction. But there is no evidence that Peter himself visited Corinth. Judaizers came and pitted Peter against Paul to the Corinthian Church on the basis of Paul’ s rebuke of Peter in Antioch. These Judaizers made bitter personal attacks on Paul in return for their defeat at the Jerusalem Conference. So a third faction was formed by the use of Peter’ s name as the really orthodox wing of the church, the gospel of the circumcision.

Robertson: 1Co 1:12

And I of Christ ( egō de Christou ).

Still a fourth faction in recoil from the partisan use of Paul, Apollos, Cephas, with "a spiritually proud utterance"(Ellicott) that assumes a relation to Christ not true of the others. "Those who used this cry arrogated the common watchword as their peculium "(Findlay). This partisan use of the name of Christ may have been made in the name of unity against the other three factions, but it merely added another party to those existing. In scouting the names of the other leaders they lowered the name and rank of Christ to their level.

Robertson: 1Co 1:13

Is Christ divided? ( memeristai ho Christos̱ ).

Perfect passive indicative, Does Christ stand divided? It is not certain, though probable, that this is interrogative like the following clauses. Hofmann calls the assertory form a "rhetorical impossibility."The absence of mē here merely allows an affirmative answer which is true. The fourth or Christ party claimed to possess Christ in a sense not true of the others. Perhaps the leaders of this Christ party with their arrogant assumptions of superiority are the false apostles, ministers of Satan posing as angels of light (2Co 11:12-15).

Robertson: 1Co 1:13

Was Paul crucified for you? ( Mē Paulos estaurōthē huper humōṉ ).

An indignant "No"is demanded by mē . Paul shows his tact by employing himself as the illustration, rather than Apollos or Cephas. Probably huper , over, in behalf of, rather than peri (concerning, around) is genuine, though either makes good sense here. In the Koiné[28928]š huper encroaches on peri as in 2Th 2:1.

Robertson: 1Co 1:13

Were ye baptized into the name of Paul? ( eis to onoma Paulou ebaptisthēte̱ ).

It is unnecessary to say into for eis rather than in since eis is the same preposition originally as en and both are used with baptizō as in Act 8:16; Act 10:48 with no difference in idea (Robertson, Grammar , p. 592). Paul evidently knows the idea in Mat 28:19 and scouts the notion of being put on a par with Christ or the Trinity. He is no rival of Christ. This use of onoma for the person is not only in the lxx, but the papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions give numerous examples of the name of the king or the god for the power and authority of the king or god (Deissmann, Bible Studies , pp. 146ff., 196ff.; Light from the Ancient East , p. 121).

Robertson: 1Co 1:14

I thank God ( eucharistō tōi theōi ).

See 1Co 1:4, though uncertain if tōi theōi is genuine here.

Robertson: 1Co 1:14

Save Crispus and Gaius ( ei mē Krispon kai Gaion ).

Crispus was the ruler of the synagogue in Corinth before his conversion (Act 18:8), a Roman cognomen, and Gaius a Roman praenomen, probably the host of Paul and of the whole church in Corinth (Rom 16:23), possibly though not clearly the hospitable Gaius of 3Jo 1:5, 3Jo 1:6. The prominence and importance of these two may explain why Paul baptized them.

Robertson: 1Co 1:15

Lest any man should say ( hina mē tis eipēi ).

Certainly sub-final hina again or contemplated result as in 1Co 7:29; Joh 9:2. Ellicott thinks that already some in Corinth were laying emphasis on the person of the baptizer whether Peter or some one else. It is to be recalled that Jesus himself baptized no one (Joh 4:2) to avoid this very kind of controversy. And yet there are those today who claim Paul as a sacramentalist, an impossible claim in the light of his words here.

Robertson: 1Co 1:16

Also the household of Stephanas ( kai ton Stephanā oikon ).

Mentioned as an afterthought. Robertson and Plummer suggest that Paul’ s amanuensis reminded him of this case. Paul calls him a first-fruit of Achaia (1Co 16:15) and so earlier than Crispus and he was one of the three who came to Paul from Corinth (1Co 16:17), clearly a family that justified Paul’ s personal attention about baptism.

Robertson: 1Co 1:16

Besides ( loipon ).

Accusative of general reference, "as for anything else."Added to make clear that he is not meaning to omit any one who deserves mention. See also 1Th 4:1; 1Co 4:2; 2Co 13:11; 2Ti 4:8. Ellicott insists on a sharp distinction from to loipon "as for the rest"(2Th 3:1; Phi 3:1; Phi 4:8; Eph 6:10). Paul casts no reflection on baptism, for he could not with his conception of it as the picture of the new life in Christ (Rom 6:2-6), but he clearly denies here that he considers baptism essential to the remission of sin or the means of obtaining forgiveness.

Robertson: 1Co 1:17

For Christ sent me not to baptize ( ou gar apesteilen me Christos baptizein ).

The negative ou goes not with the infinitive, but with apesteilen (from apostellō , apostolos , apostle).

Robertson: 1Co 1:17

For Christ did not send me to be a baptizer ( present active infinitive, linear action)

like John the Baptist.

Robertson: 1Co 1:17

But to preach the gospel ( alla euaggelizesthai ).

This is Paul’ s idea of his mission from Christ, as Christ’ s apostle, to be a gospelizer. This led, of course, to baptism, as a result, but Paul usually had it done by others as Peter at Caesarea ordered the baptism to be done, apparently by the six brethren with him (Act 10:48). Paul is fond of this late Greek verb from euaggelion and sometimes uses both verb and substantive as in 1Co 15:1 "the gospel which I gospelized unto you."

Robertson: 1Co 1:17

Not in wisdom of words ( ouk en sophiāi logou ).

Note ou , not mē (the subjective negative), construed with apesteilen rather than the infinitive. Not in wisdom of speech (singular). Preaching was Paul’ s forte, but it was not as a pretentious philosopher or professional rhetorician that Paul appeared before the Corinthians (1Co 2:1-5). Some who followed Apollos may have been guilty of a fancy for external show, though Apollos was not a mere performer and juggler with words. But the Alexandrian method as in Philo did run to dialectic subtleties and luxuriant rhetoric (Lightfoot).

Robertson: 1Co 1:17

Lest the cross of Christ should be made void ( hina mē kenōthēi ho stauros tou Christou ).

Negative purpose (hina mē ) with first aorist passive subjunctive, effective aorist, of kenoō , old verb from kenos , to make empty. In Paul’ s preaching the Cross of Christ is the central theme. Hence Paul did not fall into the snare of too much emphasis on baptism nor into too little on the death of Christ. "This expression shows clearly the stress which St. Paul laid on the death of Christ, not merely as a great moral spectacle, and so the crowning point of a life of self-renunciation, but as in itself the ordained instrument of salvation"(Lightfoot).

Vincent: 1Co 1:10

I beseech ( παρακαλῶ )

See on consolation , Luk 6:24. The word occurs more than one hundred times in the New Testament.

Vincent: 1Co 1:10

Divisions ( σχίσματα )

See on Joh 10:19. In classical Greek used only of actual rents in material. So in Mat 9:16; Mar 2:21. In the sense of discord , see Joh 7:43; Joh 9:16; Joh 10:19. Here, faction , for which the classical word is στάσις : division within the christian community. The divisions of the Corinthian church arose on questions of marriage and food (1Co 7:3, 1Co 7:5, 1Co 7:12); on eating, meat offered to idols (1Co 8:7; 1Co 10:20); on the comparative value of spiritual endowments, such as speaking with " tongues" (14) ; on the privileges and demeanor of women in the assemblies for worship (1Co 11:5-15); on the relations of the rich and the poor in the agape or love-feasts (1Co 11:17-22); and on the prerogatives of the different christian teachers (1Co 1:12, 1Co 1:13; 3:3-22).

Vincent: 1Co 1:10

Perfectly joined together ( κατηρτισμένοι )

Rev., perfected together . See on Mat 21:16; see on Luk 6:40; see on 1Pe 5:10. Carrying on the metaphor in divisions . Not of individual and absolute perfection, but of perfection in the unity of the Church.

Vincent: 1Co 1:10

Mind ( νοΐ̀ )

See on Rom 7:23.

Vincent: 1Co 1:10

Judgment ( γνώμῃ )

See on Rev 17:13. The distinction between mind and judgment is not between theoretical and practical, since νοῦς mind , includes the practical reason, while γνώμη judgment , has a theoretical side. Rather between understanding and opinion ; νοῦς regarding the thing from the side of the subject, γνώμη from the side of the object. Being in the same realm of thought, they would judge questions from the same christian stand-point, and formulate their judgment accordingly.

Vincent: 1Co 1:11

It hath been declared ( ἐδηλώθη )

Rev., signified , which is hardly strong enough. The word means to make clear , or manifest (δῆλος ). Compare 1Co 3:13. It may imply that Paul was reluctant to believe the reports, but was convinced by unimpeachable testimony.

Vincent: 1Co 1:11

Of the household of Chloe ( τῶν Χλόης )

See on Rom 16:10 for the form of expression. The persons may have been slaves who had come to Ephesus on business for their mistress, or members of her family. Chloe means tender verdure , and was an epithet of Demeter (Ceres), the goddess of agriculture and rural life. It is uncertain whether she belonged to the Corinthian or to the Ephesian church.

Vincent: 1Co 1:11

Contentions ( ἔριδες )

Socrates in Plato's " Republic" distinguishes between disputing (ἐρίζειν ) and discussing (διαλέγεσθαι ), and identifies contention (ἔρις ) with gainsaying (ἀντιλογία ), " Republic," v., 454. Compare Tit 3:9.

Vincent: 1Co 1:12

Now this I say ( λέγω δὲ τοῦτο )

A familiar classical formula: What I mean is this . Rev., Now this I mean . This usually refers to what follows. Compare Gal 3:17; Eph 4:17.

Vincent: 1Co 1:12

I am of Paul and I of Apollos

The repeated δὲ and , expresses the opposition between the respective parties. The followers of Apollos preferred his more philosophical and rhetorical preaching to the simpler and more direct utterances of Paul. Others ranged themselves under the name of Peter.

Vincent: 1Co 1:12

Cephas

Aramaic for Πέτρος Peter . See on Joh 1:42. It is Paul's usual name for Peter, Πέτρος occurring only Gal 2:7, Gal 2:8. Peter would be the rallying-point for the Judaizing Christians, who claimed him as the apostle of the circumcision. The state of the Corinthian church offered the most favorable ground for Paul's Jewish-Christian adversaries, who took advantage of the reaction created by the looser views and practice of Gentile Christians, and by the differences of opinion on important questions, to press the necessity of legal regulation, and of ceremonial observances in non-essentials.

Vincent: 1Co 1:12

Of Christ

Many modern authorities hold that Paul thus designates a fourth and quite distinct party. This view rests mainly on the form of statement in this verse, and has no support in the epistle. The peculiar characteristics of this party, if it were such, can only be conjectured. It seems more probable that those who were " of Christ" belonged to the party of Peter: that they were native Jews, coming from abroad with letters of recommendation to Corinth, representing themselves as ministers and apostles of Christ, and using His name as the watchword under which they could most successfully prosecute their opposition to Paul and the gospel which he preached. The allusion in this verse would therefore link itself with those in the tenth and eleventh chapters of the second epistle.

Vincent: 1Co 1:13

Is Christ divided? ( μεμέρισται ὁ Χριστός )

Some of the best expositors render as an assertion. Christ has been divided by your controversies . He is broken up into different party Christs. This gives a perfectly good and forcible sense, and is favored by the absence of the interrogative particle μὴ , which introduces the next clause. Divided: so portioned up that one party may claim Him more than another. Christ has the article. See on Mat 1:1.

Vincent: 1Co 1:13

Was Paul crucified for you? ( μὴ Παῦλος ἐσταυρώθη ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν )

A negative answer is implied. Paul surely was not , etc. For is ὑπέρ on behalf of , not περί on account of , as some texts.

Vincent: 1Co 1:13

In the name ( εἰς τὸ ὄνομα )

Rev., correctly, Into the name. See on Mat 28:19. Of Paul as the name of him whom you were to confess. The order of the original is: Was it into the name of Paul that ye were baptized?

Vincent: 1Co 1:15

I had baptized ( ἐβάπτισα )

The correct reading is ἐβαπτίσθητε ye were baptized . So Rev. Paul's commission contains no mention of baptism. Compare Act 9:15, with Mat 28:15. From his peculiar position as the inaugurator of a second epoch of Christianity, many would be tempted to regard him as the real founder of the Church, and to boast of having been baptized into his name. " No outward initiation of converts entered into his ministry" (Edwards).

Vincent: 1Co 1:16

And I baptized also

Another exceptional case occurs to him which he conscientiously adds. The δὲ and has a slightly corrective force.

Vincent: 1Co 1:17

Should be made of none effect ( κενωθῇ )

Lit., emptied . Rev., made void . Compare is made void , Rom 4:14, and the kindred adjective κενὸν, κενὴ vain , 1Co 15:14. The nucleus of the apostolic preaching was a fact - Christ crucified. To preach it as a philosophic system would be to empty it of its saving power, a truth which finds abundant and lamentable illustration in the history of the Church.

Wesley: 1Co 1:10

Ye have faith and hope; secure love also.

Wesley: 1Co 1:10

lnfinitely preferable to all the human names in which ye glory.

Wesley: 1Co 1:10

They now spoke different things, 1Co 1:12 And that there be no schisms among you - No alienation of affection from each other.

Wesley: 1Co 1:10

Affections, desires.

Wesley: 1Co 1:10

Touching all the grand truths of the gospel.

Wesley: 1Co 1:11

Whom some suppose to have been the wife of Stephanas, and the mother of Fortunatus and Achaicus. By these three the Corinthians had sent their letter to St. Paul, 1Co 16:17.

Wesley: 1Co 1:11

A word equivalent with schisms in the preceding verse.

Wesley: 1Co 1:12

That is, what I mean is this: there are various parties among you, who set themselves, one against an other, in behalf of the several teachers they admire.

Wesley: 1Co 1:12

They spoke well, if they had not on this pretence despised their teachers, 1Co 4:8 Perhaps they valued themselves on having heard Christ preach in his own person.

Wesley: 1Co 1:13

Are not all the members still under one head? Was not he alone crucified for you all; and were ye not all baptized in his name? The glory of Christ then is not to be divided between him and his servants; neither is the unity of the body to be torn asunder, seeing Christ is one still.

Wesley: 1Co 1:14

(A pious phrase for the common one, "I rejoice,") that, in the course of his providence, I baptized none of you, but Crispus, once the ruler of the synagogue, and Caius.

Wesley: 1Co 1:15

In order to attach them to myself.

Wesley: 1Co 1:16

That is, it does not at present occur to my memory, that I baptized any other.

Wesley: 1Co 1:17

That was not my chief errand: those of inferior rank and abilities could do it: though all the apostles were sent to baptize also, Mat 28:19 But to preach the gospel - So the apostle slides into his general proposition: but not with wisdom of speech - With the artificial ornaments of discourse, invented by human wisdom.

Wesley: 1Co 1:17

The whole effect of St. Paul's preaching was owing to the power of God accompanying the plain declaration of that great truth, "Christ bore our sins upon the cross." But this effect might have been imputed to another cause, had he come with that wisdom of speech which they admired.

JFB: 1Co 1:10

Ye already have knowledge, utterance, and hope, maintain also love.

JFB: 1Co 1:10

The very title is an argument for love.

JFB: 1Co 1:10

Whom Paul wishes to be all in all to the Corinthians, and therefore names Him so often in this chapter.

JFB: 1Co 1:10

Not speaking different things as ye do (1Co 1:12), in a spirit of variance.

JFB: 1Co 1:10

Literally, "splits," "breaches."

JFB: 1Co 1:10

"but rather."

JFB: 1Co 1:10

The opposite word to "divisions." It is applied to healing a wound, or making whole a rent.

JFB: 1Co 1:10

The view taken by the understanding, and the practical decision arrived at [CONYBEARE and HOWSON], as to what is to be done. The mind, within, refers to things to be believed: the judgment is displayed outwardly in things to be done [BENGEL]. Disposition--opinion [ALFORD].

JFB: 1Co 1:11

(1Co 11:18).

JFB: 1Co 1:11

They seem to have been alike in the confidence of Paul and of the Corinthians. The Corinthians "wrote" to the apostle (1Co 7:1), consulting him concerning certain points; marriage, the eating of things offered to idols, the decorum to be observed by women in religious assemblies. But they said not a syllable about the enormities and disorders that had crept in among them. That information reached Paul by other quarters. Hence his language about those evils is, "It hath been declared unto me," &c.; "It is reported commonly" (1Co 5:1-2). All this he says before he refers to their letter, which shows that the latter did not give him any intimation of those evils. An undesigned proof of genuineness [PALEY, Horæ Paulinæ]. Observe his prudence: He names the family, to let it be seen that he made his allegation not without authority: he does not name the individuals, not to excite odium against them. He tacitly implies that the information ought rather to have come to him directly from their presbyters, as they had consulted him about matters of less moment.

JFB: 1Co 1:11

Not so severe a word as "divisions," literally, "schisms" (1Co 1:10, Margin).

JFB: 1Co 1:12

This is what I mean in saying "contentions" (1Co 1:11).

JFB: 1Co 1:12

Ye say severally, "glorying in men" (1Co 1:31; 1Co 3:21-22), one, I am of Paul; another, I am of Apollos, &c. Not that they formed definite parties, but they individually betrayed the spirit of party in contentions under the name of different favorite teachers. Paul will not allow himself to be flattered even by those who made his name their party cry, so as to connive at the dishonor thereby done to Christ. These probably were converted under his ministry. Those alleging the name of Apollos, Paul's successor at Corinth (Act 18:24, &c.), were persons attracted by his rhetorical style (probably acquired in Alexandria, 1Co 3:6), as contrasted with the "weak bodily presence" and "contemptible speech" of the apostle. Apollos, doubtless, did not willingly foster this spirit of undue preference (1Co 4:6, 1Co 4:8); nay, to discourage it, he would not repeat his visit just then (1Co 16:12).

JFB: 1Co 1:12

Probably Judaizers, who sheltered themselves under the name of Peter, the apostle of the circumcision ("Cephas" is the Hebrew, "Peter" the Greek name; Joh 1:42; Gal 2:11, &c.): the subjects handled in the seventh through ninth chapters were probably suggested as matters of doubt by them. The church there began from the Jewish synagogue, Crispus the chief ruler, and Sosthenes his successor (probably), being converts. Hence some Jewish leaven, though not so much as elsewhere, is traceable (2Co 11:22). Petrism afterwards sprang up much more rankly at Rome. If it be wrong to boast "I am of Peter," how much more so to boast I am of the Pope!" [BENGEL].

JFB: 1Co 1:12

A fair pretext used to slight the ministry of Paul and their other teachers (1Co 4:8; 2Co 10:7-11).

JFB: 1Co 1:13

Into various parts (one under one leader, another under another) [ALFORD]. The unity of His body is not to be cut in pieces, as if all did not belong to Him, the One Head.

JFB: 1Co 1:13

In the Greek the interrogation implies that a strong negative answer is expected: "Was it Paul (surely you will not say so) that was crucified for you?" In the former question the majesty of "CHRIST" (the Anointed One of God) implies the impossibility of His being "divided." in the latter, Paul's insignificance implies the impossibility of his being the head of redemption, "crucified for" them, and giving his name to the redeemed. This, which is true of Paul the founder of the Church of Corinth, holds equally good of Cephas and Apollos, who had not such a claim as Paul in the Corinthian Church.

JFB: 1Co 1:13

The cross claims us for Christ, as redeemed by Him; baptism, as dedicated to Him.

JFB: 1Co 1:13

Rather, "into the name" (Gal 3:27), implying the incorporation involved in the idea of baptism.

JFB: 1Co 1:14

I thank God's providence now, who so ordered it that I baptized none of you but Crispus (the former ruler of the synagogue, Act 18:8) and Gaius (written by the Romans Caius, the host of Paul at Corinth, and of the church, Rom 16:23; a person therefore in good circumstances). Baptizing was the office of the deacons (Act 10:48) rather than of the apostles, whose office was that of establishing and superintending generally the churches. The deacons had a better opportunity of giving the necessary course of instruction preparatory to baptism. Crispus and Gaius were probably among the first converts, and hence were baptized by Paul himself, who founded the church.

JFB: 1Co 1:15

Not that Paul had this reason at the time, but God so arranged it that none might say [ALFORD].

JFB: 1Co 1:16

"The first-fruits of Achaia," that is, among the first converted there (1Co 16:15, 1Co 16:17). It is likely that such "households" included infants (Act 16:33). The history of the Church favors this view, as infant baptism was the usage from the earliest ages.

JFB: 1Co 1:17

Paul says this not to depreciate baptism; for he exalts it most highly (Rom 6:3). He baptized some first converts; and would have baptized more, but that his and the apostles' peculiar work was to preach the Gospel, to found by their autoptic testimony particular churches, and then to superintend the churches in general.

JFB: 1Co 1:17

Literally, "as an apostle."

JFB: 1Co 1:17

Even in Christ's name, much less in my own.

JFB: 1Co 1:17

Or speech; philosophical reasoning set off with oratorical language and secular learning, which the Corinthians set so undue a value upon (1Co 1:5; 1Co 2:1, 1Co 2:4) in Apollos, and the want of which in Paul they were dissatisfied with (2Co 10:10).

JFB: 1Co 1:17

The sum and substance of the Gospel (1Co 1:23; 1Co 2:2), Christ crucified.

JFB: 1Co 1:17

Literally, "be made void" (Rom 4:14); namely, by men thinking more of the human reasonings and eloquence in which the Gospel was set forth, than of the Gospel itself of Christ crucified, the sinner's only remedy, and God's highest exhibition of love.

Clarke: 1Co 1:10

Now I beseech you, brethren - The apostle having finished his introduction comes to his second point, exhorting them to abstain from dissensions, that they might be of the same heart and mind, striving together for the hope of the Gospel

Clarke: 1Co 1:10

By the name of our Lord Jesus - By his authority, and in his place; and on account of your infinite obligations to his mercy in calling you into such a state of salvation

Clarke: 1Co 1:10

That ye all speak the same thing - If they did not agree exactly in opinion on every subject, they might, notwithstanding, agree in the words which they used to express their religious faith. The members of the Church of God should labor to be of the same mind, and to speak the same thing, in order to prevent divisions, which always hinder the work of God. On every essential doctrine of the Gospel all genuine Christians agree: why then need religious communion be interrupted? This general agreement is all that the apostle can have in view; for it cannot be expected that any number of men should in every respect perfectly coincide in their views of all the minor points, on which an exact conformity in sentiment is impossible to minds so variously constituted as those of the human race. Angels may thus agree, who see nothing through an imperfect or false medium; but to man this is impossible. Therefore men should bear with each other, and not be so ready to imagine that none have the truth of God but they and their party.

Clarke: 1Co 1:11

By them which are of the house of Chloe - This was doubtless some very religious matron at Corinth, whose family were converted to the Lord; some of whom were probably sent to the apostle to inform him of the dissensions which then prevailed in the Church at that place. Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, mentioned 1Co 16:17, were probably the sons of this Chloe

Clarke: 1Co 1:11

Contentions - Εριδες, Altercations; produced by the σχισματα, divisions, mentioned above. When once they had divided, they must necessarily have contended, in order to support their respective parties.

Clarke: 1Co 1:12

Every one of you saith - It seems from this expression that the whole Church at Corinth was in a state of dissension: they were all divided into the following sect

1.    Paulians, or followers of St. Paul

2.    Apollonians, or followers of Apollos

3.    Kephians, or followers of Kephas

4.    Christians, or followers of Christ

See the Introduction, Section 5.

The converts at Corinth were partly Jews and partly Greeks. The Gentile part, as Dr. Lightfoot conjectures, might boast the names of Paul and Apollos; the Jewish, those of Kephas and Christ. But these again might be subdivided; some probably considered themselves disciples of Paul, he being the immediate instrument of their conversion, while others might prefer Apollos for his extraordinary eloquence

If by Kephas the apostle Peter be meant, some of the circumcision who believed might prefer him to all the rest; and they might consider him more immediately sent to them; and therefore have him in higher esteem than they had Paul, who was the minister or apostle of the uncircumcision: and on this very account the converted Gentiles would prize him more highly than they did Peter

Instead of Christ, Χριστου, some have conjectured that we should read Κρισπου, of Crispus; who is mentioned 1Co 1:14. And some think that Χριστου, of Christ, is an interpolation, as it is not likely that Christ in any sense of the word could be said to be the head of a sect, or party, in his own Church; as all those parties held that Gospel, of which himself was both the author and the subject. But it is very easy to conceive that, in a Church so divided, a party might be found, who, dividing Christ from his ministers, might be led to say, "We will have nothing to do with your parties, nor with your party spirit; we are the disciples of Christ, and will have nothing to do with Paulians, Apollonians, or Kephians, as contradistinguished from Christ."The reading Κρισπου for Χριστου is not acknowledged by any MS. or version.

Clarke: 1Co 1:13

Is Christ divided? - Can he be split into different sects and parties? Has he different and opposing systems? Or, is the Messiah to appear under different persons

Clarke: 1Co 1:13

Was Paul crucified for you? - As the Gospel proclaims salvation through the crucified only, has Paul poured out his blood as an atonement for you? This is impossible, and therefore your being called by my name is absurd; for his disciples you should be, alone, who has bought you by his blood

Clarke: 1Co 1:13

Were ye baptized in the name of Paul? - To be baptized in, or into the name of one, implied that the baptized was to be the disciple of him into whose name, religion, etc., he was baptized. As if he said: Did I ever attempt to set up a new religion, one founded on my own authority, and coming from myself? On the contrary, have I not preached Christ crucified for the sin of the world; and called upon all mankind, both Jews and Gentiles, to believe on Him?

Clarke: 1Co 1:14

I thank God that I baptized none of you - None of those who now live in Corinth, except Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, Act 18:8. And Gaius, the same person probably with whom Paul lodged, Rom 16:23 (note). Dr. Lightfoot observes: "If this be Gaius, or Caius, to whom the third epistle of John was written, which is very probable when the first verse of that epistle (3Jo 1:1) is compared with Rom 16:23, then it will appear probable that John wrote his first epistle to the Corinthians. I wrote, says he, unto the Church - What Church? Certainly it must have been some particular Church which the apostle has in view, and the Church where Gaius himself resided. And if this be true, we may look for Diotrephes (3Jo 1:9) in the Corinthian Church; and the author of the schism of which the apostle complains. See the Introduction, Section 8.

Clarke: 1Co 1:15

Lest any should say, etc. - He was careful not to baptize, lest it should be supposed that he wished to make a party for himself; because superficial observers might imagine that he baptized them into his own name - to be his followers, though he baptized them into the name of Christ only

Instead of εβαπτισα, I have baptized, the Codex Alexandrinus, the Codex Ephraim, and several others, with the Coptic, Sahidic, later Syriac in the margin, Armenian, Vulgate, some copies of the Itala, and several of the fathers, read εβαπτισθητε, ye were baptized. And if we read ἱνα, so that, instead of lest, the sentence will stand thus: So that no one can say that ye were baptized into my name. This appears to be the true reading, and for it Bp. Pearce offers several strong arguments.

Clarke: 1Co 1:16

The household of Stephanas - From 1Co 16:15, we learn that the family of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, probably converted and baptized by the apostle himself. Epenetus is supposed to be one of this family. See the note on Rom 16:5

Clarke: 1Co 1:16

I know not whether I baptized any other - I do not recollect that there is any person now residing in Corinth, or Achaia, besides the above mentioned, whom I have baptized. It is strange that the doubt here expressed by the apostle should be construed so as to affect his inspiration! What, does the inspiration of prophet or apostle necessarily imply that he must understand the geography of the universe, and have an intuitive knowledge of all the inhabitants of the earth, and how often, and where they may have changed their residence! Nor was that inspiration ever given so to work on a man’ s memory that he could not forget any of the acts which he had performed during life. Inspiration was given to the holy men of old that they might be able to write and proclaim the mind of God in the times which concern the salvation of men.

Clarke: 1Co 1:17

For Christ sent me not to baptize - Bp. Pearce translates thus: For Christ sent me, not so much to baptize as to preach the Gospel: and he supports his version thus - "The writers of the Old and New Testaments do, almost every where (agreeably to the Hebrew idiom) express a preference given to one thing beyond another by an affirmation of that which is preferred, and a negation of that which is contrary to it: and so it must be understood here, for if St. Paul was not sent at all to baptize, he baptized without a commission; but if he was sent, not only to baptize but to preach also, or to preach rather than baptize, he did in fact discharge his duty aright."It appears sufficiently evident that baptizing was considered to be an inferior office, and though every minister of Christ might administer it, yet apostles had more important work. Preparing these adult heathens for baptism by the continual preaching of the word was of much greater consequence than baptizing them when thus prepared to receive and profit by it

Clarke: 1Co 1:17

Not with wisdom of words - Ουκ εν σοφιᾳ λογου . In several places in the New Testament the term λογος is taken not only to express a word, a speech, a saying, etc., but doctrine, or the matter of teaching. Here, and in 1Th 1:5, and in several other places, it seems to signify reason, or that mode of rhetorical argumentation so highly prized among the Greeks. The apostle was sent not to pursue this mode of conduct, but simply to announce the truth; to proclaim Christ crucified for the sin of the world; and to do this in the plainest and simplest manner possible, lest the numerous conversions which followed might be attributed to the power of the apostle’ s eloquence, and not to the demonstration of the Spirit of God. It is worthy of remark that, in all the revivals of religion with which we are acquainted, God appears to have made very little use of human eloquence, even when possessed by pious men. His own nervous truths, announced by plain common sense, though in homely phrase, have been the general means of the conviction and conversion of sinners. Human eloquence and learning have often been successfully employed in defending the outworks of Christianity; but simplicity and truth have preserved the citadel

It is farther worthy of remark, that when God was about to promulgate his laws he chose Moses as the instrument, who appears to have labored under some natural impediment in his speech, so that Aaron his brother was obliged to be his spokesman to Pharaoh; and that, when God had purposed to publish the Gospel to the Gentile world - to Athens, Ephesus, Corinth, and Rome, he was pleased to use Saul of Tarsus as the principal instrument; a man whose bodily presence was weak, and his speech contemptible, 2Co 10:1, 2Co 10:10. And thus it was proved that God sent him to preach, not with human eloquence, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect but with the demonstration and power of his own Spirit; and thus the excellence of the power appeared to be of God, and not of man.

Calvin: 1Co 1:10

10.Now I beseech you, brethren Hitherto he has handled the Corinthians mildly, because he knew that they were much too sensitive. Now, however, after preparing their minds for receiving correction, acting the part of a good and skillful surgeon, who soothes the wound when about to apply a painful remedy, he begins to handle them with more severity. Even here, however, as we shall still farther see, he uses great moderation. The sum is this: “It is my hope that the Lord has not in vain conferred upon you so many gifts, so as not to have it in view to bring you to salvation, but you ought at the same time to take heed lest graces so distinguished be polluted by your vices. See, then, that you be agreed among yourselves; and it is not without good reason that I call for agreement among yourselves, for I have been informed that you are in a state of disagreement, amounting even to hostility, and that there are parties and contentions raging among you, by which true unity of faith is torn asunder.” As, however, they might not perhaps be sufficiently aroused by mere exhortation, he uses earnest entreaty, for he adjures them, by the name of Christ, that, as they loved him, they should aim at promoting harmony.

That ye all speak the same thing In exhorting them to harmony, he employs three different forms of expression: for, in the first place, he requires such agreement among them that all shall have one voice; secondly, he takes away the evil by which unity is broken and torn asunder; and, thirdly, he unfolds the nature of true harmony, which is, that they be agreed among themselves in mind and will. What he has placed second is first in order, — that we beware of strifes. For from this a second thing will naturally follow, — that we be in harmony; and then at length a third thing will follow, which is here mentioned first, — that we all speak, as it were, with one mouth; a thing exceedingly desirable as a fruit of Christian harmony. Let us then observe, that nothing is more inconsistent on the part of Christians than to be at variance among themselves, for it is the main article of our religion that we be in harmony among ourselves; and farther, on such agreement the safety of the Church rests and is dependent.

But let us see what he requires as to Christian unity. If any one is desirous of nice distinctions — he would have them first of all joined together in one mind; secondly, in one judgment; and, thirdly, he would have them declare in words that agreement. As, however, my rendering differs somewhat from that of Erasmus, I would, in passing, call my readers to observe, that Paul here makes use of a participle, which denotes things that are fitly and suitably joined together ⁵⁶ For the verb καταρτιζεσθαι itself (from which the participle κατηρτισμένος comes) properly signifies, to be fitted and adjusted, just as the members of the human body are connected together by a most admirable symmetry. ⁵⁷

For sententia (judgment) Paul has γνώμην : but I understand it here as denoting the will, so that there is a complete division of the soul, and the first clause refers to faith, the second to love. Then only will there be Christian unity among us, when there is not merely a good agreement as to doctrine, but we are also in harmony in our affections and dispositions, and are thus in all respects of one mind. Thus Luke bears witness to believers in the primitive Church, (Act 2:46,) that they had “one heart and one soul.” And without doubt this will be found wherever the Spirit of Christ reigns. When, however, he exhorts them to speak the same thing, he intimates still more fully from the effect, how complete the agreement ought to be — so that no diversity may appear even in words. It is difficult, indeed, of attainment, but still it is necessary among Christians, from whom there is required not merely one faith, but also one confession.

Calvin: 1Co 1:11

11.It has been declared As general observations have usually little effect, he intimates, that what he had said was more particularly applicable to them. The application, therefore, is designed with the view of leading the Corinthians to perceive, that it was not without good reason that Paul had made mention of harmony. For he shows that they had not merely turned aside from a holy unity, ⁵⁸ but had even fallen into contentions, which are worse ⁵⁹ than jarrings of sentiment. And that he may not be charged with believing too readily what was said, ⁶⁰ as though he lightly lent his ear to false accusations, he speaks with commendation of his informants, who must have been in the highest esteem, as he did not hesitate to adduce them as competent witnesses against an entire Church. It is not indeed altogether certain, whether Chloe is the name of a place or of a woman, but to me it appears more probable that it is the name of a woman. ⁶¹ I am of opinion, therefore, that it was a well-regulated household that acquainted Paul with the distempered condition of the Corinthian Church, being desirous that it might be remedied by him. The idea entertained by many, in accordance with Chrysostom’s view, that he refrained from mentioning names, lest he should bring odium upon them, appears to me to be absurd. For he does not say that some of the household had reported this to him, but, on the contrary, makes mention of them all, and there is no doubt that they would willingly have allowed their names to be made use of. Farther, that he might not exasperate their minds by undue severity, he has modified the reproof by an engaging form of address; not as though he would make light of the distemper, but with the view of bringing them to a more teachable spirit, for perceiving the severity of the malady.

Calvin: 1Co 1:12

12.I say then, etc Some think there is here an instance of μιμησις, imitation, as if Paul were here repeating their expressions. Now, although the manuscripts differ as to the particle ὅτι, I am of opinion that it is the conjunction ( because) rather than the relative ( which), so that there is simply an explanation of the preceding statement in this sense. “My reason for saying that there are contentions among you is, because every one of you glories in the name of some individual.” It will, however, be objected, that in these words there is no appearance as yet of contention. My answer is, that where there are jarrings in religion, it cannot but be that men’s minds will soon afterwards burst forth in open strife. For as nothing is more effectual for uniting us, and there is nothing that tends more to draw our minds together, and keep them in a state of peace, than agreement in religion, so, on the other hand, if any disagreement has arisen as to matters of this nature, the effect necessarily is, that men’s minds are straightway stirred up for combat, and in no other department are there more fierce contendings. ⁶² Hence it is with good reason that Paul brings it forward as a sufficient evidence of contention, that the Corinthians were infested with sects and parties.

I am of Paul He makes mention here of Christ’s faithful servants — Apollos, who had been his successor at Corinth, and Peter himself too, and then adds himself to their number, that he may appear to plead not so much his own cause as that of Christ. In any other point of view it is not likely that there were any parties that espoused the separate interests of ministers joined together by a sacred agreement. ⁶³ He has, however, as he afterwards mentions, transferred to himself and Apollos what was applicable to others; and this he has done, in order that they might more candidly consider the thing itself, viewing it apart from respect of persons. It will, however, be replied, that he makes mention here even of those who professed that they were of Christ Was this, too, worthy of blame? I answer, that in this way he shows more fully what unseemly consequences result from those depraved affections, when we give ourselves up to men, as in that case Christ must be acknowledged merely in part, and the pious have no alternative left them, but to separate themselves from others, if they would not renounce Christ.

As, however, this passage is wrested in various ways, we must endeavor to ascertain more minutely what Paul intends here. His object is, to maintain Christ’s exclusive authority in the Church, so that we may all exercise dependence upon him, that he alone may be recognized among us as Lord and Master, and that the name of no individual be set in opposition to his. Those, therefore, that draw away disciples after them (Act 20:30,) with the view of splitting the Church into parties, he condemns as most destructive enemies of our faith. Thus then he does not, suffer men to have such pre-eminence in the Church as to usurp Christ’s supremacy. He does not allow them to be held in such honor as to derogate even in the slightest degree from Christ’s dignity. There is, it is true, a certain degree of honor that is due to Christ’s ministers, and they are also themselves masters in their own place, but this exception must always be kept in view, that Christ must have without any infringement what belongs to him — that he shall nevertheless be the sole Master, and looked upon as such. Hence the aim of good ministers is this, that they may all in common serve Christ, and claim for him exclusively power, authority, and glory — fight under his banner — obey him alone, and bring others in subjection to his sway. If any one is influenced by ambition, that man gathers disciples, not to Christ, but to himself. This then is the fountain of all evils — this the most hurtful of all plagues — this the deadly poison of all Churches, when ministers seek their own interests rather than those of Christ. In short, the unity of the Church consists more especially in this one thing — that we all depend upon Christ alone, and that men thus occupy an inferior place, so as not to detract in any degree from his pre-eminence.

Calvin: 1Co 1:13

13.Is Christ divided? This intolerable evil was consequent upon the divisions that prevailed among the Corinthians: for Christ alone must reign in the Church. And as the object of the gospel is, that we be reconciled to God through him, it is necessary, in the first place, that we should all be bound together in him. As, however, only a very few of the Corinthians, who were in a sounder condition than the others, ⁶⁴ retained Christ as their Master, (while all made it their boast that they were Christians,) Christ was by this means torn asunder. For we must be one body, if we would be kept together under him as our head. If, on the other hand, we are split asunder into different bodies, we start aside from him also. Hence to glory in his name amidst strifes and parties is to tear him in pieces: which indeed is impossible, for never will he depart from unity and concord, because “He cannot deny himself” (2Ti 2:13.) Paul, therefore, by setting before them this absurdity, designs to lead the Corinthians to perceive that they are estranged from Christ, inasmuch as they are divided, for then only does he reign in us, when we have him as the bond of an inviolably sacred unity.

Was Paul crucified for you? By two powerful considerations, he shows how base a thing ⁶⁵ it is to rob Christ of the honor of being the sole Head of the Church — the sole Teacher — the sole Master; or to draw away from him any part of that honor, with the view of transferring it to men. The first is, that we have been redeemed by Christ on this footing, that we are not our own masters. This very argument Paul makes use of in his Epistle to the Romans (Rom 14:9,) when he says,

“For this end Christ died and rose again, that he might be Lord both of the living and the dead.”

To him, therefore, let us live and die, because we are always his. Also in this same Epistle (1Co 7:23,)

“Ye are bought with a price: be not ye the servants of men.”

As the Corinthians, therefore, had been purchased with the blood of Christ, they in a manner renounced the benefit of redemption, when they attached themselves to other leaders. Here is a doctrine that is deserving of special notice — that we are not at liberty to put ourselves under bondage to men, ⁶⁶ because we are the Lord’s heritage. Here, therefore, he accuses the Corinthians of the basest ingratitude, in estranging themselves from that Leader, by whose blood they had been redeemed, however they might have done so unwittingly.

Farther, this passage militates against the wicked contrivance of Papists, by which they attempt to bolster up their system of indulgences. For it is from the blood of Christ and the martyrs ⁶⁷ that they make up that imaginary treasure of the Church, which they tell us is dealt out by means of indulgences. Thus they pretend that the martyrs by their death merited something for us in the sight of God, that we may seek help from this source for obtaining the pardon of our sins. They will deny, indeed, that they are on that account our redeemers; but nothing is more manifest than that the one thing follows from the other. The question is as to the reconciling of sinners to God; the question is as to the obtaining of forgiveness; the question is as to the appeasing of the Lord’s anger; the question is as to redemption from our iniquities. This they boast is accomplished partly by the blood of Christ, and partly by that of the martyrs. They make, therefore, the martyrs partners with Christ in procuring our salvation. Here, however, Paul in strong terms denies that any one but Christ has been crucified for us. The martyrs, it is true, died for our benefit, but (as Leo ⁶⁸ observes) it was to furnish an example of perseverance, not to procure for us the gift of righteousness.

Or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? Here we have a second argument, which is taken from the profession of baptism; for we enlist ourselves under the banners of him in whose name we are baptized. We are, accordingly, bound ⁶⁹ to Christ, in whose name our baptism is celebrated. Hence it follows that the Corinthians are chargeable with perfidy and apostasy, if they place themselves under subjection to men. Observe here that the nature of baptism resembles a contract ⁷⁰ of mutual obligation; for as the Lord by that symbol receives us into his household, and introduces us among his people, so we pledge our fidelity to him, that we will never afterwards have any other spiritual Lord. Hence as it is on God’s part a covenant of grace that he contracts with us, in which he promises forgiveness of sins and a new life, so on our part it is an oath of spiritual warfare, in which we promise perpetual subjection to him. The former department Paul does not here touch upon, because the subject did not admit of it; but in treating of baptism it ought not to be omitted. Nor does Paul charge the Corinthians with apostasy simply on the ground of their forsaking Christ and betaking themselves to men; but he declares that if they do not adhere to Christ alone — that very thing would make them covenant-breakers.

It is asked, what it is to be baptized in the name of Christ? I answer that by this expression it is not simply intimated that baptism is founded on the authority of Christ, but depends also on his influence, and does in a manner consist in it; and, in fine, that the whole effect of it depends on this — that the name of Christ is therein invoked. It is asked farther, why it is that Paul says that the Corinthians were baptized in the name of Christ, while Christ himself commanded (Mat 28:19) the Apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. I answer, that in baptism the first thing to be considered is, that God the Father, by planting us in his Church in unmerited goodness, receives us by adoption into the number of his sons. Secondly, as we cannot have any connection with him except by means of reconciliation, we have need of Christ to restore us to the Father’s favor by his blood. Thirdly, as we are by baptism consecrated to God, we need also the interposition of the Holy Spirit, whose office it is to make us new creatures. Nay farther, our being washed in the blood of Christ is peculiarly his work; but as we do not obtain the mercy of the Father, or the grace of the Spirit, otherwise than through Christ alone, it is on good grounds that we speak of him as the peculiar object in view in baptism, and more particularly inscribe his name upon baptism. At the same time this does not by any means exclude the name of the Father and of the Spirit; for when we wish to sum up in short compass the efficacy of baptism, we make mention of Christ alone; but when we are disposed to speak with greater minuteness, the name of the Father and that of the Spirit require to be expressly introduced.

Calvin: 1Co 1:14

14.I thank my God In these words he reproves very sharply the perversity of the Corinthians, which made it necessary for him to avoid, in a manner, a thing so sacred and honorable as that of the administration of baptism. Paul, indeed, would have acted with propriety, and in accordance with the nature of his office, though he had baptized ever so many. He rejoices, however, that it had happened otherwise, and acknowledges it as having been so ordered, in the providence of God, that they might not take occasion from that to glory in him, or that he might not bear any resemblance to those ambitious men who endeavored in this way to catch followers. But what if he had baptized many? There would have been no harm in it, but (as I have said) there is couched under this a heavy reproach against the Corinthians and their false apostles, inasmuch as a servant of the Lord found occasion to rejoice that he had refrained from a work, otherwise good and commendable, lest it should become an occasion of harm to them.

Calvin: 1Co 1:17

17.For Christ sent me not He anticipates an objection that might, perhaps, be brought against him — that he had not discharged his duty, inasmuch as Christ commands his Apostles to baptize as well as teach. Accordingly he replies, that this was not the principal department of his office, for the duty of teaching had been principally enjoined upon him as that to which he should apply himself. For when Christ says to the Apostles, (Mat 28:19, Mar 16:15,) Go, preach and baptize, he connects baptism with teaching simply as an addition or appendage, so that teaching always holds the first place.

Two things, however, must be noticed here. The first is, that the Apostle does not here absolutely deny that he had a command to baptize, for this is applicable to all the Apostles: Go and baptize; and he would have acted rashly in baptizing even one, had he not been furnished with authority, but simply points out what was the chief thing in his calling. The second thing is, that he does not by any means detract here, as some think, from the dignity or utility of the sacrament. For the question here is, not as to the efficacy of baptism, and Paul does not institute this comparison with the view of detracting in any degree from that; but because it was given to few to teach, while many could baptize; and farther, as many could be taught at the same time, while baptism could only be administered to individuals successively, one by one, Paul, who excelled in the gift of teaching, applied himself to the work that was more especially needful for him, and left to others what they could more conveniently accomplish. Nay farther, if the reader considers minutely all the circumstances of the case, he will see that there is irony ⁷¹ tacitly conveyed here, dexterously contrived for making those feel acutely, who, under color of administering a ceremony, endeavor to catch a little glory at the expense of another’s labor. Paul’s labors in building up that Church had been incredible. There had come after him certain effeminate masters, who had drawn over followers to their party by the sprinkling of water; ⁷² Paul, then, giving up to them the title of honor, declares himself contented with having had the burden. ⁷³

Not with wisdom of words There is here an instance of anticipation, by which a twofold objection is refuted. For these pretended teachers might reply that it was ludicrous to hear Paul, who was not endowed with eloquence, making it his boast that the department of teaching had been assigned to him. Hence he says, by way of concession, that he had not been formed to be an orator, ⁷⁴ to set himself off by elegance of speech: but a minister of the Spirit, that he might, by plain and homely speech, bring to nothing the wisdom of the world. Now, lest any one should object that he hunted after glory by his preaching, as much as others did by baptism, he briefly replies, that as the method of teaching that he pursued was the farthest removed from show, and breathed nothing of ambition, it could give no ground of suspicion on that head. Hence, too, if I mistake not, it may readily be inferred what was the chief ground of the controversy that Paul had with the wicked and unfaithful ministers of the Corinthians. It was that, being puffed up with ambition, that they might secure for themselves the admiration of the people, they recommended themselves to them by a show of words and mask of human wisdom.

From this main evil two others necessarily followed — that by these disguises (so to speak) the simplicity of the gospel was disfigured, and Christ was, as it were, clothed in a new and foreign garb, so that the pure and unadulterated knowledge of him was not to be found. Farther, as men’s minds were turned aside to neatness and elegance of expression, to ingenious speculations, and to an empty show of superior sublimity of doctrine, the efficacy of the Spirit vanished, and nothing remained but the dead letter. The majesty of God, as it shines forth in the gospel, was not to be seen, but mere disguise and useless show. Paul, accordingly, with the view of exposing these corruptions of the gospel, makes a transition here to the manner of his preaching. This he declares to be right and proper, while at the same time it was diametrically opposed to the ambitious ostentation of those men. ⁷⁵ It is as though he had said — “I am well aware how much your fastidious teachers delight themselves in their high-sounding phrases. As for myself, I do not simply confess that my preaching has been conducted in a rude, coarse, and unpolished style, but I even glory in it. For it was right that it should be so, and this was the method that was divinely prescribed to me. ” By the wisdom of words, he does not mean λογοδαιδαλία, ⁷⁶ which is mere empty talk, but true eloquence, which consists in skillful contrivance of subjects, ingenious arrangement, and elegance of expression. He declares that he had nothing of this: nay more, that it was neither suitable to his preaching nor advantageous.

Lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect As he had so often previously presented the name of Christ in contrast with the arrogant wisdom of the flesh, so now, with the view of bringing down thereby all its pride and loftiness, he brings forward to view the cross of Christ. For all the wisdom of believers is comprehended in the cross of Christ, and what more contemptible than a cross? Whoever, therefore, would desire to be truly wise in God’s account, must of necessity stoop to this abasement of the cross, and this will not be accomplished otherwise than by his first of all renouncing his own judgment and all the wisdom of the world. Paul, however, shows here not merely what sort of persons Christ’s disciples ought to be, and what path of learning they ought to pursue, but also what is the method of teaching in Christ’s school. “ The cross of Christ (says he) would have been made of none effect, if my preaching had been adorned with eloquence and show.” The cross of Christ he has put here for the benefit of redemption, which must be sought from Christ crucified. Now the doctrine of the gospel which calls us to this, should savor of the nature of the Cross, so as to be despised and contemptible, rather than glorious, in the eyes of the world. The meaning, therefore, is, that if Paul had made use of philosophical acuteness and studied address in the presence of the Corinthians, the efficacy of the cross of Christ, in which the salvation of men consists, would have been buried, because it cannot come to us in that way.

Here two questions are proposed: first, whether Paul here condemns in every respect the wisdom of words, as opposed to Christ; and secondly, whether he means that eloquence and the doctrine of the gospel are invariably opposed, so they cannot agree together, and that the preaching of the gospel is vitiated, if the slightest tincture of eloquence ⁷⁷ is made use of for adorning it. To the first of these I answer — that it were quite unreasonable to suppose, that Paul would utterly condemn those arts which, it is manifest, are excellent gifts of God, and which serve as instruments, as it were, to assist men in the accomplishment of important purposes. As for those arts, then, that have nothing of superstition, but contain solid learning, ⁷⁸ and are founded on just principles, as they are useful and suited to the common transactions of human life, so there can be no doubt that they have come forth from the Holy Spirit; and the advantage which is derived and experienced from them, ought to be ascribed exclusively to God. What Paul says here, therefore, ought not to be taken as throwing any disparagement upon the arts, as if they were unfavorable to piety.

The second question is somewhat more difficult, for he says, that the cross of Christ is made of none effect if there be any admixture of the wisdom of words I answer, that we must consider who they are that Paul here addresses. The ears of the Corinthians were tickled with a silly fondness for high sounding style. ⁷⁹ Hence they needed more than others to be brought back to the abasement of the cross, that they might learn to embrace Christ as he is, unadorned, and the gospel in its simplicity, without any false ornament. I acknowledge, at the same time, that this sentiment in some respects holds invariably, that the cross of Christ is made of none effect, not merely by the wisdom of the world, but also by elegance of address. For the preaching of Christ crucified is simple and unadorned, and hence it ought not to be obscured by false ornaments of speech. It is the prerogative of the gospel to bring down the wisdom of the world in such a way that, stripped of our own understanding, we show ourselves to be simply docile, and do not think or even desire to know anything, but what the Lord himself teaches. As to the wisdom of the flesh, we shall have occasion to consider more at large ere long, in what respects it is opposed to Christ. As to eloquence, I shall advert to it here in a few words, in so far as the passage calls for.

We see that God from the beginning ordered matters so, that, the gospel should be administered in simplicity, without any aid from eloquence. Could not he who fashions the tongues of men for eloquence, be himself eloquent if he chose to be so? While he could be so, he did not choose to be so. Why it was that he did not choose this, I find two reasons more particularly. The first is, that in a plain and unpolished manner of address, the majesty of the truth might shine forth more conspicuously, and the simple efficacy of his Spirit, without external aids, might make its way into the hearts of men. The second is, that he might more effectually try our obedience and docility, and train us at the same time to true humility. For the Lord admits none into his school but little children. ⁸⁰ Hence those alone are capable of heavenly wisdom who, contenting themselves with the preaching of the cross, however contemptible it may be in appearance, feel no desire whatever to have Christ under a mask. Hence the doctrine of the gospel required to be regulated with this view, that believers should be drawn off from all pride and haughtiness.

But what if any one should at the present day, by discoursing with some degree of elegance, adorn the doctrine of the gospel by eloquence? Would he deserve to be on that account rejected, as though he either polluted it or obscured Christ’s glory. I answer in the first place, that eloquence is not at all at variance with the simplicity of the gospel, when it does not merely not disdain to give way to it, and be in subjection to it, but also yields service to it, as a handmaid to her mistress. For as Augustine says, “He who gave Peter a fisherman, gave also Cyprian an orator.” By this he means, that both are from God, notwithstanding that the one, who is much the superior of the other as to dignity, is utterly devoid of gracefulness of speech; while the other, who sits at his feet, is distinguished by the fame of his eloquence. That eloquence, therefore, is neither to be condemned nor despised, which has no tendency to lead Christians to be taken up with an outward glitter of words, or intoxicate them with empty delight, or tickle their ears with its tinkling sound, or cover over the cross of Christ with its empty show as with a veil; ⁸¹ but, on the contrary, tends to call us back to the native simplicity of the gospel, tends to exalt the simple preaching of the cross by voluntarily abasing itself, and, in fine, acts the part of a herald ⁸² to procure a hearing for those fishermen and illiterate persons, who have nothing to recommend them but the energy of the Spirit.

I answer secondly, that the Spirit of God, also, has an eloquence of his own, but of such a nature as to shine forth with a native luster peculiar to itself, or rather (as they say) intrinsic, more than with any adventitious ornaments. Such is the eloquence that the Prophets have, more particularly Isaiah, David, and Solomon. Moses, too, has a sprinkling of it. Nay farther, even in the writings of the Apostles, though they are more unpolished, there are notwithstanding some sparks of it occasionally emitted. Hence the eloquence that is suited to the Spirit of God is of such a nature that it does not swell with empty show, or spend itself in empty sound, but is solid and efficacious, and has more of substance than elegance.

Defender: 1Co 1:17

Paul did baptize believers, for this was a part of the great commission (Mat 28:19, Mat 28:20), but baptism, as this verse makes very clear, is not a part of the gospel. Therefore it is not a requisite of salvation, for it is by the gospel that men and women are saved (1Co 15:1, 1Co 15:2)."

TSK: 1Co 1:10

I beseech : 1Co 4:16; Rom 12:1; 2Co 5:20, 2Co 6:1, 2Co 10:1; Gal 4:12; Eph 4:1; Phm 1:9, Phm 1:10; 1Pe 2:11

by the : Rom 15:30; 1Th 4:1, 1Th 4:2; 2Th 2:1; 1Ti 5:21; 2Ti 4:1

that ye : Psa 133:1; Jer 32:39; Joh 13:34, Joh 13:35, Joh 17:23; Act 4:32; Rom 12:16, Rom 15:5, Rom 15:6; Rom 16:17; 2Co 13:11; Eph 4:1-7, Eph 4:31, Eph 4:32; Phi 1:27, Phi 2:1-4, Phi 3:16; 1Th 5:13; Jam 3:13-18; 1Pe 3:8, 1Pe 3:9

divisions : Gr. schisms, 1Co 11:18, 1Co 12:25; Mat 9:16; Mar 2:21; Joh 7:43, Joh 9:16, Joh 10:19 *Gr.

TSK: 1Co 1:11

it hath : 1Co 11:18; Gen 27:42, Gen 37:2; 1Sa 25:14-17

that there : 1Co 3:3, 1Co 6:1-7; Pro 13:10, Pro 18:6; 2Co 12:20; Gal 5:15, Gal 5:20,Gal 5:26; Phi 2:14; 1Ti 6:4; 2Ti 2:23-25; Jam 4:1, Jam 4:2

TSK: 1Co 1:12

this : 1Co 7:29, 1Co 15:50; 2Co 9:6; Gal 3:17

I am : 1Co 3:4-6, 1Co 3:21-23, 1Co 4:6

Apollos : 1Co 16:12; Act 18:24-28, Act 19:1

Cephas : 1Co 9:5, 1Co 15:5; Joh 1:42; Gal 2:9

TSK: 1Co 1:13

Christ : 2Co 11:4; Gal 1:7; Eph 4:5

Paul : 1Co 6:19, 1Co 6:20; Rom 14:9; 2Co 5:14, 2Co 5:15; Tit 2:14

or : 1Co 1:15, 1Co 10:2; Mat 28:19; Act 2:38, Act 10:48, Act 19:5

TSK: 1Co 1:14

thank : 1Co 1:4, 1Co 14:18; 2Co 2:14; Eph 5:20; Col 3:15, Col 3:17; 1Th 5:18; 1Ti 1:12; Phm 1:4

Crispus : Act 18:8

Gaius : Rom 16:23; 3Jo 1:1-4

TSK: 1Co 1:15

I : Joh 3:28, Joh 3:29, Joh 7:18; 2Co 11:2

TSK: 1Co 1:16

household : 1Co 16:15, 1Co 16:17; Act 16:15, Act 16:33

TSK: 1Co 1:17

not to : Joh 4:2; Act 10:48, Act 26:17, Act 26:18

not : 1Co 2:1, 1Co 2:4, 1Co 2:13; 2Co 4:2, 2Co 10:3, 2Co 10:4, 2Co 10:10; 2Pe 1:16

words : or, speech, 1Co 2:5

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: 1Co 1:10

Now I beseech you, brethren - In this verse the apostle enters on the discussion respecting the irregularities and disorders in the church at Corinth, of which he had incidentally heard; see 1Co 1:11. The first of which he had incidentally learned, was that which pertained to the divisions and strifes which had arisen in the church. The consideration of this subject occupies him to 1Co 1:17; and as those divisions had been caused by the influence of phi osophy, and the ambition for distinction, and the exhibition of popular eloquence among the Corinthian teachers, this fact gives occasion to him to discuss that subject at length 1Co 1:17-31; in which he shows that the gospel did not depend for its success on the reasonings of philosophy, or the persuasions of eloquence. This part of the subject he commences with the language of entreaty. "I beseech you, brethren"- the language of affectionate exhortation rather than of stern command. Addressing them as his brethren, as members of the same family with himself, he conjures them to take all proper measures to avoid the evils of schism and of strife.

By the name - By the authority of his name; or from reverence for him as the common Lord of all.

Of our Lord Jesus Christ - The reasons why Paul thus appeals to his name and authority here, may be the following:

(1) Christ should be regarded as the Supreme Head and Leader of all his church. It was improper, therefore, that the church should be divided into portions, and its different parts enlisted under different banners.

(2) "the whole family in heaven and earth should be named"after him Eph 3:15, and should not be named after inferior and subordinate teachers. The reference to "the venerable and endearing name of Christ here, stands beautifully and properly opposed to the various human names under which they were so ready to enlist themselves"- Doddridge. "There is scarcely a word or expression that he (Paul) makes use of, but with relation and tendency to his present main purpose; as here, intending to abolish the names of leaders they had distinguished themselves by, he beseeches them by the name of Christ, a form that I do not remember he elsewhere uses"- Locke.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 he prime and leading thing which Christ had enjoined upon his church was union and mutual love Joh 13:34; Joh 15:17, and for this he had most earnestly prayed in his memorable prayer; Joh 17:21-23. It was well for Paul thus to appeal to the name of Christ - the sole Head and Lord of his church, and the friend of union, and thus to rebuke the divisions and strifes which had arisen at Corinth.

That ye all speak the same thing - "That ye hold the same doctrine"- Locke. This exhortation evidently refers to their holding and expressing the same religious sentiments, and is designed to rebuke that kind of contention and strife which is evinced where different opinions are held and expressed. To "speak the same thing"stands opposed to speaking different and conflicting things; or to controversy, and although perfect uniformity of opinion cannot be expected among people on the subject of religion any more than on other subjects, yet on the great and fundamental doctrines of Christianity, Christians may be agreed; on all points in which they differ they may evince a good spirit; and on all subjects they may express their sentiments in the language of the Bible, and thus "speak the same thing."

And that there be no divisions among you - Greek, σχίσματα schismata , "schisms."No divisions into contending parties and sects. The church was to be regarded as one and indivisible, and not to be rent into different factions, and ranged under the banners of different leaders; compare Joh 9:16; 1Co 11:18; 1Co 12:25.

But that ye be perfectly joined together - ἦτε δὲ κατηρτισμένοι ēte de katērtismenoi . The word used here and rendered "perfectly joined together,"denotes properly to restore, mend, or repair that; which is rent or disordered Mat 4:21; Mar 1:19, to amend or correct that which is morally evil and erroneous Gal 6:1, to render perfect or complete Luk 6:40, to fit or adapt anything to its proper place so that it shall be complete in all its parts, and harmonious, Heb 11:5; and thence to compose and settle controversies, to produce harmony and order. The apostle here evidently desires that they should be united in feeling; that every member of the church should occupy his appropriate place, as every member of a well proportioned body, or part of a machine has its appropriate place and use; see his wishes more fully expressed in 1Co. 12:12-31.

In the same mind - νοΐ̀ noi ; see Rom 15:5. This cannot mean that they were to be united in precisely the same shades of opinion, which is impossible - but that their minds were to be disposed toward each other with mutual good will, and that they should live in harmony. The word here rendered "mind,"denotes not merely the intellect itself, but that which is in the mind - the thoughts, counsels, plans; Rom 11:34; Rom 14:5; 1Co 2:16; Col 2:18. Bretschneider.

And in the same judgment - γνώμη gnōmē . This word properly denotes science, or knowledge; opinion, or sentiment; and sometimes, as here, the purpose of the mind, or will. The sentiment of the whole is, that in their understandings and their volitions, they should be united and kindly disposed toward each other. Union of feeling is possible even where people differ much in their views of things. They may love each other much, even where they do not see alike. They may give each other credit for honesty and sincerity, and may be willing to suppose that others "may be right,"and "are honest"even where their own views differ. The foundation of Christian union is not so much laid in uniformity of intellectual perception as in right feelings of the heart. And the proper way to produce union in the church of God, is not to begin by attempting to equalize all intellects on the bed of Procrustes, but to produce supreme love to God, and elevated and pure Christian love to all who bear the image and the name of the Redeemer.

Barnes: 1Co 1:11

For it hath been declared unto me - Of the contentions existing in the church at Corinth, it is evident that they had not informed him in the letter which they had sent; see 1Co 7:1, compare the introduction. He had incidentally heard of their contentions.

My brethren - A token of affectionate regard, evincing his love for them, and his deep interest in their welfare, even when he administered a needed rebuke.

Of the house of Chloe - Of the family of Chloe. It is most probable that Chloe was a member of the church at Corinth, some of whose family had been at Ephesus when Paul was, and had given him information of the state of things there. Who those members of her family were, is unknown. Grotius conjectures that they were Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, mentioned in 1Co 16:17, who brought the letter of the church at Corinth to Paul. But of this there is no certain evidence; perhaps not much probability. If the information had been obtained from them, it is probable that it would have been put in the letter which they bore. The probability is that Paul had received this information before they arrived.

Barnes: 1Co 1:12

Now this I say - This is what I mean; or, I give this as an instance of the contentions to which I refer.

That every one of you saith - That you are divided into different factions, and ranged under different leaders. The word translated "that" ὅτι hoti might be translated here, "because,"or "since,"as giving a reason for his affirming 1Co 1:11 that there were contentions there. "Now I say that there are contentions, because you are ranged under different leaders,"etc. - Calvin.

I am of Paul - It has been doubted whether Paul meant to affirm that the parties had actually taken the names which he here specifies, or whether he uses these names as illustrations, or suppositions, to show the absurdity of their ranging themselves under different leaders. Many of the ancient interpreters supposed that Paul was unwilling to specify the real names of the false teachers and leaders of the parties, and that he used these names simply by way of illustration. This opinion was grounded chiefly on what he says in 1Co 4:6, "And these things, brethren, I have ‘ in a figure’ transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes,"etc. But in this place Paul is not referring so particularly to the factions or parties existing in the church, as he is to the necessity of modesty and humility; and in order to enforce this, he refers to himself and Apollos to show that even those most highly favored should have a low estimate of their importance, since all their success depends on God; see 1Co 3:4-6.

It can scarcely be doubted that Paul here meant to say that there were parties existing in the church at Corinth, who were called by the names of himself, of Apollos, of Cephas, and of Christ. This is the natural construction; and this was evidently the information which he had received by those who were of the family of Chloe. Why the parties were ranged under these leaders, however, can be only a matter of conjecture. Lightfoot suggests that the church at Corinth was composed partly of Jews and partly of Gentiles; see Acts 18. The Gentile converts, he supposes, would range themselves under Paul and Apollos as their leaders; and the Jewish under Peter and Christ. Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, and Peter particularly the apostle to the Jews Gal 2:7; and this circumstance might give rise to the division. Apollos succeeded Paul in Achaia, and labored successfully there; see Act 18:27-28. These two original parties might be again sub-divided. A part of those who adhered to Paul and Apollos might regard Saul with chief veneration, as being the founder of the church as the instrument of their conversion, as the chief apostle, as signally pure in his doctrine and manner; and a part might regard Apollos as the instrument of their conversion, and as being distinguished for eloquence. It is evident that the main reason why Apollos was regarded as the head of a faction was on account of his extraordinary eloquence, and it is probable that his followers might seek particularly to imitate him in the graces of popular elocution.

And I of Cephas, Peter; - compare Joh 1:42. He was regarded particularly as the apostle to the Jews; Gal 2:7. He had his own speciality of views in teaching, and it is probable that his teaching was not regarded as entirely harmonious with that of Paul; see Gal 2:11-17. Paul had everywhere among the Gentiles taught that it was not necessary to observe the ceremonial laws of Moses; and, it is probable, that Peter was regarded by the Jews as the advocate of the contrary doctrine. Whether Peter had been at Corinth is unknown. If not, they had heard of his name, and character; and those who had come from Judea had probably reported him as teaching a doctrine on the subject of the observance of Jewish ceremonies unlike that of Paul.

And I of Christ - Why this sect professed to be the followers of Christ, is not certainly known. It probably arose from one of the two following causes:

(1)    Either that they had been in Judea and had seen the Lord Jesus, and thus regarded themselves as particularly favored and distinguished: or,

(2)    More probably because they refused to call themselves by any inferior leader, and wished to regard Christ alone as their head, and possibly prided themselves on the belief that they were more conformed to him than the other sects.

Barnes: 1Co 1:13

Is Christ divided? - Paul, in this verse, proceeds to show the impropriety of their divisions and strifes. His general argument is, that Christ alone ought to be regarded as their head and leader, and that his claims, arising from his crucifixion, and acknowledged by their baptism, were so pre-eminent that they could not be divided, and the honors due to him should not be rendered to any other. The apostle, therefore, asks, with strong emphasis, whether Christ was to be regarded as divided? Whether this single Supreme Head and Leader of the church, had become the head of different contending factions? The strong absurdity of supposing that, showed the impropriety of their ranging themselves under different banners and leaders.

Was Paul crucified for you? - This question implies that the crucifixion of Christ had an influence in saving them which the sufferings of no other one could have, and that those sufferings were in fact the speciality which distinguished the work of Christ, and rendered it of so much value. The atonement was the grand, crowning work of the Lord Jesus. It was through this that all the Corinthian Christians had been renewed and pardoned. That work was so pre-eminent that it could not have been performed by another. And as they had all been saved by that alone; as they were alike dependent on his merits for salvation, it was improper that they should be torn into contending factions, and ranged under different leaders. If there is anything that will recall Christians of different names and of contending sects from the heat of strife, it is the recollection of the fact that they have been purchased by the same blood, and that the same Saviour died to redeem them all. If this fact could be kept before their minds, it would put an end to angry strife everywhere in the church, and produce universal Christian love.

Or were ye baptized in the name of Paul - Or, "into,"or "unto"the name of Paul; see the note at Mat 28:19. To be baptized "into,"or "unto"anyone is to be devoted to him, to receive and acknowledge him as a teacher, professing to receive his rules, and to be governed by his authority - Locke. Paul here solemnly reminds them that their baptism was an argument why they should not range themselves under different leaders. By that, they had been solemnly and entirely devoted to the service of the only Saviour. "Did I ever,"was the implied language of Paul, "baptize in my own name? Did I ever pretend to organize a sect, announcing myself as a leader? Have not I always directed you to that Saviour into whose name and service you have been baptized?"It is remarkable here, that Paul refers to himself, and not to Apollos or Peter. He does not insinuate that the claims of Apollos or Peter were to be disparaged, or their talents and influence to be undervalued, as a jealous rival would have done; but he numbers himself first, and alone, as having no claims to be regarded as a religious leader among them, or the founder of a sect. Even he, the founder of the church, and their spiritual father, had never desired or intended that they should call themselves by his name; and he thus showed the impropriety of their adopting the name of any man as the leader of a sect.

Barnes: 1Co 1:14

I thank God ... - Why Paul did not himself baptize, see in 1Co 1:17. To him it was now a subject of grateful reflection that he had not done it. He had not given any occasion for the suspicion that he had intended to set himself up as a leader of a sect or party.

But Crispus - Crispus had been the chief ruler of the synagogue at Corinth; Act 18:8.

And Gaius - Gaius resided at Corinth, and at his house Paul resided when he wrote the Epistle to the Romans; Rom 16:23. It is also possible that the Third Epistle of John was directed to this man; see 3Jo 1:1. And if so, then probably Diotrephes 3Jo 1:9, who is mentioned as one who loved "to have the pre-eminence,"had been one cause of the difficulties at Corinth. The other persons at Corinth had been probably baptized by Silas and Timothy.

Barnes: 1Co 1:15

Lest any should say - Lest any of those who had been baptized should pervert his design, and say that Paul had baptized them unto himself; or, lest any others should, with any appearance of truth, say that he had sought to make disciples to himself. The Ethiopic version renders this, "that ye should not say we were baptized in his name."Many of the ancient mss. read this, "test any should say that ‘ ye were baptized’ into my name."Mill.

Barnes: 1Co 1:16

And I baptized also the household - The family. Whether there were any infants in the family, does not appear. It is certain that the family was among the first converts to Christianity in Achaia, and that it had evinced great zeal in aiding those who were Christians; see 1Co 16:15 - From the manner in which Paul mentions this, it is probable that Stephanas did not reside at Corinth when he was baptized, though he might have subsequently removed there. "I baptized none ‘ of you’ 1Co 1:14. - that is, none of those who permanently dwelt at Corinth, or who were members of the original church there, but Crispus and Gaius - but I baptized also the family of Stephanas, ‘ now’ of your number"- Or it may mean, "I baptized none of you ‘ who are adult members of the church,’ but Crispus and Gains, though I also baptized the ‘ family’ of Stephanas. If this be the true interpretation, then it forms an argument to prove that Paul practiced household baptism, or the baptism of the families of those who were themselves believers. Or the expression may simply indicate a recollection of the true circumstances of the case - a species of correction of the statement in 1Co 1:14, "I recollect now also that I baptized the family of Stephanas."

Household - οἶκον oikon . The house; the family. The word comprises the whole family, including adults, domestics, slaves, and children. It includes:

(1)    The men in a house, Act 7:10; 1Ti 3:4-5, 1Ti 3:12;

(2)    "Domestics,"Act 10:2; Act 11:14; Act 16:15, Act 16:31; 1Ti 3:4;

(3)    "The family"in general; Luk 10:5; Luk 16:27.

Bretschneider. It was the custom, doubtless, for the apostles to baptize the entire "household,"whatever might be the age, including domestics, slaves, and children. The head of a family gave up the entire "household"to God.

(That adult domestics and slaves were baptized without personal profession or other evidence of faith, is incredible. The word οἶκον oikon indeed includes domestics as well as children, out while the latter must have been admitted on the profession of their parents, it is reasonable to suppose that the former would be received solely on their own.)

Of Stephanas - Who Stephanas was, is not known. The Greek commentators say that he was the jailor of Philippi, who, after he had been baptized Act 16:33, removed with his family to Corinth. But of this there is no certain evidence.

Besides - Besides these.

I know not ... - I do not know whether I baptized any others who are now members of that church. Paul would, doubtless, recollect that he had baptized others in other places, but he is speaking here particularly of Corinth. This is not to be urged as an argument against the inspiration of Paul, for:

(1)    It was not the design of inspiration to free the memory from defect in ordinary transactions, or in those things which were not to be received for the instruction of the church;

(2)    The meaning of Paul may simply be, "I know not who of the original members of the church at Corinth may have removed, or who may have died; I know not who may have removed to Corinth from other places where I have preached and baptized, and consequently I cannot know whether I may not have baptized some others of your present number."It is evident, however, that if he had baptized any others, the number was small.

Barnes: 1Co 1:17

For Christ sent me not to baptize - That is, not to baptize as my main business. Baptism was not his principal employment, though be had a commission in common with others to administer the ordinance, and occasionally did it. The same thing was true of the Saviour, that he did not personally baptize, Joh 4:2. It is probable that the business of baptism was entrusted to the ministers of the church of inferior talents, or to those who were connected with the churches permanently, and not to those who were engaged chiefly in traveling from place to place. The reasons of this may have been:

(1) That which Paul here suggests, that if the apostles had themselves baptized, it might have given occasion to strifes, and the formation of parties, as those who had been baptized by the apostles might claim some superiority over those who were not.

\caps1 (2) i\caps0 t is probable that the rite of baptism was preceded or followed by a course of instruction adapted to it, and as the apostles were traveling from place to place, this could be better entrusted to those who were to be with them as their ordinary religious teachers. It was an advantage that those who imparted this instruction should also administer this ordinance.

\caps1 (3) i\caps0 t is not improbable, as Doddridge supposes, that the administration of this ordinance was entrusted to inferiors, because it was commonly practiced by immersion, and was attended with some trouble and inconvenience, while the time of the apostles might be more directly occupied in their main work.

But to preach the gospel - As his main business; as the leading, grand purpose of his ministry. This is the grand object of all ministers. It is not to build up a sect or party; it is not to secure simply the baptism of people in this or that communion; it is to make known the glad tidings of salvation, and call people to repentance and to God.

Not with wisdom of words - ( οὐκ ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου ouk en sophia logou ). Not in wisdom of speech, margin. The expression here is a Hebraism, or a form of speech common in the Hebrew writings, where a noun is used to express the meaning of an adjective, and means "not in wise words or discourse."The wisdom mentioned here, refers, doubtless, to that which was common among the Greeks, and which was so highly valued. It included the following things:

(1) Their subtle and learned mode of disputation, or that which was practiced in their schools of philosophy.

\caps1 (2) a\caps0 graceful and winning eloquence; the arts by which they sought to commend their sentiments, and to win others to their opinions. On this also the Greek rhetoricians greatly valued themselves, and this, probably, the false teachers endeavored to imitate.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 hat which is elegant and finished in literature, in style and composition. On this the Greeks greatly valued themselves, as the Jews did on miracles and wonders; compare 1Co 1:22. The apostle means to say, that the success of the gospel did not depend on these things; that he had not sought them; nor had he exhibited them in his preaching. His doctrine and his manner had not been such as to appear wise to the Greeks; and he had not depended on eloquence or philosophy for his success. Longinus (on the Sublime) enumerates Paul among people distinguished for eloquence; but it is probable that he was not distinguished for the graces of manner (compare 2Co 10:1, 2Co 10:10), so much as the strength and power of his reasoning.

Paul here introduces a new subject of discourse, which he pursues through this and the two following chapters - the effect of philosophy on the gospel, or the estimate which ought to be formed in regard to it. The reasons why he introduces this topic, and dwells upon it at such a length, are not perfectly apparent. They are supposed to have been the following:

(1) He had incidentally mentioned his own preaching, and his having been set apart particularly to that; 1Co 1:17.

\caps1 (2) h\caps0 is authority, it is probable, had been called in question by the false teachers at Corinth.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 he ground of this, or the reason why they undervalued him, had been probably, that he had not, evinced the eloquence of manner and the graces of oratory on which they so much valued themselves.

\caps1 (4) t\caps0 hey had depended for their success on captivating the Greeks by the charms of graceful rhetoric and the refinements of subtle argumentation.

(5) In every way, therefore, the deference paid to rhetoric and philosophy in the church, had tended to bring the pure gospel into disrepute; to produce faction; and to destroy the authority of the apostle. It was necessary, therefore, thoroughly to examine the subject, and to expose the real influence of the philosophy on which they placed so high a value.

Lest the cross of Christ - The simple doctrine that Christ was crucified to make atonement for the sins of people. This was the speciality of the gospel; and on this doctrine the gospel depended for success in the world.

Should be made of none effect - Should be rendered vain and ineffectual. That is, lest the success which might attend the preaching of the gospel should be attributed to the graces of eloquence, the charms of language, or the force of human argumentation, rather than to its true cause, the preaching of Christ crucified; or lest the attempt to recommend it by the charms of eloquence should divert the attention from the simple doctrines of the cross, and the preaching be really vain. The preaching of the gospel depends for its success on the simple power of its truths, borne by the Holy Spirit to the hearts of people; and not on the power of argumentation, and the charms of eloquence. To have adorned the gospel with the charms of Grecian rhetoric, would have obscured its wisdom and efficacy, just as the gilding of a diamond would destroy its brilliancy. True eloquence, and real learning and sound sense, are not to be regarded as valueless; but their use in preaching is to convey the truth with plainness; to fix the mind on the pure gospel; and to leave the conviction on the heart that this system is the power of God. The design of Paul here cannot be to condemn true eloquence and just reasoning, but to rebuke the vain parade, and the glittering ornaments, and dazzling rhetoric which were objects of so much esteem in Greece. A real belief of the gospel, a simple and natural statement of its sublime truths, will admit of, and prompt to, the most manly and noble kind of eloquence. The highest powers of mind, and the most varied learning, may find ample scope for the illustration and the defense of the simple doctrines of the gospel of Christ. But it does not depend for its success on these, but on its pure and heavenly truths, borne to the mind by the agency of the Holy Spirit.

Poole: 1Co 1:10

By the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, is as much as, by Christ, by the authority of Christ, for this is his will; or, by the love which you bear to the Lord Jesus Christ, who hath so often recommended to you peace with, and brotherly love towards, one another.

That ye all speak the same thing; that in matters of doctrine you all speak the same thing (for it is capable of no other sense); and that you neither be divided in sentiments or opinions, nor yet in affection, that there may be no divisions among you; which is also further evidenced by the last phrase, being joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. A union in affection is the necessary and indispensable duty of all those that are the disciples of Christ, and such a duty as not only concerns Christians of the same nation, with relation one to another, but also Christians of all nations, and may be attained, if by our lusts we do not hinder it. A union in opinion, as to the fundamental truths of religion, is (though not so easy, yet) what the church of God hath in a great measure arrived at. But for a union in every particular proposition of truth, is not a thing to be expected, though we all are to labour for it: God hath neither given unto all the same means, nor the same natural capacities.

Poole: 1Co 1:11

The apostle cometh to show one reason, as why he wrote to them, so also why in the preceding verse he so zealously pressed unity upon them, because of an information he had received from some of the family of Chloe; for it is far more probable that Chloe was the name of a person, head of a family in Corinth, than of a city or town.

There are contentions among you: what their divisions were about, the next verses will tell us.

Poole: 1Co 1:12

Every one here signifieth no more than many of you, or several of you; so 1Co 14:26 : from whence, those that think they have such a mighty argument from Heb 2:9 , where is the same particle to prove Christ’ s dying for all individuals, may undeceive themselves, and find that they have need of better arguments to prove their assertion.

I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ: we may from hence observe, that the divisions amongst the Corinthians were not in matters of faith, but occasioned from their having men’ s persons in admiration. This was probably caused either from God’ s making of Paul the instrument of some of their conversion, Apollos the instrument of others’ conversion, and Peter the instrument of others’ , or else from the difference of their gifts. Of this Apollos we read, Act 18:24 ; he was a Jew of Alexandria, who (as may be seen there, 1Co 1:28 ) mightily convinced they, and that publicly, and probably was as useful to the Corinthians. One minister of Christ may be justly preferred to another. We ought to honour those most whom God most honoureth, either by a more plentiful giving out of his Spirit, or by a more plentiful success upon their labours; but we ought not so far to appropriate any ministers to ourselves, as for them to despise others. We are not bound to make every minister our pastor, but we are bound to have a just respect for every minister, who by his doctrine and holy life answereth his profession and holy calling.

Poole: 1Co 1:13

How came these parties? There is but one Christ, but one that was crucified for you, but one into whose name, into a faith in whom, and a profession of whom, you were baptized. Peter baptized you into the name of Christ, so did I; I did not list those whom I baptized under any banner of my own, but under Christ’ s banner. The Head is but one, and the body ought not to be divided.

Poole: 1Co 1:14

Concerning the apostle’ s baptizing Crispus we read, Act 18:8 ; he was the chief ruler of the synagogue of the Jews: why Paul thanks God that he baptized not many, he tells us, 1Co 1:15 .

Poole: 1Co 1:15

Because by that providence of God it so fell out, that very few of them could pretend any such thing, as that he had baptized any in his own name.

Poole: 1Co 1:16

He correcteth himself, remembering that he also baptized the household of Stephanas, which (1Co 16:15 ) he calleth the first-fruits of Achaia, a family that had addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints. Besides, I know not whether I baptized any other; he did not remember that he had baptized any more at Corinth, though it is very probable he had baptized many more in other parts of the world, where he had been travelling.

Poole: 1Co 1:17

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel; baptism was not his principal work, not the main business for which Paul was sent; it was his work, otherwise he would not have baptized Crispus, or Gaius, or the household of Stephanas, but preaching was his principal work. It is very probable others (besides the apostles) baptized. It is hard to conceive how three thousand should in a day be added to the church, if Peter had baptized them all, Act 2:41 . The apostle goes on, telling us how he preached the gospel, and thereby instructing all faithful ministers how they ought to preach.

Not with wisdom of words, or speech. Wisdom of words must signify either what we call rhetoric, or logic, delivering the mysteries of the gospel in lofty, tunable expressions, or going about to evidence them from rational demonstrations and arguments. This was the way (he saith) to have taken away all authority from the doctrine of the cross of Christ: Divine faith being nothing else but the soul’ s assent to the Divine revelation because it is such, is not furthered, but hindered, by the arguing the object of it from the principles of reason, and the colouring of it with high-flown words and trim phrases. There is a decent expression to be used in the communicating the will of God unto men; but we must take heed that we do not diminish the authority of God’ s revealed will, either by puerile flourishings of words, or philosophical argumentation.

Haydock: 1Co 1:10

That there is no schism....contentions, &c. To hinder these, was the chief design of this letter; one saying, I am of Paul, &c. each party bragging of their master by whom they had been baptized, and made Christians. I am of Apollo, the eloquent preacher, and I of Cephas, the head of the apostles, and of the whole Church; whilst others, the only party not to be blamed, contented themselves with saying, and I am of Christ. ---

Is Christ divided? Is not your salvation, is not your justification in baptism, and all gifts from him? (Witham)

Haydock: 1Co 1:11

Of Chloe. It is worthy our observation, that St. Paul does not here mention any one person in particular, lest he might expose any one to the resentment of the rest, but mentions only in general terms the house of Chloe. (St. John Chrysostom; Theophylactus)

Haydock: 1Co 1:12

Chloe was a Christian woman of Corinth. Apollo is the person mentioned, Acts xviii. 24. &c. Cephas is St. Peter, so called in the Syriac tongue. (Bible de Vence)

Haydock: 1Co 1:13

Was Paul crucified for you? Though says St. Augustine brothers may die for brothers, yet the blood of no martyr is shed for the remission of a brother's sin. See also St. Leo the Great, serm. xii. de pass. Dom.

Haydock: 1Co 1:14

I give God thanks that I baptized none of you, but, &c. It is strange that Quakers should from hence pretend, that St. Paul condemned baptism, when he only tells them, he is glad they were baptized by some other, rather than by him, lest they should say, they were baptized in his name, or think that baptism had a greater virtue, when given by a minister of greater sanctity; whereas it is Christ only, who is the chief minister, who gives grace in baptism, and in the other sacraments. This makes him say, was Paul crucified for you, &c. He tells them the occasion why he baptized few, because he was sent chiefly to preach and to be their apostle, whereas other inferior ministers were employed in baptizing. (Witham)

Haydock: 1Co 1:17

Not to baptize. That is, the first and principal intent, in my vocation to the apostleship, was to preach the gospel, before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel. (Acts chap. ix. 15.) To baptize is common to all, but to preach is peculiarly the function of an apostle. (Estius; Menochius; Grotius) ---

I was sent to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of speech, and as he says in the next chapter, (ver. 13.) not in the persuasive words of human wisdom, &c. The Spirit of God, which guided the thoughts and pen of St. Paul, and the other sacred writers, inspired them to deliver the gospel-truths with great simplicity, without the ornaments of an artificial human eloquence, lest the cross of Christ should be made void, lest the conversion of the world might be attributed to any human means, and not to the power of God, and of Christ crucified. (Witham)

Gill: 1Co 1:10

Now I beseech you, brethren,.... The apostle having observed the many favours and blessings bestowed on this church, proceeds to take notice of the divisions and contentions which were fomented in it; and in the most kind and tender manner entreats them to take every proper step to prevent schisms among them: he does not use his apostolical power and authority, or lay his injunctions and commands upon them, which he might have done, but most affectionately beseeches them; styling them brethren, as they were in a spiritual relation, being children of the same Father, members of the same body, and partakers of the same grace, and is a reason why they should not fail out by the way: and this obsecration is made

by the name of the Lord Jesus; which he wisely judged must have its weight and influence on many of them, to whom that name must be dear and precious, and which they called upon and were called by; and shows, that he was not acting in his own name, and seeking his own profit; but was concerned in and for the name of Christ, and for his honour and interest, which lay at stake by their contentions. His earnest request to them is,

that ye speak the same thing; profess the same truths, and express them in the same words; which shows the lawfulness, yea, necessity and usefulness, of confessions and articles of faith, being made and agreed to by members of churches; and which should be drawn up in a form of sound words, and abode by; for the introducing of new words and phrases is often the means of bringing in new doctrines, and of raising great contentions and animosities; wherefore using the same words to express truth by is a very proper and prudent expedient to prevent them:

and that there be no divisions, or schisms

among you; which are generally made by innovations in doctrine, or worship; by forming new schemes of religion, new articles of faith, and modes of discipline: but

that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment; which regards not only the sameness of love and affection, to one another, being, as the first Christians were, of one heart and of one soul; but their agreement in their judgments and sentiments, of both doctrine and discipline; and such an entire harmony and symmetry among them, as in the members of the body, where each member and bone being in their proper place, exactly answer to, and tally with each other; and which is the most effectual way to speak the same things, and so bar against all schisms and divisions; and such an agreement is absolutely necessary to the peace, comfort, and well being of a church; for how should "two", and much less more, "walk together", unless they are "agreed?" Amo 3:3.

Gill: 1Co 1:11

For it hath been declared unto me, of you, my brethren,.... Lest the above advice of the apostle should be thought to be impertinent and needless, and to proceed upon groundless suspicions and jealousies of his, he signifies that he not only had some broad hints of their contentions and divisions, but the whole affair was laid open, and made manifest to him: the thing was a clear point to him; he had no reason at all to doubt of the truth of it; nor could they deny it, the proof was so strong, the evidence so full, being given

by them which are of the house of Chloe. Some take Chloe to be the name of a place; a city so called is said to have been in Cappadocia; but it seems rather to have been the name of a woman. Horace ^b several times makes mention of a woman of this name, and so does Martial ^c. Pausanias ^d calls the goddess Ceres by it, the goddess of husbandry; the word signifying green grass of the field. The person the apostle speaks of was one that very probably lived at Corinth, and was a member of the church there, and at the head of a family of great worth and credit; who being grieved at the growing animosities, and disturbances there raised, wrote to the apostle, and gave him a distinct account of them, desiring him to use his interest to put a stop to them. He mentions this family by name, to show that he had not took up an idle tale, and received reports from anybody, nor from a single person only, but from a family of repute among them; and who could have no other views in the relation of it to him, than the good of the church, and the glory of God: and what they had made out clearly to him was,

that there are contentions among you; about their ministers, as appears afterward, as well as about opinions in doctrines, and ceremonies in worship, which occasioned undue heats, and great indecencies, tending to make rents and schisms among them,

Gill: 1Co 1:12

Now this I say that everyone of you saith,.... This the apostle affirms not upon his own personal knowledge, but upon the credit of the report the house of Chloe had made unto him; and his meaning is not that every individual member of this church, but that many of them, and the far greater number of them, were in the following factions, some being for one minister, and some for another: one part of them said,

I am of Paul; he had been instrumental in their conversion: he had baptized some of them, and first laid the foundation of a Gospel church among them; was a solid, brave, and bold preacher of the Gospel, and was set for the defence of it; wherefore he was the minister for them, and they were desirous of being called and distinguished by his name: but there was another party that said,

and I of Apollos; in opposition to Paul, whom they despised, as a man whose aspect was mean; his bodily presence weak, made no figure in the pulpit; his speech low and contemptible; his discourses plain, not having that flow of words, and accuracy of expression, as Apollos had; who was an eloquent man, and mighty in the Scriptures, who coming to Corinth after the Apostle Paul, many were taken with his way of preaching; he was the preacher for them, and they chose to be called after him, and in distinction from others: whilst another company of them said,

and I of Cephas; or Peter, in opposition both to Paul and Apollos; who with them were new upstart ministers, in comparison of Peter, who was with Christ from the beginning, and saw his miracles, and heard his doctrines; and, besides, had the apostleship and Gospel of the circumcision, on which account they highly valued him; for these must be supposed to be the converted Jews among them, who still retained a regard to the ceremonies of the law; wherefore they fixed on Peter as their minister, and to be called by his name: but others said,

and I of Christ; which some take to be the words of the apostle, declaring who he was of, and for, and belonged unto; intimating that they, as he, should call no man father, or master, on earth, or be called by any other name than that of Christ. Others consider them as the words of the Corinthians, a small part of them who were very mean and contemptible, and therefore mentioned last, who chose to be known and called by no other name than that of Christians; but I rather think that these design a faction and party, to be condemned as the others. These were for Christ, in opposition to Paul, Apollos, and Cephas, and any other ministers of the word. They were for Christ without his ministers; they were wiser than their teachers; they were above being under any ministrations and ordinances; as the others attributed too much to the ministers of the Gospel, these detracted too much from them, and denied them to be of any use and service. Some persons may be, in such sense, for Christ, as to be blame worthy; as when they use his name to deceive men, or divide his interest.

Gill: 1Co 1:13

Is Christ divided?.... Some read the words as an assertion, "Christ is divided"; that is, his body, the church, is divided by such factions and parties; though in some copies μη, the note of interrogation, is put before the clause, and so to be rendered, "is Christ divided?" no; his human body was not to be divided; a bone of him was not to be broken, Joh 19:36; the seamless garment he wore was not to be rent asunder, Joh 19:23; nor is his mystical body, the church, to be torn in pieces by schisms and divisions; nor is anyone part of his Gospel different from, or opposite to another part of it; his doctrine is the same as preached by one minister and another, and is all of a piece, uniform and harmonious. Christ is not divided from his Father, not in nature; though he is to be distinguished from him, yet not to be divided; he is one in nature with him, though he is a distinct person from him; nor is he, nor can he, or will be ever separated from him; nor is he to be divided from him in his works and actions, with whom he was jointly concerned in creation, providence, and grace; and such are to be blamed as dividers of Christ from the Father, who talk of Christ to the exclusion of the Father, or to the dropping and neglect of any of his acts of grace; as his everlasting love to his chosen ones, the eternal election of them in Christ, the covenant of grace made with him, and the instance of his grace in the gift and mission of his Son: nor is Christ divided from himself, not in his nature and person; the two natures, human and divine, are united in one person; they are to be distinguished, and not to be confounded, yet not to be separated as to wake two distinct persons: nor in his offices; a whole Christ is to be received; Christ in his kingly as well as in his priestly office; to claim him as a Saviour and disown him as a King, is dishonourable to him; it is to make one end of his death void, as much as in such lies, which is, that he may be Lord of dead and living; and argues a carnal selfish spirit, and that faith in him is not right: such are to be blamed for being for Christ, and as dividers of him, who talk of being saved by him, and yet would not have him to rule over them. Nor is he divided from his Spirit, not from the person of the Spirit; he is to be distinguished from him as a person, but is one in nature with him; nor from his gifts and graces, which he has as man and Mediator without measure; nor from the work of the Spirit; for it is his grace the Spirit of God implants in the hearts of men: it comes from him, it centres in him, it makes men like him, and glorifies him; such who cry up Christ, and cry down the work of his Spirit upon the soul, are to be blamed for being for Christ, and to be reckoned dividers of them as much as in them lies: nor is Christ divided from his church and people; there is a close union between them, and he dwells in them, and among them; and they are to be blamed that talk of Christ, and never meet with his saints in public service and worship: nor is he divided from his ministers, word, and ordinances; Christ is the sum of the ministry of the word; the ordinances are instituted by him; he submitted to them himself, and is the substance of them, and has promised his presence in them to the end of the world: and what God has put together, let no man put asunder,

Was Paul crucified for you? no; he had taught them another doctrine; namely, that Christ was crucified for them, that he died for their sins, and had bought them with the price of his own blood; and therefore they were not to be the servants of men, or to call any man master, or to be called by his name, or any other man's, only by Christ's, who had redeemed them by his blood; so that they were not their own, nor any other's, but his, and ought to glorify him with their souls and bodies, which were his,

Or were ye baptized in the name of Paul; no; but in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. The apostle did not pretend to be the author of a new revelation, or the propagator of a new religion, but was a preacher of the Gospel, and an administrator of the ordinances of Christ; wherefore he baptized not in his own name, but in the name of Christ: to whose worship and service such as are baptized are devoted, and not to the service of men, and therefore not to be called after their names.

Gill: 1Co 1:14

I thank God that I baptized none of you,.... The Alexandrian copy and the Syriac version read, "I thank my God"; not that the apostle disliked the ordinance of baptism, or the administration of it; and much less that he thought it criminal, or an evil in him to perform it; nor was he at any time displeased at the numbers of persons who desired it of him; but on the contrary rejoiced where proper subjects of it were brought to a submission to it; but inasmuch as some persons in the church at Corinth made such an ill use of his having baptized them, he was greatly thankful that it was so ordered in providence, that the far greater part of them were baptized by other ministers, either by those who were with him, or came after him; and that he baptized none of them with his own hands,

but Crispus and Gaius. The former of these was the chief ruler of the Jewish synagogue at Corinth, who hearing the apostle, and believing in Christ, was baptized by him, Act 18:8 and the latter was a very liberal and hospitable man, and was the apostle's host, whilst he was at Corinth; see Rom 16:23.

Gill: 1Co 1:15

Lest any should say that I had baptized in my own name. The Alexandrian copy, and some others, and the Vulgate Latin version, read, "lest anyone should say that ye were baptized in my name"; and the Ethiopic version renders it, "that ye might not say we have been baptized in his name". This gives the true reason why the apostle was so thankful he had baptized no more of the members of this church, lest either some should reproach him, as having done it in his own name, and as seeking his own honour and interest; or lest others should affect, from their being baptized by him, to be called by his name, as if he was the author and patron of a new sect.

Gill: 1Co 1:16

And I also baptized the household of Stephanas,.... The same name with "Stephanios", or "Stephanio" in Pliny ^e. Before he says he had baptized none but Crispus and Gaius; but recollecting things, he corrects himself, and observes, that he had also baptized the household of Stephanas, who by the Greek writers is thought to be the same with the jailer baptized by the apostle at Philippi, but was now removed from thence to Corinth, and was become a famous and useful man there. No argument can be formed from the baptism of his household in favour of infant baptism, since it must be first proved that he had any infants in his family, and that these were baptized; and if his household and the jailer's are the same, it is certain that his household were such who were capable of having the word of God spoke to them, and who actually did believe in God. And if they were not the same, yet it is clear that this household of Stephanas consisted of adult, converted, and very useful persons; they were the firstfruits of Achaia, and had addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints, 1Co 16:15.

Besides, that is, the above mentioned persons,

I know not whether I baptized any other; meaning at Corinth, for he might have baptized, and doubtless did baptize many more in other places, for anything that is here said to the contrary: of this he would not be positive; for though he might fully know, and well remember, on recollection, who, and how many, were baptized by him with his own hands there, yet he could not tell but that some persons might have removed thither, and become members of the church in that place, who had been baptized by him elsewhere,

Gill: 1Co 1:17

For Christ sent me not to baptize,.... Some think the apostle refers to his particular mission from Christ, Act 26:16 in which no mention is made of his administering the ordinance of baptism; but no doubt he had the same mission the rest of the apostles had, which was to baptize as well as preach; and indeed, if he had not been sent at all to baptize, it would have been unlawful for him to have administered baptism to any person whatever; but his sense is, that baptism was not the chief and principal business he was sent about; this was to be done mostly by those preachers of the word who travelled with him, or followed after him: he was not sent so much about this work,

but to preach the Gospel; for which he was most eminently qualified, had peculiar gifts for the discharge of it, and was greatly useful in it. This was what he was rather sent to do than the other, and this "not with wisdom of words". Scholastic divinity, or the art of disputation, is by the ^f Karaites, a sect among the Jews, called חכמת הדברים, "wisdom of words": this the apostle seems to refer to, and signifies he was not sent with, or to preach, with words of man's wisdom, with human eloquence and oratory, with great swelling words of vanity, but in a plain, humble, modest manner; on which account the false teachers despised him, and endeavoured to bring his ministry into contempt with others: but this way and manner of preaching he chose for this reason,

lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect; that is, either lest men's ears and fancies should be so tickled and pleased with the eloquence of speech, the elegancy of diction, and accuracy of expression, the cadency of words, and beauty of the oration, with the manner, and not with the matter of preaching, and so the true use, end, and design of the doctrine of a crucified Christ be defeated; or lest the success of the ministry should be attributed to the force of enticing words, and the strength and persuasion of oratory, and not to the energy of divine power attending the doctrine of the cross,

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: 1Co 1:10

¹ tn Grk “brothers,” but the Greek word may be used for “brothers and sisters” or “fellow Christians” as here (cf. BDAG 18 s.v. ἀδελφός 1, where considerable nonbiblical evidence for the plural ἀδελφοί [adelfoi] meaning “brothers and sisters” is cited).

² tn Grk “that you all say the same thing.”

³ tn Grk “that there be no divisions among you.”

⁴ tn Grk “that you be united in/by the same mind and in/by the same purpose.”

NET Notes: 1Co 1:11

¹ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:10.

² tn Or “rivalries, disputes.”

NET Notes: 1Co 1:12

¹ tn Or “And I say this because.”

NET Notes: 1Co 1:13

¹ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here the tag is “was he?”).

² tn This third question marks a peak in which Paul’s incredulity at the Corinthians’ attitude is in focus. The words “in fact” have been supplied in the translation to make this rhetorical juncture clear.

NET Notes: 1Co 1:14

¹ tc The oldest and most important witnesses to this text, as well as a few others (א* B 6 1739 sa^ms bo^pt), lack the words τῷ θεῷ (tw qew, “God”), while the rest have them. An accidental omission could well account for the shorter reading, especially since θεῷ would have been written as a nomen sacrum (eucaristwtwqMw). However, one might expect to see, in some mss at least, a dropping of the article but not the divine name. Internally, the Pauline introductory thanksgivings elsewhere always include τῷ θεῷ after εὐχαριστῶ (eucaristw, “I thank”; cf. Rom 1:8; 1 Cor 1:4; Phil 1:3; Phlm 4; in the plural, note Col 1:3; 1 Thess 1:2). However, both the fact that this is already used in 1 Cor 1:4 (thus perhaps motivating scribes to add it ten verses later), and that in later portions of his letters Paul does not consistently use the collocation of εὐχαριστῶ with τῷ θεῷ (Rom 16:4; 1 Cor 10:30), might give one pause. Still, nowhere else in the corpus Paulinum do we see a sentence begin with εὐχαριστῶ without an accompanying τῷ θεῷ. A decision is difficult, but on balance it is probably best to retain the words.

NET Notes: 1Co 1:17

¹ tn Grk “would not be emptied.”

Geneva Bible: 1Co 1:10

^{( 12 )} Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ^{( 13 )} ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be ^{( i )} perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

^{( 12 )} Having made an end of the preface, he comes to the matter itself, beginning with a most grave testimony, as though they should hear Christ himself speaking, and not Paul.

^{( 13 )} The first part of this epistle, in which his purpose is found, to call back the Corinthians to brotherly harmony, and to take away all occasion of discord. So then this first part concerns the taking away of divisions. Now a division occurs when men who otherwise agree and consent together in doctrine, yet separate themselves from one another.

^{( i )} Knit together, as a body that consists of all its parts, fitly knit together.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 1:11

^{( 14 )} For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them [which are of the house] of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

^{( 14 )} He begins his reprehension and chiding by taking away an objection, because he understood from good witnesses that there were many factions among them. And in addition he declares the cause of dissentions, because some depended on one teacher, some on another, and some were so addicted to themselves that they neglected all teachers and learned men, calling themselves the disciples of Christ alone, completely ignoring their teachers.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 1:12

Now ^{( k )} this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

^{( k )} The matter I would say to you is this.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 1:13

^{( 15 )} Is Christ divided? was ^{( 16 )} Paul crucified for you? or were ye ^{( 17 )} baptized in the name of Paul?

^{( 15 )} The first reason why divisions ought to be avoided: because Christ seems by that means to be divide and torn in pieces, who cannot be the head of two different and disagreeing bodies, being himself one.

^{( 16 )} Another reason: because they cannot without great injury to God so depend on men as on Christ: which thing those no doubt do who allow whatever some man speaks, and do it for their own sakes: as these men allowed one and the very same Gospel being uttered by one man, and did loathe it being uttered by another man. So that these factions were called by the names of their teachers. Now Paul sets aside his own name, not simply to grieve no man, but also to show that he does not plead his own cause.

^{( 17 )} The third reason taken from the form and end of baptism, in which we make a promise to Christ, calling also on the name of the Father, and the Holy Spirit. Therefore although a man does not fall from the doctrine of Christ, yet if he depends upon certain teachers, and despises others, he forsakes Christ: for if he holds Christ as his only master, he would hear him, no matter who Christ taught by.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 1:14

^{( 18 )} I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

^{( 18 )} He protests that he speaks so much the more boldly of these things, because through God's providence, he is void of all suspicion of gathering disciples to himself, and taking them from others. By which we may understand, that not the scholars only, but the teachers also are here reprehended, who gathered flocks separately and for themselves.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 1:17

^{( 19 )} For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: ^{( 20 )} not with ^{( l )} wisdom of words, lest the ^{( 21 )} cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

^{( 19 )} The taking away of an objection: that he gave not himself to baptize many amongst them: not for the contempt of baptism, but because he was mainly occupied in delivering the doctrine, and committed those that received his doctrine to others to be baptized. And so he declared sufficiently how far he was from all ambition: whereas on the other hand they, whom he reprehends, as though they gathered disciples to themselves and not to Christ, bragged most ambitiously of numbers, which they had baptized.

^{( 20 )} Now he turns himself to the teachers themselves, who pleased themselves in brave and glory-seeking eloquence, to the end that they might draw more disciples after them. He openly confesses that he was not similar to them, opposing gravely, as it became an apostle, his example against their perverse judgments: so that this is another place in this epistle with regard to the observing of a godly simplicity both in words and sentences in teaching the Gospel.

^{( l )} With eloquence: which Paul casts off from himself not only as unnecessary, but also as completely contrary to the office of his apostleship: and yet Paul had this kind of eloquence, but it was heavenly, not of man, and void of fancy words.

^{( 21 )} The reason why he did not use the pomp of words and fancy speech: because it was God's will to bring the world to his obedience by that way, by which the most foolish among men might understand that this work was done by God himself, without the skill of man. Therefore as salvation is set forth to us in the Gospel by the cross of Christ, which nothing is more contemptible than, and more far from life, so God would have the manner of the preaching of the cross, most different from those means with which men do use to draw and entice others, either to hear or believe: therefore it pleased him by a certain kind of most wise folly, to triumph over the most foolish wisdom of the world, as he had said before by Isaiah that he would. And by this we may gather that both these teachers who were puffed up with ambitious eloquence, and also their hearers, strayed far away from the goal and mark of their calling.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: 1Co 1:1-31

1 After his salutation and thanksgiving,

10 he exhorts them to unity,

12 and reproves their dissensions.

18 God destroys the wisdom of the wise,

21 by the foolishness of preaching;

26 and calls not the wise, mighty, and noble,

28 but the foolish, weak, and men of no account.

MHCC: 1Co 1:10-16

In the great things of religion be of one mind; and where there is not unity of sentiment, still let there be union of affection. Agreement in the greater things should extinguish divisions about the lesser. There will be perfect union in heaven, and the nearer we approach it on earth, the nearer we come to perfection. Paul and Apollos both were faithful ministers of Jesus Christ, and helpers of their faith and joy; but those disposed to be contentious, broke into parties. So liable are the best things to be corrupted, and the gospel and its institutions made engines of discord and contention. Satan has always endeavoured to stir up strife among Christians, as one of his chief devices against the gospel. The apostle left it to other ministers to baptize, while he preached the gospel, as a more useful work.

MHCC: 1Co 1:17-25

Paul had been bred up in Jewish learning; but the plain preaching of a crucified Jesus, was more powerful than all the oratory and philosophy of the heathen world. This is the sum and substance of the gospel. Christ crucified is the foundation of all our hopes, the fountain of all our joys. And by his death we live. The preaching of salvation for lost sinners by the sufferings and death of the Son of God, if explained and faithfully applied, appears foolishness to those in the way to destruction. The sensual, the covetous, the proud, and ambitious, alike see that the gospel opposes their favourite pursuits. But those who receive the gospel, and are enlightened by the Spirit of God, see more of God's wisdom and power in the doctrine of Christ crucified, than in all his other works. God left a great part of the world to follow the dictates of man's boasted reason, and the event has shown that human wisdom is folly, and is unable to find or retain the knowledge of God as the Creator. It pleased him, by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe. By the foolishness of preaching; not by what could justly be called foolish preaching. But the thing preached was foolishness to wordly-wise men. The gospel ever was, and ever will be, foolishness to all in the road to destruction. The message of Christ, plainly delivered, ever has been a sure touchstone by which men may learn what road they are travelling. But the despised doctrine of salvation by faith in a crucified Saviour, God in human nature, purchasing the church with his own blood, to save multitudes, even all that believe, from ignorance, delusion, and vice, has been blessed in every age. And the weakest instruments God uses, are stronger in their effects, than the strongest men can use. Not that there is foolishness or weakness in God, but what men consider as such, overcomes all their admired wisdom and strength.

Matthew Henry: 1Co 1:10-13

Here the apostle enters on his subject.

I. He extorts them to unity and brotherly love, and reproves them for their divisions. He had received an account from some that wished them well of some unhappy differences among them. It was neither ill-will to the church, nor to their ministers, that prompted them to give this account; but a kind and prudent concern to have these heats qualified by Paul's interposition. He writes to them in a very engaging way: " I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; if you have any regard to that dear and worthy name by which you are called, be unanimous. Speak all the same thing; avoid divisions or schisms "(as the original is), "that is, all alienation of affection from each other. Be perfectly joined together in the same mind, as far as you can. In the great things of religion be of a mind: but, when there is not a unity of sentiment, let there be a union of affections. The consideration of being agreed in greater things should extinguish all feuds and divisions about minor ones."

II. He hints at the origin of these contentions. Pride lay at the bottom, and this made them factious. Only of pride cometh contention, Pro 13:10. They quarrelled about their ministers. Paul and Apollos were both faithful ministers of Jesus Christ, and helpers of their faith and joy: but those who were disposed to be contentious broke into parties, and set their ministers at the head of their several factions: some cried up Paul, perhaps as the most sublime and spiritual teacher; others cried up Apollos, perhaps as the most eloquent speaker; some Cephas, or Peter, perhaps for the authority of his age, or because he was the apostle of the circumcision; and some were for none of them, but Christ only. So liable are the best things in the world to be corrupted, and the gospel and its institutions, which are at perfect harmony with themselves and one another, to be made the engines of variance, discord, and contention. This is no reproach to our religion, but a very melancholy evidence of the corruption and depravity of human nature. Note, How far will pride carry Christians in opposition to one another! Even so far as to set Christ and his own apostles at variance, and make them rivals and competitors.

III. He expostulates with them upon their discord and quarrels: " Is Christ divided? No, there is but one Christ, and therefore Christians should be on one heart. Was Paul crucified for you? Was he your sacrifice and atonement? Did I ever pretend to be your saviour, or any more than his minister? Or, were you baptized in the name of Paul? Were you devoted to my service, or engaged to be my disciples, by that sacred rite? Did I challenge that right in you, or dependence from you, which is the proper claim of your God and Redeemer?"No; ministers, however instrumental they are of good to us, are not to be put in Christ's stead. They are not to usurp Christ's authority, nor encourage any thing in the people that looks like transferring his authority to them. He is our Saviour and sacrifice, he is our Lord and guide. And happy were it for the churches if there were no name of distinction among them, as Christ is not divided.

Matthew Henry: 1Co 1:14-16

Here the apostle gives an account of his ministry among them. He thanks God he had baptized but a few among them, Crispus, who had been a ruler of a synagogue at Corinth (Act 18:8), Gaius, and the household of Stephanas, besides whom, he says, he did not remember that he had baptized any. But how was this a proper matter for thankfulness? Was it not a part of the apostolical commission to baptize all nations? And could Paul give thanks to God for his own neglect of duty? He is not to be understood in such a sense as if he were thankful for not having baptized at all, but for not having done it in present circumstances, lest it should have had this very bad construction put upon it - that he had baptized in his own name, made disciples for himself, or set himself up as the head of a sect. He left it to other ministers to baptize, while he set himself to more useful work, and filled up his time with preaching the gospel. This, he thought, was more his business, because the more important business of the two. He had assistants that could baptize, when none could discharge the other part of his office so well as himself. In this sense he says, Christ sent him not to baptize, but to preach the gospel - not so much to baptize as to preach. Note, Ministers should consider themselves sent and set apart more especially to that service in which Christ will be most honoured and the salvation of souls promoted, and for which they are best fitted, though no part of their duty is to be neglected. The principal business Paul did among them was to preach the gospel (1Co 1:17), the cross (1Co 1:18), Christ crucified, 1Co 1:23. Ministers are the soldiers of Christ, and are to erect and display the banner of the cross. He did not preach his own fancy, but the gospel - the glad tidings of peace, and reconciliation to God, through the mediation of a crucified Redeemer. This is the sum and substance of the gospel. Christ crucified is the foundation of all our joys. By his death we live. This is what Paul preached, what all ministers should preach, and what all the saints live upon.

Matthew Henry: 1Co 1:17-31

We have here,

I. The manner in which Paul preached the gospel, and the cross of Christ: Not with the wisdom of words (1Co 1:17), the enticing words of man's wisdom (1Co 2:4), the flourish of oratory, or the accuracies of philosophical language, upon which the Greeks so much prided themselves, and which seem to have been the peculiar recommendations of some of the heads of the faction in this church that most opposed this apostle. He did not preach the gospel in this manner, lest the cross of Christ should be of no effect, lest the success should be ascribed to the force of art, and not of truth; not to the plain doctrine of a crucified Jesus, but to the powerful oratory of those who spread it, and hereby the honour of the cross be diminished or eclipsed. Paul had been bred up himself in Jewish learning at the feet of Gamaliel, but in preaching the cross of Christ he laid his learning aside. He preached a crucified Jesus in plain language, and told the people that that Jesus who was crucified at Jerusalem was the Son of God and Saviour of men, and that all who would be saved must repent of their sins, and believe in him, and submit to his government and laws. This truth needed no artificial dress; it shone out with the greatest majesty in its own light, and prevailed in the world by its divine authority, and the demonstration of the Spirit, without any human helps. The plain preaching of a crucified Jesus was more powerful than all the oratory and philosophy of the heathen world.

II. We have the different effects of this preaching: To those who perish it is foolishness, but to those who are saved it is the power of God, 1Co 1:18. It is to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the Greeks foolishness; but unto those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God, 1Co 1:23, 1Co 1:24. 1. Christ crucified is a stumbling-block to the Jews. They could not get over it. They had a conceit that their expected Messiah was to be a great temporal prince, and therefore would never own one who made so mean an appearance in life, and died so accursed a death, for their deliverer and king. They despised him, and looked upon him as execrable, because he was hanged on a tree, and because he did not gratify them with a sign to their mind, though his divine power shone out in innumerable miracles. The Jews require a sign, 1Co 1:22. See Mat 12:38. 2. He was to the Greeks foolishness. They laughed at the story of a crucified Saviour, and despised the apostles' way of telling it. They sought for wisdom. They were men of wit and reading, men that had cultivated arts and sciences, and had, for some ages, been in a manner the very mint of knowledge and learning. There was nothing in the plain doctrine of the cross to suit their taste, nor humour their vanity, nor gratify a curious and wrangling temper: they entertained it therefore with scorn and contempt. What, hope to be saved by one that could not save himself! And trust in one who was condemned and crucified as a malefactor, a man of mean birth and poor condition in life, and cut off by so vile and opprobrious a death! This was what the pride of human reason and learning could not relish. The Greeks thought it little better than stupidity to receive such a doctrine, and pay this high regard to such a person: and thus were they justly left to perish in their pride and obstinacy. Note, It is just with God to leave those to themselves who pour such proud contempt on divine wisdom and grace. 3. To those who are called and saved he is the wisdom of God, and the power of God. Those who are called and sanctified, who receive the gospel, and are enlightened by the Spirit of God, discern more glorious discoveries of God's wisdom and power in the doctrine of Christ crucified than in all his other works. Note, Those who are saved are reconciled to the doctrine of the cross, and led into an experimental acquaintance with the mysteries of Christ crucified.

III. We have here the triumphs of the cross over human wisdom, according to the ancient prophecy (Isa 29:14): I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 1Co 1:19, 1Co 1:20, All the valued learning of this world was confounded, baffled, and eclipsed, by the Christian revelation and the glorious triumphs of the cross. The heathen politicians and philosophers, the Jewish rabbis and doctors, the curious searchers into the secrets of nature, were all posed and put to a nonplus. This scheme lay out of the reach of the deepest statesmen and philosophers, and the greatest pretenders to learning both among the Jews and Greeks. When God would save the world, he took a way by himself; and good reason, for the world by wisdom knew not God, 1Co 1:21. All the boasted science of the heathen world did not, could not, effectually bring home the world to God. In spite of all their wisdom, ignorance still prevailed, iniquity still abounded. Men were puffed up by their imaginary knowledge, and rather further alienated from God; and therefore it pleased him, by the foolishness of preaching, to save those that believe. By the foolishness of preaching - not such in truth, but in vulgar reckoning.

1. The thing preached was foolishness in the eyes of worldly-wise men. Our living through one who died, our being blessed by one who was made a curse, our being justified by one who was himself condemned, was all folly and inconsistency to men blinded with self-conceit and wedded to their own prejudices and the boasted discoveries of their reason and philosophy.

2. The manner of preaching the gospel was foolishness to them too. None of the famous men for wisdom or eloquence were employed to plant the church or propagate the gospel. A few fishermen were called out, and sent upon this errand. These were commissioned to disciple the nations: these vessels chosen to convey the treasure of saving knowledge to the world. There was nothing in them that at first view looked grand or august enough to come from God; and the proud pretenders to learning and wisdom despised the doctrine for the sake of those who dispensed it. And yet the foolishness of God is wiser than men, 1Co 1:25. Those methods of divine conduct that vain men are apt to censure as unwise and weak have more true, solid, and successful wisdom in them, than all the learning and wisdom that are among men: " You see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called, 1Co 1:26, etc. You see the state of Christianity; not many men of learning, or authority, or honourable extraction, are called."There is a great deal of meanness and weakness in the outward appearance of our religion. For, (1.) Few of distinguished character in any of these respects were chosen for the work of the ministry. God did not choose philosophers, nor orators, nor statesmen, nor men of wealth and power and interest in the world, to publish the gospel of grace and peace. Not the wise men after the flesh, though men would apt to think that a reputation for wisdom and learning might have contributed much to the success of the gospel. Not the mighty and noble, however men might be apt to imagine that secular pomp and power would make way for its reception in the world. But God seeth not as man seeth. He hath chosen the foolish things of the world, the weak things of the world, the base and despicable things of the world, men of mean birth, of low rank, of no liberal education, to be the preachers of the gospel and planters of the church. His thoughts are not as our thoughts, nor his ways as our ways. He is a better judge than we what instruments and measures will best serve the purposes of his glory. (2.) Few of distinguished rank and character were called to be Christians. As the teachers were poor and mean, so generally were the converts. Few of the wise, and mighty, and noble, embraced the doctrine of the cross. The first Christians, both among Jews and Greeks, were weak, and foolish, and base; men of mean furniture as to their mental improvements, and very mean rank and condition as to their outward estate; and yet what glorious discoveries are there of divine wisdom in the whole scheme of the gospel, and in this particular circumstance of its success!

IV. We have an account how admirably all is fitted, 1. To beat down the pride and vanity of men. God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise - men of no learning to confound the most learned; the weak things of the world to confound the might - men of mean rank and circumstances to confound and prevail against all the power and authority of earthly kings; and base things, and things which are despised - things which men have in the lowest esteem, or in the utmost contempt, to pour contempt and disgrace on all they value and have in veneration; and things which are not, to bring to nought ( to abolish ) things that are - the conversion of the Gentiles (of whom the Jews had the most contemptuous and vilifying thoughts) was to open a way to the abolishing of that constitution of which they were so fond, and upon which they valued themselves so much as for the sake of it to despise the rest of the world. It is common for the Jews to speak of the Gentiles under this character, as things that are not. Thus, in the apocryphal book of Esther, she is brought in praying that God would not give his sceptre to those who are not, Esth. 14:11. Esdras, in one of the apocryphal books under his name, speaks to God of the heathen as those who are reputed as nothing, 2 Esdras 6:56, 57. And the apostle Paul seems to have this common language of the Jews in his view when he calls Abraham the father of us all before him whom he believed, God, who calleth those things that are not as though they were, Rom 4:17. The gospel is fitted to bring down the pride of both Jews and Greeks, to shame the boasted science and learning of the Greeks, and to take down that constitution on which the Jews valued themselves and despised all the world besides, that no flesh should glory in his presence (1Co 1:29), that there might be no pretence for boasting. Divine wisdom alone had the contrivance of the method of redemption; divine grace alone revealed it, and made it known. It lay, in both respects, out of human reach. And the doctrine and discovery prevailed, in spite of all the opposition it met with from human art or authority: so effectually did God veil the glory and disgrace the pride of man in all. The gospel dispensation is a contrivance to humble man. But, 2. It is as admirably fitted to glorify God. There is a great deal of power and glory in the substance and life of Christianity. Though the ministers were poor and unlearned, and the converts generally of the meanest rank, yet the hand of the Lord went along with the preachers, and was mighty in the hearts of the hearers; and Jesus Christ was made both to ministers and Christians what was truly great and honourable. All we have we have from God as the fountain, and in and through Christ as the channel of conveyance. He is made of God to us wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption (1Co 1:30): all we need, or can desire. We are foolishness, ignorant and blind in the things of God, with all our boasted knowledge; and he is made wisdom to us. We are guilty, obnoxious to justice; and he is made righteousness, our great atonement and sacrifice. We are depraved and corrupt; and he is made sanctification, the spring of our spiritual life; from him, the head, it is communicated to all the members of his mystical body by his Holy Spirit. We are in bonds, and he is made redemption to us, our Saviour and deliverer. Observe, Where Christ is made righteousness to any soul, he is also made sanctification. He never discharges from the guilt of sin, without delivering from the power of it; and he is made righteousness and sanctification, that he may in the end be made complete redemption, may free the soul from the very being of sin, and loose the body from the bonds of the grave: and what is designed in all is that all flesh may glory in the Lord, 1Co 1:31. Observe, It is the will of God that all our glorifying should be in the Lord: and, our salvation being only through Christ, it is thereby effectually provided that it should be so. Man is humbled, and God glorified and exalted, by the whole scheme.

Barclay: 1Co 1:10-17

Paul begins the task of mending the situation which had arisen in the Church at Corinth. He was writing from Ephesus. Christian slaves who belonged to the establishment of a lady called Chloe had had occasion to visit Corinth and they had come back with a sorry tale of dissension and disunity.

Twice Paul addresses the Corinthians as brothers. As Beza, the old commentator said, "In that word too there lies hidden an argument." By the very use of the word Paul does two things. First, he softens the rebuke which is given, not as from a schoolmaster with a rod, but as from one who has no other emotion than love. Second, it should have shown them how wrong their dissensions and divisions were. They were brothers and they should have lived in brotherly love.

In trying to bring them together Paul uses two interesting phrases. He bids them to make up their differences. The phrase he uses is the regular one used of two hostile parties reaching agreement. He wishes them to be knit together, a medical word used of knitting together bones that have been fractured or joining together a joint that has been dislocated. The disunion is unnatural and must be cured for the sake of the health and efficiency of the body of the Church.

Paul identifies four parties in the Church at Corinth. They have not broken away from the Church; the divisions are as yet within it. The word he uses to describe them is schismata (4978), which is the word for rents in a garment. The Corinthian Church is in danger of becoming as unsightly as a torn garment. It is to be noted that the great figures of the Church who are named, Paul and Cephas and Apollos, had nothing to do with these divisions. There were no dissensions between them. Without their knowledge and without their consent their names had been appropriated by these Corinthian factions. It not infrequently happens that a man's so-called supporters are a bigger problem than his open enemies. Let us look at these parties and see if we can find out what they were standing for.

(i) There were those who claimed to belong to Paul. No doubt this was mainly a Gentile party. Paul had always preached the gospel of Christian freedom and the end of the law. It is most likely that this party were attempting to turn liberty into licence and using their new found Christianity as an excuse to do as they liked. Bultmann has said that the Christian indicative always brings the Christian imperative. They had forgotten that the indicative of the good news brought the imperative of the Christian ethic. They had forgotten that they were saved, not to be free to sin, but to be free not to sin.

(ii) There was the party who claimed to belong to Apollos. There is a brief character sketch of Apollos in Act 18:24. He was a Jew from Alexandria, an eloquent man and well versed in the scriptures. Alexandria was the centre of intellectual activity. It was there that scholars had made a science of allegorizing the scriptures and finding the most recondite meanings in the simplest passages. Here is an example of the kind of thing they did. The Epistle of Barnabas, an Alexandrian work, argues from a comparison of Gen 14:14and Gen 18:23that Abraham had a household of 318 people whom he circumcised. The Greek for 18--the Greeks used letters as symbols for numbers--is iota followed by eta, which are the first two letters of the name Jesus; and the Greek for 300 is the letter tau, which is the shape of the Cross; therefore this old incident is a foretelling of the crucifixion of Jesus on his Cross! Alexandrian learning was full of that kind of thing. Further, the Alexandrians were enthusiasts for literary graces. They were in fact the people who intellectualized Christianity. Those who claimed to belong to Apollos were, no doubt, the intellectuals who were fast turning Christianity into a philosophy rather than a religion.

(iii) There were those who claimed to belong to Cephas. Cephas is the Jewish form of Peter's name. These were most likely Jews; and they sought to teach that a man must still observe the Jewish law. They were legalists who exalted law, and, by so doing, belittled grace.

(iv) There were those who claimed to belong to Christ. This may be one of two things. (a) There was absolutely no punctuation in Greek manuscripts and no space whatever between the words. This may well not describe a party at all. It may be the comment of Paul himself. Perhaps we ought to punctuate like this: "I am of Paul; I am of Apollos; I am of Cephas--but I belong to Christ." It may well be that this is Paul's own comment on the whole wretched situation. (b) If that is not so and this does describe a party, they must have been a small and rigid sect who claimed that they were the only true Christians in Corinth. Their real fault was not in saying that they belonged to Christ, but in acting as if Christ belonged to them. It may well describe a little, intolerant, self-righteous group.

It is not to be thought that Paul is belittling baptism. The people he did baptize were very special converts. Stephanas was probably the first convert of all (1Co 16:15); Crispus had once been no less than the ruler of the Jewish synagogue at Corinth (Act 18:8); Gaius had probably been Paul's host (Rom 16:23). The point is this--baptism was into the name of Jesus.

That phrase in Greek implies the closest possible connection. To give money into a man's name was to pay it into his account. To sell a slave into a man's name was to give that slave into his undisputed possession. A soldier swore loyalty into the name of Caesar; he belonged absolutely to the Emperor. Into the name of implied utter possession. In Christianity it implied even more; it implied that the Christian was not only possessed by Christ but was in some strange way identified with him. All that Paul is saying is, "I am glad that I was so busy preaching, because if I had baptized it would have given some of you the excuse to say that you were baptized into my possession instead of into Christ's." He is not making little of baptism; he is simply glad that no act of his could be misconstrued as annexing men for himself and not for Christ.

It was Paul's claim that he set before men the Cross of Christ in its simplest terms. To decorate the story of the Cross with rhetoric and cleverness would have been to make men think more of the language than of the facts, more of the speaker than of the message. It was Paul's aim to set before men, not himself, but Christ in all his lonely grandeur.

Constable: 1Co 1:10--7:1

II. Conditions reported to Paul 1:10--6:20

The warm introduction to the epistle (1:1-9) led Paul to give a strong exhortation to unity. In it he expressed his reaction to reports of serious problems in this church that had reached his ears.

"Because Paul primarily, and in seriatim fashion, addresses behavioral issues, it is easy to miss the intensely theological nature of 1 Corinthians. Here Paul's understanding of the gospel and its ethical demands--his theology, if you will--is getting its full workout.

". . . the central issue in 1 Corinthians is salvation in Christ as that manifests itself in the behavior of those "who are being saved." This is what the Corinthians' misguided spirituality is effectively destroying.

"Thus three phenomena must be reckoned with in attempting a theology of this Letter: (1) Behavioral issues ( = ethical concerns) predominate. . . . (2) Even though Paul is clearly after behavioral change, his greater concern is with the theological distortions that have allowed, or perhaps even promoted, their behavior. This alone accounts for the unusual nature of so much of the argumentation. . . . (3) In every case but two (11:2-16; chaps. 12-14), Paul's basic theological appeal for right behavior is the work of Christ in their behalf."¹⁸

Constable: 1Co 1:10--5:1

A. Divisions in the church 1:10-4:21

The first major problem was the divisions that were fragmenting the assembly.

". . . this opening issue is the most crucial in the letter, not because their quarrels' were the most significant error in the church, but because the nature of this particular strife had as its root cause their false theology, which had exchanged the theology of the cross for a false triumphalism that went beyond, or excluded, the cross."¹⁹

Constable: 1Co 1:10-17

1. The manifestation of the problem 1:10-17

The surface manifestation of this serious problem was the party spirit that had developed. Members of the church were appreciating their favorite leaders too much and not appreciating the others enough. This was really a manifestation of self-exaltation. They boasted about their teachers of wisdom to boast about themselves.

1:10 By exhorting his readers in the name of their Lord Jesus Christ, Paul was putting what he was about to say on the highest level of authority. The Corinthians were to regard what he was about to say as coming from the Lord Himself.

"That the true source of the Corinthians' illicit behavior is bad theology--ultimately a misunderstanding of God and his ways--is evident from the beginning, especially with Paul's use of crucifixion language in 1:10-2:16."²⁰

There was already disagreement among members of the congregation, but there was not yet division in the sense of a church split. Paul urged his original readers to unite in their thinking. The Greek word katartizo, translated "made complete," describes the mending of nets in Mark 1:19. He wanted them to take the same view of things, to have the same mind (cf. Phil. 2:2), and to experience unanimity in their judgment of what they needed to do.

"The gospel that effects eschatological salvation also brings about a radical change in the way people live. This is the burden of this letter and the theological presupposition behind every imperative. Therefore, although apocalyptic-cosmological language is also found, salvation is expressed primarily in ethical-moral language.²¹

1:11 Today no one knows exactly who Chloe was. She evidently had a household or business that included servants some of whom had traveled to Corinth and had returned to Ephesus carrying reports of conditions in the Corinthian church. They had eventually shared this news with Paul. Quarrels and dissension should never mark the church (Gal. 5:20).

1:12 The Corinthians had overdone the natural tendency to appreciate some of God's servants more than others because of their own personal qualities or because of blessings they had imparted.

It was normal that some would appreciate Paul since he had founded the church and had ministered in Corinth with God's blessing for 18 months. Apollos had followed Paul there and was especially effective in refuting Jewish unbelievers and in showing that Jesus was the Messiah. He was a gifted apologist and orator (Acts 18:24-28).

There is no scriptural record that Peter ever visited Corinth, though he may have. Cephas is the Hellenized form of the Aramaic kepa, meaning "rock" (cf. John 1:42). Since Peter was the leading apostle to the Jews, it is understandable that many of the early Christians, especially the Jewish believers, would have venerated him. A fourth group apparently professed loyalty to no human leader but boasted of their allegiance to Christ alone. They appear to have regarded themselves as the most spiritual element in the church. They had devised their own brand of spiritual elitism that made them no better than the others.

1:13 This last group was using Christ as the name of a party within the church. This cut Him off from the other members of the church. Such an idea was unthinkable, and by stating it Paul showed its absurdity.

Next Paul addressed his own supporters. How foolish it was to elevate him over Christ since Christ did what was most important. Note the central importance of the Cross in Paul's thinking. His followers had not submitted to baptism in water to identify with Paul but with the Savior. This reference shows how highly Paul regarded water baptism. It is God's specified way for the believer to identify publicly with his or her Lord (Matt. 28:19; cf. Acts 8:16; 19:5; Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:27). It implies turning over allegiance to the one named in the rite.

1:14 Crispus was the ruler of the synagogue in which Paul preached when he first came to Corinth (Acts 18:8). Gaius may be the same person as Titius Justus. This man was a Gentile convert who lived next door to the synagogue and opened his home to the church after the Christians could no longer meet in the synagogue (Acts 18:7; Rom. 16:23).

"Gaius Titius Justus would be a complete Roman name (praenomen, nomen gentile, cognomen)."²²

Some Christians contend that water baptism is essential for salvation. If it is, it would seem natural that Paul would have emphasized its importance by personally baptizing more than just two new believers in Corinth (cf. John 4:2).

1:15 Paul deliberately did not baptize his converts so there would be no question as to whose disciples they were. This was one way he kept Christ central in his ministry. Paul believed baptism was important, but it was valid whether he or any other believer administered it. He was not superior to other believers in this respect.

1:16 The members of Stephanus' family were the first converts in the Roman province of Achaia (16:15). It was unimportant to Paul whom he personally baptized. This is clear because he temporarily forgot that he had baptized these people. As he continued to write, the Lord brought them to mind.

1:17 Obviously baptizing is part of the Great Commission that all Christians are responsible to carry out (Matt. 28:19). Paul's point was that preaching the gospel is more important than baptizing. He used a figure of speech, litotes, for emphasis.²³ He would hardly have said this if baptism was necessary for salvation.

"Cleverness of speech" (NASB) and "words of human wisdom" (NIV) greatly impressed the Greeks.

"The Greeks were intoxicated with fine words; and to them the Christian preacher with his blunt message seemed a crude and uncultured figure, to be laughed at and ridiculed rather than to be listened to and respected."²⁴

One of the features of Paul, Apollos, Peter, and Christ that made them attractive to various segments of the Corinthian church was evidently their individual oratorical styles. Later Paul pointed out that the Corinthian Christians were viewing things through carnal eyes, namely seeing things as unsaved people do (3:1-4). Paul did not emphasize or place confidence in the method of his preaching but the message of the Cross. He did not want to draw attention away from the gospel message to his style of delivering that message.

"Paul represents himself as a preacher, not as an orator. Preaching is the proclamation of the cross; it is the cross that is the source of its power."²⁵

This verse provides a transition into the next section of the epistle in which Paul contrasted God's wisdom and human wisdom.

"With this observation Paul is fully launched on his epistle. As in Romans (cf. i. 16 ff.), mention of the Gospel sets his thought and language in motion."²⁶

The crux of the Corinthians' party spirit lay in their viewing things as unbelievers did, specifically Christian preachers and teachers. They failed to see the important issues at stake in ministry and instead paid too much attention to external superficial matters. This was a serious condition, so Paul invested many words in the following section to deal with it (1:18-4:21).

College: 1Co 1:1-31

1 CORINTHIANS 1

I. INTRODUCTION (1:1-9)

A. SALUTATION (1:1-3)

¹ Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes,

² To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ - their Lord and ours:

³ Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

1:1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes.

Even though it is normal for Paul to use the self-designation "apostle" in his letters, the function and significance of the term apostle have deeper roots in 1 Corinthians than in most of Paul's other letters. This concept plays an important role in the issue of division in chapters 1-4, a role in the Pauline directives regarding the treatment of the weak by the strong in chapters 8-10, a tangential role in the discussion of spiritual matters, chapters 12-14, and an important part of the argument for the resurrection in 1 Cor 15. It is noteworthy that 1 Corinthians is a good example of a letter in which ambiguity exists about the exact meaning of the Greek term ajpovstolo", apostolos . While Paul obviously regards himself as an apostle, it is not always clear that he regarded himself as an Apostle in the same way as he regarded the Twelve (see 15:7, where "apostles" is used in a wider sense than the Twelve).

First Corinthians makes it clear that the term "called" (klhtov", klçtos) was not reserved for a select group of believers. While different believers were called to different tasks by God, all believers had received a call (1 Cor 1:2, 24). Quite naturally, Paul testified again and again in his letters that his call was by the will of God, an early hint that Paul's self-definition was rooted in a theocentric experience.

The name Sosthenes is found only twice in the New Testament, here and at Acts 18:17. Since Sosthenes is depicted as the co-sender of the letter he must have been with Paul in Ephesus. There is no firm evidence that this was the same individual, a non-Christian synagogue leader in Corinth, mentioned in Acts 18:17. Homiletical needs have tended to identify the two individuals, but there is nothing in their respective circumstances or the text of Scripture which requires this identification. It is noteworthy that the place of Sosthenes in 1 Corinthians recedes markedly after 1:1.

1:2 To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ - their Lord and ours:

Evidence for the beginning of the church of God in Corinth is given in Acts 18. The closeness of the concepts sanctified (from aJgiavzw, hagiazô) and holy (a{gio", hagios ) is not as clear in English as it is in Greek, where the two words are cognates.

The use of the phrase "church of God" for believers is one of several in the New Testament. This particular phrase reflects the Old Testament concept of the assembly of God. It is worth noting that many of the texts of 1 Corinthians that relate to what would be called Pauline ecclesiology reveal a distinctive theocentric perspective.

The term "everywhere" (Greek reads "in every place") need not be a reference to a public or formal assembly of believers. While the phrase "call on the name of the Lord" is often associated with initial salvation in the New Testament (Acts 2:21; 22:16; Rom 10:13) the text of 1 Cor 1:2, like 2 Tim 2:19 and numerous Old Testament texts (Gen 13:4; 21:33; 26:25; 1 Kings 18:24-25; 1 Chron 16:8; Ps 63:4; 99:6; 116:13, 17; Isa 12:4; Lam 3:55; Zeph 3:9), refers to those who are seeking God in prayer and pious devotion.

1:3 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

The salutation of grace and peace is found in numerous Pauline letters (Rom 1:7; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2; Phil 1:2; Col 1:2; 1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:2; 1 Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2; Titus 1:4; Phlm 1:3) and usually with the dual reference to God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

B. THANKSGIVING (1:4-9)

⁴ I always thank God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus. ⁵ For in him you have been enriched in every way - in all your speaking and in all your knowledge - ⁶ because our testimony about Christ was confirmed in you. ⁷ Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed. ⁸ He will keep you strong to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. ⁹ God, who has called you into fellowship with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, is faithful.

1:4 I always thank God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus.

As in many of his letters (Col 1:3; 1 Thess 1:2; 2 Thess 1:3; 2 Thess 2:13; Phlm 1:4), Paul here refers to his constant practice of thanking God in regard to his converts. The spiritual realities expressed in this verse follow the normal Pauline pattern of theocentric piety by making God the object of praise and thanksgiving, while Christ is seen as the agency or locus in which God has acted. Paul's own piety, in stark contrast to many later Protestant pietists, was centered on the primacy of God the Father. Trinitarian piety with its adoration of the Spirit was the result of Catholic orthodoxy established in the needs of later Councils. It is also important to observe, moreover, that Paul is not simply thanking God for the Corinthians, as though in spite of their many problems and sins, he was still patting them on the back. The NIV obfuscates what Paul made clear - his thanksgiving was concerning (periv, peri ) the Corinthians, not for the Corinthians. As O'Brien rightly observed, "In this thanksgiving there was no attention paid to the achievements of the Corinthians - and with good reason!"

What is clear throughout this thanksgiving summary is that Paul expresses thanks to God for what God has done and will do on behalf of the Corinthians. Verses 4-9 provide no evidence that Paul had in fact discovered some virtuous behavior among the Corinthians or that he was going to congratulate, to affirm, or to empower them on the basis of some ostensible goodness he found among their deeds. This summary of 1:4-9 is clearly focused on the actions of God the Father on behalf of the Corinthians, and it is God alone who is acknowledged as faithful (1:9).

In addition, there is a theme established in this summary which is not only an important perspective addressed to the Corinthians, but which is a frequent theme in the Pauline letters generally. This particular theme, highlighted by verbal links in Greek, is that gifts (cavrisma, charisma ) of God flow from the grace (cavri", charis ) of God.

Some English translations obscure Paul's point by breaking down his one Greek sentence of 1:4-8 and making it into four English sentences. One of the effects of this translation decision is that it blurs the grammatical and theological relationship between the grace ( charis ) given in 1:4 and the gifts ( charisma ) mentioned in 1:8. The Greek word w{ste (hôste, "therefore") in 1:7 begins a result clause and, in my judgment, is intended to highlight that the presence of gifts is a result of God's grace.

1:5 For in him you have been enriched in every way - in all your speaking and in all your knowledge -

The point Paul wants to make here is to express why he is so involved in always giving thanks to God (1:4); it is because (o{ti, hoti ) they have been enriched by God in all divine knowledge and in every proclamation. Interpreters vary in their judgment about whether Paul's intended focus in the reference to the enrichment of the Corinthians was the enrichment they experienced at the time of their conversion or later. Paul explicitly states that this enrichment took place "in him," which requires that it was at least available to the Corinthians since the time of their conversion to Christ. Moreover, the typical Pauline pattern in an epistolary thanksgiving section is to have a present tense "I/we give thanks" statement followed by verbs and participles in the present tense indicating contemporaneous activity (e.g., Rom 1:8; Phil 1:3; Col 1:3; 1 Thess 1:2; 2 Thess 1:3). In this light, we should be more sensitive to the significance of the aorist tense used by Paul in 1:5 as we wrestle with the event Paul had in mind. The two terms "speaking" (lovgo", logos ) and "knowledge" (gnw'si", gnôsis) have a variety of meanings not only in the Pauline corpus, but even within 1 Corinthians. The specific meaning Paul has for these two words in 1:5 will be found most likely by looking at 1:6 where he seems to continue his train of thought.

1:6 because our testimony about Christ was confirmed in you.

Paul clearly taught that the testimony about Christ preached by himself and others was verified and "confirmed" (from bebaiovw, bebaiôo and cognates, cf. Rom 4:16; 15:8; 1 Cor 1:6, 8; 2 Cor 1:21; Phil 1:7; Heb 2:3; 6:16; 13:9) in and among the Corinthians at Corinth. Paul here seems to be saying that the effect of this divine enrichment in Christ (Gr. aor. pass.) is similar to and especially evident in the past confirmation (Gr. aor. pass.) of the testimony about Christ among the Corinthians. Pentecostal and Charismatic interpreters, among others, tend to have the meaning of this verse supplemented by the reference to (spiritual) gifts in 1:7, so that Paul is interpreted as teaching that the spiritual gifts, as presented most clearly in 12-14, are the source of enrichment and confirmation of the message of Christ. Other scholars infer a non-charismatic reading of 1:7 by looking more at the evidence regarding the confirmation of the testimony about Christ in: (1) the conversion stories from Corinth in Acts 18, (2) Pauline use of Scripture as confirmation, (3) Christian proclamation, and, (4) Paul's references to the Spirit of sonship as providing confirming testimony. Since it seems that 1:6-7 refer to the reasons (o{ti, hoti ) for Paul's thanksgiving in 1:4 and that 1:7 (w{ste, hôste) refers to the intended results of receiving God's grace (1:4), I do not find convincing Fee's judgment that, "the clause (1:6) says that God himself confirmed Paul's witness to Christ among them by giving them these spiritual gifts, which is exactly what v. 7 will go on to reaffirm."

1:7 Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed.

God's grace always supplies the needs (not to be confused with the wants) of the saints that are necessary for them to implement God's agenda. The occurrence of the English phrase "spiritual gift" in 1:7 is potentially misleading since it reflects an embellishment of the Greek of 1:7. While admittedly all translations require the addition of words that were not in the original Greek text, translations do sometimes promote a particular doctrinal perspective not evident in the Greek text. With the charismatic domination of so much of contemporary Christian piety, it is important to point out that the use of the phrase "spiritual gift(s)" here, as often in 1 Corinthians, is not a translation of a corresponding Greek phrase. The following chart displays the translation tendency of the NIV in comparison with the evidence of the Greek text.

NIV Greek text

1:7 any spiritual gift gift charisma (lacks Greek word for spiritual)

12:1 about spiritual gifts spiritual pneumatikos (lacks Greek word for gift)

14:1 desire spiritual gifts spiritual pneumatikos (lacks Greek word for gift)

14:12 to have spiritual gifts spirit pneuma (lacks Greek word for gift and spiritual)

14:37 spiritually gifted spiritual pneumatikos (lacks Greek word for gift)

Verse 7 contains only the word gift (cavrisma, charisma ). Commentators such as John Calvin and Gordon Fee note that this use of gift in 1:7 may refer to the gift(s) of God associated with our salvation, rather than gifts as conventionally understood in chapters 12-14.

Situated on a spectrum of interpretations somewhere between the popular charismatic interpretation of gifts and the redemptive interpretation of gift, I would suggest that "gift" in 1:7 refers to gifts given by God to his people to facilitate their calling, but that Paul's definition, as demonstrated by his use of charisma in 1 Cor 7:7, would be broader than those stereotypical Pentecostal items such as tongues.

Verse 7 concludes on an eschatological note, with expectant language reminiscent of Rom 8:18-25; Phil 3:20; and Gal 5:5, and makes it clear that the giftedness of the Corinthian church would not cease prior to the return and revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul can hardly be faulted for not knowing that the church of God at Corinth would itself cease to exist (along with its gifts) long before the return of Christ. The quintessential giftedness of the church expressed here fits with other statements of Paul about the church. The reference to Christ's return also anticipates the significant role played by eschatological perspectives in the close of this thanksgiving section (1:8-9) as well as in the remainder of 1 Corinthians.

1:8 He will keep you strong to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The same disposition of God that confirmed the testimony about Christ among the saints (1:6) will also confirm the blamelessness of the saints themselves until the time of Christ's return.

The phrase "to the end" is a clarion reference to the return of Jesus Christ and implies that some of the original readers would remain "until the end." The vitality and pervasiveness of such eschatological conviction flow naturally from the pen of one who prays "Maranatha" (1 Cor 16:22). The doctrine of the blamelessness of believers (cf. Col 1:22) arises from the forensic imagery of accusations in the courtroom of God's justice and the culpability of his saints. This doctrinal concept is evident in the scenes of the judgment of God's priest in Zech 3, in the accusation against the saints in Rev 12, and in the accusation theme depicted in the rhetorical questions of Rom 8:33-34.

1:9 God, who has called you into fellowship with his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, is faithful.

Paul concludes the thanksgiving with two affirmations about the character and work of God. The faithfulness of God, a frequent doctrine in the Old Testament as well as in the Pauline Corpus, (cf. 10:13) is mentioned here by Paul to undergird the prior statement about the blamelessness of the saints. Calvin may have been correct when he observed that "it was important for Paul to write this to prevent them from being dejected when they came face to face with all the faults, that he will reveal to them later on [in 1 Corinthians]." In Paul's thinking the promise of the eschatological blamelessness of the saints rests securely on the conviction of God's steadfast loyalty (2 Tim 2:12-13).

Second, Paul reminds them that it was God who called them and who was the author of their spiritual standing, described by Paul as fellowship with his son, the Lord Jesus Christ. The primary function of 1:9 in the literary unit of his thanksgiving was to underscore the foundation of their eschatological security. Paul may well have hoped, however, that this reference to God as the author of fellowship with Christ would have also reduced some of the boasting about human agents such as Cephas and Paul. Paul wanted to diminish the role attributed to them in facilitating the establishment of fellowship which the Corinthians had with the Lord Jesus Christ.

II. DISUNITY AND COMMUNITY FRAGMENTATION (1:10-4:21)

A. As we approach the first major problem at Corinth, 1:10-4:21, it is appropriate to summarize what the general issues are in this section and what may have been their source. Fragmentation and schism are the issues that Paul is addressing in this first major block of instruction. In particular, the point of strife seems to be group loyalties to various Christian leaders within the Corinthian fellowship. It is anachronistic as well as counterproductive to the goals of exegesis to suggest that the division troubling the Corinthian church was similar to later ecclesiastical fragmentation which has characterized much of church history. Similarly, it is equally unfounded to impose a doctrinal framework of orthodoxy/heresy upon this division. All the evidence we have from the text suggests that the disunity is based upon a polarization of loyalties centering upon, but not necessarily engendered by, influential Christian leaders.

An attendant issue interwoven in these four chapters of the epistle is the matter of Corinthian disregard for Paul's own authority. Any interpretation of the first four chapters of 1 Corinthians must include this attendant issue. A natural consequence of party loyalties to Apollos and Cephas is that not everyone at Corinth will have an appropriate loyalty to Paul. Accordingly, a strategy that begins by attacking all party loyalty, even loyalty for Paul (1:12-16), shifts its focus first to an apology for Paul, then moves to a counterattack against Paul's detractors (4:1-13) and culminates with a demand for explicit loyalty to Paul over against other leaders at Corinth (4:14-21). This overview provides the best explanation for the fact that Paul employs the "I appeal" (parakalevw, parakalço) rhetorical device to address both divisions (1:10) and disloyalty to him (4:16). The recognition of this second facet of Paul's argument, namely its desire to solidify his apostolic authority rooted in God's calling rather than worldly preferences, clearly helps explain the dramatic shift in tone between 1:10-3:23 and 4:1-21.

B. The most natural explanation for the origin of this party loyalty problem comes directly from the urban context of Roman Corinth. Specifically, the fabric of Greco-Roman city life supplied the threads of strife and dissension woven into the life of the Corinthian church. Three realities of city life that could well have contributed are: (1) personal patronage - house churches, (2) philosopher-student loyalty, and (3) urban party loyalties. The social and economic infrastructure of this city, like all major Greco-Roman cities, was held together by a system of personal patronage and group loyalties. Every culture is based upon accepted social structures, group interaction and personal loyalties. Party spirit was a common fact of ancient city life and it was commented upon and lamented by more than one pagan author contemporary with early Christianity.

Thus, the phenomenon of divisions within the Christian community at Corinth arose quite organically from the social matrix of group interaction, social stratification, and urban alienation which existed in Corinth long before the arrival of the Gospel. The human soil from which the church of God at Corinth grew had been watered and cultivated for generations with party strife and loyalties.

A. DIVISIONS IN THE CHURCH (1:10-17)

1. Report Received by Paul (1:10-12)

¹⁰ I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. ¹¹ My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. ¹² What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas ^a"; still another, "I follow Christ."

^a 12 That is, Peter

1:10 I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.

Paul's use of the term "appeal" (parakalevw, parakalço) is striking for it was a term often used in ancient Greek documents to underscore the focal point and seriousness of a request. Paul's urgent petition to the Corinthians contains three points:

1. all of you agree with one another

2. there be no divisions among you

3. you be united in the same mind and same thought.

The insertion of the phrase "so that" by the NIV translation at 1:10 sounds a bit more like modern ecumenism than Paul's Greek text reads. Paul urgently petitions for the three conditions listed above, but never directly states that any one of them is predicated upon the other. Paul's statement is taken by some interpreters to teach that unity (no divisions among you) stems from uniformity (agree with one another), but that view of intrachurch relations is not taught explicitly in this text. Furthermore, while Paul is no stranger to making a doctrinal plea on the basis of the universal practice of the church (1 Cor 4:17), that type of appeal is interestingly absent in this part of Paul's argumentation.

The wording of 1:10 is sufficiently vague, but it is reasonable to assume that the first readers of his letter would have known quite well what particular manifestations of strife Paul had in mind. Generally speaking it is clear that the issues of uniform thought, judgment and agreement must have pertained to the divisiveness and polarization mentioned in 1:11-17. It is unfortunate that the NIV chose to leave untranslated the Greek word "for" (gavr, gar ) which occurs in 1:11, since this would make the logical connection between the petition of 1:10 and the evidence of 1:11 patent. Accordingly, the specific doctrinal content concerning which Paul was arguing for sameness was the centrality of Christ. The uniformity for which Paul is so earnestly arguing is a common loyalty to Christ which brings with it a dissolution of intrachurch strife. Even though strife and division were culturally acceptable consequences of patronage and personal loyalties, they were unacceptable to Paul and his theology of the corporate fellowship which they had in the Lord Jesus Christ.

1:11 My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you.

Paul identifies certain unnamed individuals from the household of Chloe as the source of his information concerning the quarrels and strife occurring among the Corinthian believers. Fee is of the opinion that Chloe and her household were Asian Christians and not members of the church in Corinth. Given this reconstruction, Chloe (a Christian woman) had sent some of her financial agents on business to Corinth and when they were there they discovered this problem of division and reported it to Paul on their return home to Ephesus. While it is true that Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus were representatives from the Corinthian church (16:15-18), this need not preclude there being others from Corinth, who were not leaders, who traveled to Ephesus from Corinth on occasion and could report to Paul. The brevity of the reference to Chloe suggests that all the Corinthian saints would have recognized sister Chloe, a more difficult scenario to imagine if she lived in Ephesus rather than Corinth.

1:12 What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas"; still another, "I follow Christ."

This one verse is as replete with exegetical and historical problems as any other single verse in 1 Corinthians. The following points, though admittedly not problem free, seem to rest upon the firmest evidence and most plausible historical reconstruction.

A. In light of the flow of Paul's argument which follows in 1:13-4:21 and the fact that this is a response to a secondhand summary, I regard it as clear that these believers were not intentionally choosing Paul or Apollos or Cephas as replacements for their devotion to God or Christ. Carnal decisions by Christians are rarely so self-evident. Rather, within the context of their intentional loyalty to God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, they were expressing personal loyalty to different leaders which, perhaps intentionally on their part, was leading to division and quarrels within the Christian fellowship at Corinth.

B. While the assumption of a fourth party at Corinth, namely a Christ party, has served well as fodder in antisectarian sermons, it seems historically unimaginable that any group at Corinth really thought that they, in contrast to the rest of the Corinthian brethren, gave their allegiance to Christ. Moreover, if there were a Christ party, it is hard to explain why it drops from discussion after 1:12 since Paul continues with references to those who maintain loyalty to Paul (3:4-5, 22; 4:6) to Cephas (3:22) and to Apollos (3:4-5, 22; 4:6). I take the fourth slogan to represent Paul's own response and corrective to the first three slogans. It is hard to believe that Paul would belittle a slogan which pledged loyalty to Christ.

C. In light of the positive and supporting comments from Paul throughout the rest of 1 Corinthians it seems improbable that Paul regards Apollos or Cephas as supportive of these party loyalists. There is no criticism in the letter, in either this subunit or elsewhere, of the practices of either Cephas or Apollos, but rather only of those who divide Christ because of misplaced loyalty to either Paul or Apollos or Cephas.

D. In spite of recent trends reacting against previous scholarly excesses in describing these Corinthians parties, it does seem that parties is still a useful term to describe the phenomenon Paul is combating in 1:10-4:21. To be sure, there were no parties whose central element was an elaborate theology. Paul is certainly not fighting, for example, against a Petrine school of theology. However, once it is recognized that in the Greco-Roman world one could have party advocacy which formed around leadership/ patronage as well as student/devotee loyalty to a teacher/philosopher, then a similar situation among some new Christians in Corinth is not difficult to imagine.

2. Christ Undivided (1:13-17)

¹³ Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into ^a the name of Paul? ¹⁴ I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, ¹⁵ so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. ¹⁶ (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else.) ¹⁷ For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel - not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

^a 13 Or in ; also in verse 15

1:13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul?

All three of these questions anticipate a negative answer. The first questions calls upon the readers to reflect upon their beliefs about Christ, while the last two questions lead them to contemplate their understanding of Paul and his significance. Paul begins to use at this juncture a significant strategy which will run through 4:13. This strategy consists of destroying party loyalty by undermining the inflated significance attributed to the three personalities of Paul, Cephas, and Apollos. Sometimes this process involves a candid assessment of the various leaders, while at other times it includes denigration of himself and others. What better way for one of the principals in this issue to defuse the strife than by acknowledging his own insignificance and his personal ineptitude?

The fragmentation of unity which was epitomized by the slogans of 1:12 is challenged by Paul with the reference to the implied dividedness of Christ. If Christ is not divided, then how could his followers be? The linkage of crucifixion and baptism was already part and parcel of Paul's doctrinal teaching prior to this peculiar application in 1 Corinthians. In a few short months he will have employed this linkage in his letter to the church in Rome (Rom 6) and assumes that they, though not evangelized by him, are themselves familiar with it already. The passing reference to the vicarious nature (for you) of the crucifixion is noteworthy, though it will not be the dominant motif associated with crucifixion in this chapter.

As with the question of crucifixion, so with the issue of baptism, Paul expects the Corinthians to realize that the name of Christ, rather than Paul, belongs in the correct understanding of this act. Much has been written about the misunderstanding(s) of baptism held by at least some of the Corinthians (see comments on 10:1-5 and 15:29). I do not regard this verse as providing evidence for any bizarre theology of baptism held by the Corinthians any more than this verse supports the idea that there were Corinthians who literally believed in some bizarre way that Paul had undergone crucifixion for them. Verse 13 does attest that Paul's doctrine of baptism at Corinth and Ephesus included the idea of baptism "into the name of Christ" (cf. Rom 6), an idea also well attested in the Lukan picture of early Christianity (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5). Apparently the act of baptism was seen by some of those involved in factionalism as being so important that they thought that personal loyalty should be given to the baptizer. It is not difficult to imagine how this act of immersion, so essential to Christian conversion, would have been caught up and interpreted in a social world in which patron and client relationships were the norm and all benefactors, financial or spiritual, were the object of loyalty. Another part of the historical puzzle that helps us understand the origin of the baptism/personal loyalty pattern is that converts were often made by households. The mixture of baptisms of households, the home as the locus of family loyalty as well as the architectural setting for patronage, and the matter of house assemblies readily engenders and exacerbates the Corinthian problem of loyalty on the basis of the one who performed the baptism.

1:14 I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius,

With some overstatement, Paul asserts that he baptized only Crispus and Gaius at Corinth; the conversion of a certain Crispus is known from Acts 18:8, while a Pauline co-worker Gaius who is mentioned in Acts 19:29 is called a Macedonian. The Gaius referred to in Rom 16:23 was probably the same individual as mentioned in 1 Cor 1:14. If the two individuals mentioned in this verse are identified with the converted synagogue ruler of Corinth in Acts 18:8 and the host of the entire church at Corinth mentioned in Rom 16:23, then it is obvious that Paul was personally responsible for the baptism and conversion of two of the socially elite and wealthy individuals within the church of God at Corinth. Paul apparently left the baptism of the Corinthians of lower social status, who would have comprised the majority of the church members, to co-workers.

1:15 so no one can say that you were baptized into my name.

It is unclear whether Paul is, in hindsight, thankful that he baptized so few of the Corinthians, or whether he is writing that he intentionally did not baptize many of them so that the very problem that he is having to deal with would not occur. The idea in verse 15 of being baptized into Paul's name continues the issue raised about this in 1:13b. While we cannot know whether the Corinthians were explicitly stating, "I was baptized into the name of Paul," "I was baptized into the name of Apollos," etc., it is reasonable to conclude that it was not merely a matter of one following after Paul, Cephas, or Apollos, but one expressing loyalty on the basis of who performed (or perhaps authorized) the baptism.

1:16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else.)

This verse clarifies that there were individuals besides Gaius and Crispus whom Paul baptized during his ministry at Corinth. In addition to acknowledging the baptism of Stephanas and his household (e.g., family members, slaves) Paul also confesses to a bit of amnesia in the matter of his baptizing activity in Corinth. It should not be overlooked that Stephanas probably shares with Crispus and Gaius the fact that he comes from the upper stratum of Corinthian city life, for not only did he have a household (rather than belonging to one), but he was also able to travel as one of the representatives of the Corinthian church to visit Paul in Ephesus (1 Cor 16:15-18). The use of parentheses at 1:16 in the NIV is somewhat misleading. Not only is 1:16 not disjointed or an afterthought in the argument of 1:14-17, it is conceptually and rhetorically connected to 1:17 by the linking word "for" (gavr, gar ) in 1:17a.

1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel - not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

Paul begins this verse with an explanation of his comment about his faulty memory in the matter of the number of baptisms he performed at Corinth. He couldn't remember because (for, gar ) God hadn't commissioned him to baptize, but to preach the gospel. Had he been commissioned to baptize, Paul would have remembered names and head count; since he wasn't, he didn't.

Paul's statement here serves both to conclude his argument about how one should view his apostolic ministry given by God and the rite of baptism, and to serve as a transition to the next component in this urgent appeal to the readers. This verse has been a favorite of those interpreters who have a view of religion that disdains ceremony. In his observations on this verse Gordon Fee noted, "Paul does not intend to minimize Christian baptism; his use of this imagery in Rom 6:3-7 would forever rule that out. The reason for expressing his own calling in this negative way has been dictated by the nature of the argument." This is one of scores of examples in 1 Corinthians where it is imperative to interpret Paul's thoughts and words in the literary and rhetorical setting of a unit of thought.

It seems to me that Paul's statement here is no different in kind from Old Testament prophets who on occasion, for reasons of context and rhetorical effect, minimized God-ordained ceremonies and institutions (Isa 1:11-15; Jer 7:1-11) or Jesus who criticized pious acts such as prayer and fasting (Matt 6:1-18) or Paul who, in 1 Cor 13:1-3, denigrates for contextual reasons acts of piety which are normally admirable.

Paul knew that baptism had become one of the elements at the root of the quarreling in Corinth, and he wanted no part in leaving the Corinthians with the idea that he was supportive of their doctrine of a divisive baptism stemming from personal loyalty to the one who performed the baptism. The counterpoint to Paul's denial of the centrality of baptizing in his ministry is his affirmation that the focus of his commission by Christ was the proclamation of the gospel. This brief summary agrees completely with the picture of Paul's apostolic appointment as sketched in Acts and mentioned in his own letters.

In its function to provide a transition to 1:18-31 this verse introduces central terms such as gospel, cross, and wisdom. In order to understand the rhetoric and the flow of Paul's theological thought and reasoning in this literary unit of 1:10-4:21, it is imperative to acknowledge the single focus of this entire section. Even though there is an amazing variety in the rhetoric, in the illustrations, in the subarguments, and in the tenor of the material stretching from 1:18-4:21, one must not lose sight of the fact that all this is Paul's argument against the dissensions and quarreling mentioned in 1:10-12. The reason that this point must be made explicitly here is that sometimes interpreters use portions of Paul's arguments in this section as though they were directed to outsiders, to the lost of the world.

While admittedly 1:18-31 describes the unsaved world of Paul's day, both Jew and Greek, it is unacceptable to stop with that mere observation since it is clear that this section of Paul's argument was intended by Paul both to address and to ameliorate the problem of party strife among believers at Corinth. Proper interpretation of this section must discern the flow of Paul's thought by which he adapted this description of the attitudes of a world alienated from God into his argument designed to undermine the divisions among believers based upon personal loyalty.

To miss this point is to miss the Pauline intention behind all the variety in this section and it runs the great risk of misusing material from this section to make points and doctrinal affirmations which Paul had no intention of making. In light of the problem of a noncontextual reading of these verses, it is worthwhile to point out that there are two major internal textual indicators that the material set forth in 1:18-4:21 was written by Paul as a unified response to the congregational problem described in 1:10-17:

1. References to the slogans of party loyalty first mentioned in 1:12 are reintroduced later at 3:4-5, 3:21-22, and 4:6 by means of the names of Paul, Cephas and Apollos. This is the clearest proof that Paul is continuing to address the same problem.

2. The clustering of key terms associated with the division and quarrels at Corinth are evident throughout this epistolary section.

Word and cognates Occurrences in Letter Occurrences in 1:18-4:21 Wise/wisdom (sofiva, sophia ) 28 26 Cross/crucified (staurov", stauros ) 6 5 Fools/foolishness (mwrov", môros) 10 10 World (kovsmo", kosmos ) 17 10 Age/world (aiJwvn, aiôn) 8 6 Paul's statement at the end of 1:17 makes it clear that the cross of Christ and human wisdom are antithetical to one another. All attempts, Paul argues, to force the message of Christ crucified through the mold of human wisdom can only destroy the gospel he preaches. Even though the cross of Christ is central to Paul's gospel, it would be a mistake to reduce the multifaceted view Paul holds about the cross of Christ into a single oversimplified doctrine. Paul's utilization of his doctrine of the cross for the congregational problems he addressed throughout his letters reveals that this doctrine can be as diverse as the congregations themselves. When viewed in the setting of the congregational problems at Corinth, the point of irreconcilable difference between the cross and human wisdom in 1 Corinthians should not be viewed as Paul's desire to be obscure. Even more untenable is the view that Paul's disdain for human wisdom at Corinth was a result of his failure in his ostensible mishandling of human wisdom in Athens at the Areopagus (Acts 17). Finally, there is not sufficient internal evidence to demonstrate the existence of, let alone reconstruct, a "wisdom party" at Corinth. At times scholars have posited various wisdom emphases in the Corinthian church. It has even been suggested that Paul's pejorative use of wisdom terminology was directed against a single particular party, perhaps some group associated with the eloquent Apollos. None of these attempts seem to fit explicit evidence of 1 Corinthians.

B. CHRIST THE WISDOM AND POWER OF GOD (1:18-2:5)

1. The Message of the Cross (1:18-19)

¹⁸ 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. ¹⁹ For it is written:

"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;

the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." ^a

^a 19 Isaiah 29:14

The only contextual explanation for Paul's broad attack, beginning in 1:17, upon wisdom is the issue of divisive personal loyalties which lead to a fragmented fellowship. There is simply no contextual or internal evidence that Paul is attacking some format of speculative wisdom or metaphysics being promoted by Gnostics, Hellenized Judaism, or Stoic-Cynic popular philosophy. As Margaret Mitchell noted in this regard, "The wisdom of the world is the set of values and norms which divide persons of higher and lower status into separate groups, a wisdom which prefers dissension to unity, superiority to cooperation." It is in particular the societally accepted criteria for the evaluation of leaders and the direct impact that this worldly wisdom has on the disunity (is Christ divided? 1:13) of the church of God that leads Paul to construct this clear and stern antithesis.

It is really no secret why so many Corinthians would embrace this type of worldly wisdom. Plato's works contain a dialogue in which an Athenian sets forth principles by which societies should rule themselves. The discussion includes the views that "the wellborn have a title to rule the worse-born," that "the stronger should rule the weaker," and that "it is for the ignorant to follow and for the wise men to take over the lead and to rule."

1:18 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.

Paul turns now directly to his strategy of bringing the believers to their spiritual senses by reminding them that the cross of Christ, on which their salvation rests, is disdained by the world. Paul is attempting to alienate the Corinthians' affections for worldly values and cultural acceptability, while at the same time rekindling their loyalty for the centrality of Christ crucified and the explicit foolishness attached thereto. There are many ways that Paul constructs his admonitions about unity among believers, both in this letter as well as in others. But at this juncture in 1 Corinthians other Pauline techniques and strategies for promoting unity and mutual acceptance (e.g., the one body theme) are neither germane nor effectual. At this point Paul must utilize some facet of fundamental Christian doctrine that will decimate the particular foundation upon which the divisions are erected and maintained. Given the origin of the struggle at hand, Paul's strategy requires a straightforward counter-culture argument. Accordingly, the cross aptly serves the theological needs of the moment, since it points to the bedrock of the Christian faith and also serves as an obvious point of disjuncture between the gospel on the one hand and urban respectability, status, and values of individualistic loyalty on the other.

1:19 For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."

Paul provides scriptural support for his observations in 1:18, highlighted by the phrase "for it is written," with a citation from Isa 29:14. The linking term between the observations of 1:18 and the Scripture of 1:19 is the common Greek word ajpovllumi ( apollymi ). It is not as evident in the English translation that a single Greek term is used in both verses since in the NIV the word is rendered perishing in 1:18 and destroy in 1:19. This text from Isaiah basically follows the LXX and is the first of numerous examples of Paul's pattern of addressing the problems and issues in this pagan setting by the citation of Scripture.

2. Both Jews and Gentiles Offended (1:20-25)

²⁰ Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? ²¹ For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. ²² Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, ²³ but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, ²⁴ but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. ²⁵ For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.

1:20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

The specific references in this rapid set of rhetorical questions has led to several interpretations. The general point of the questions is clear and there is little doubt about the function of these questions in the flow of Paul's argument. The major issue, and one for which there is not enough clear evidence, is, "do these three groups of people represent types of individuals from pagan Corinthian society or from ancient Judaism or from both?" Fee suggests that the wise man and philosopher would represent the pagan world while the scholar (grammateuv", grammateus ) should be understood as a Jewish scribe, thereby anticipating the Jew and Gentile vocabulary of 1:22-23.

There is a consensus among scholars that Paul's phrase "of this age" points to a widespread eschatological understanding among Jews which depicts history in terms of two dispensations, this age and the age to come. This brief phrase serves as a window into Paul's eschatological thinking and reveals how naturally it flowed from his piety and theology into the various pastoral issues he dealt with among these Gentile converts. The notion of "this age" usually has pejorative connotations in an eschatological paradigm because it stands for contemporary history yet unredeemed and would have seemed to some of the Corinthians as "Paul's Dogmatic Imposition." Paul declares that in fact God has looked upon the greatest wisdom and cultural acumen available in prosperous urban centers like Corinth and still regards it all as foolishness.

1:21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

In verse 21a the Apostle makes two points. The current situation (1:18-20), namely the world's inability to embrace God's wisdom, was set into place by God himself, in his own wisdom. Specifically, God so arranged matters that it would be impossible for humans to know God through and on the basis of their own wisdom. The Apostle's declaration that God did what pleased him finds its theological roots in the Old Testament idea of the sovereign will of God. Ps 115:3 and 135:6 contain the verbal antecedents of Paul's thoughts at this point in the affirmation that God does what pleases him. Even though Paul does not spell out here why God did it in this way, there are an abundant number of Scriptures which make clear God's disdain and hatred for boasting, pride and self-righteousness stemming from humanity's sense of self-determination and self-actualization, all of which would eventuate had mankind through its wisdom come to know God. In Calvin's commentary he responds to those of his day who would disagree with Paul, and who argued that knowledge of God through philosophical inquiry was possible. Regarding philosophers Calvin wrote, "For you cannot find one of them who has not constantly fallen away from that principle of knowledge which I have already mentioned, to wanderings and misleading speculations. They are mostly sillier than old wives!"

It must be pointed out that Paul makes no mention here of creation or general revelation of God in nature, and it would be questionable to transfer the issues and arguments of Romans 1 into this Corinthian setting where the contingent setting of the theological formulation is so distant from those of Jew-Gentile ethnicity expressed in the letter to the Romans.

Second, it was God's good pleasure to make the object of saving faith, Christ crucified, foolish by human standards. The meaning of the phrase "the foolishness of what was preached" can be best appreciated only when one understands the shame, humiliation and sense of denigration associated with crucifixion in Roman antiquity.

In verse 21b Paul makes reference to three items of Christian doctrine which anticipate material found in his later letter to the Romans:

1. The act of preaching is an essential component in the process of bringing individuals to faith.

2. Salvation is a unique act of God.

3. Active trust and faith is a precondition for salvation.

1:22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom,

The assertion that "The Jewish mind was matter of fact and crudely concrete" (while) "The Greek restlessly felt after something which could dazzle his ingenuous speculative turn, and he passed by anything which failed to satisfy intellectual curiosity" is surely an overstatement. Admittedly the Greeks were well known for, and wanted to be well known for, a love of wisdom, philosophy . Paul's comments about the Jews probably contain an autobiographical element from his years of opposition to God's Anointed. It also reflects an outlook similar to early Christian Gospel traditions which focused on this characteristic of certain Jews (Matt 12:38-39; 16:1-4; 24:3, 24). The purpose of this Pauline generalization is to show that the entire cultural environment consisted of those who were at odds with God's wisdom.

1:23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,

Quite often God does not offer to individuals what they want, especially as incentives to faith. It is especially clear in the death of God's Anointed, that the desire to root faith in the soil of human understanding of how and when God should act has to be abandoned. Accordingly, Paul reaffirms that his message does not takes its cue from the religious passion of his contemporaries for signs and wisdom; rather, he offers a crucified Messiah. The Pauline gospel is a stumbling block (skavndalon, skandalon ) to the unbelieving Jews for the very reason that it fails, in their preconceived theology, to reflect an understanding of God and his kingdom that has any attraction to them. The Gentiles likewise regard the message of Paul as foolishness because it is so antithetical to the supposedly enlightened wisdom they have developed and taught for centuries.

1:24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

Because of Paul's deeply rooted conviction about the sovereignty of God and the prevenient nature of grace, he may well have in mind an intentional contrast between lost mankind who "demand" and "look for" (1:22) and the saints who are called and can only respond to God's initiative. Paul was never bothered by retaining ethnic and cultural labels such as "Jews" and "Gentiles" for individuals, whether they were outsiders (cf. 9:20; 10:32; 12:13) or insiders. We see then in this verse that the saints at Corinth are still referred to by the terms appropriate for their culture and ethnicity.

In contrast to the foolishness ascribed by unbelievers to the crucified Christ, the saved at Corinth know God's Anointed as the wisdom and power of God. This verse makes it clear that Paul has no problem with Christians possessing wisdom, as long as their definition of wisdom flows from Golgotha rather than the agoras, temples, lecture halls, and offices of civic administration at Corinth.

It is difficult to know precisely what Paul meant by power in this context. The immediate temptation is to go to the ostensible parallel text of Rom 1:16 and affirm that Paul has in mind the power of God for salvation, primarily salvation from wrath and sin (cf. Rom 1:18; 3:9). However, Paul's use of the term "power" cannot be fully understood apart from his use of the term weakness in the following verse. The characteristics and ideas associated with these two terms "power" (duvnami", dynamis ) and "weakness" (ajsqenev", asthenes ) in the literary unit 1:10-4:21 provide important clues for determining the meaning of power in this issue of divisions in Corinth. These words occur in subunits at 1:24-27; 2:3-5; 4:10. They highlight the fact that God's ways are not mankind's ways and that, in particular, God chose peoples and events that would be regarded as low status or substandard by the unsaved in contemporary Roman society. Thus, this term "weakness" interplays more with the socially derived matrix of the issue of church quarrels and divisions in Roman Corinth than it does with a soteriological affirmation about God's ability and method of saving lost sinners.

1:25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.

In this statement Paul takes the terms of derision (i.e., foolishness and weakness) which originate in the setting of the perishing world and shows how he can embrace them from his own cross-forged perspectives. Paul accomplishes this on the basis of the fundamental contrast between God and mankind. Paul is saying that while the cross may look foolish to mankind, even the most foolish thing God has done is wiser than any and all the wisdom of mankind. Granted that the cross may connote weakness to the perishing, but even the weakest act of God is stronger than the strongest act performed by mankind.

3. God's Choice of Foolish Things (1:26-31)

²⁶ Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. ²⁷ But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. ²⁸ He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things - and the things that are not - to nullify the things that are, ²⁹ so that no one may boast before him. ³⁰ It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God - that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. ³¹ Therefore, as it is written: "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord." ^a

^a 31 Jer. 9:24

1:26 Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth.

Paul now moves his argument to the sphere of personal experience and social standing of the church at Corinth. The Corinthians are told to look at themselves and others in the church of God at Corinth and discern from that whether God works with and through the weak and foolish things of the world. By the term "calling" Paul here is referring to the status or station in life that characterizes the Corinthians. The phrase "not many" (ouj polloiv, ou polloi ) is used three times to underscore the social standing of the majority of the Corinthian believers. Paul's statement, however, surely allows the modern reader to assume that there were at least some Corinthians who would be regarded by human standards as wise, influential, and of noble birth. That there were certain Corinthian believers of high status, can also be demonstrated from other evidence in 1 Corinthians. Pauline congregations, like many religions of the Greco-Roman world whose membership was drawn from a Greco-Roman society with a negligible middle class, would have found most of their members in the lower classes.

One would be gravely mistaken to think that 1:26 contained the doctrinal seed needed to promote Christianity as a religion of the proletariat. All the evidence points to the fact that Paul's urban churches contained wealthy members. This Corinthian church contained people of wealth who served as host not only to Paul, but to the entire congregation (Rom 16), people who owned homes in which they could eat (1 Cor 11:22), and at least one of the influential members, namely Erastus (Rom 16:23), was an administrator in the Roman colony of Corinth.

1:27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.

The religious perspective of this verse is one which runs throughout the Scriptures, and Paul's choice of ideas here was influenced and inspired by the long history of God expressing his sovereign will through his choice of foolish and weak individuals to carry out his agenda. Whether one considers God's choice of Israel, or of Moses, or of Gideon, or of David, or of Mary the mother of Jesus, the Scripture is clear in its depiction of a God whose list of friends portrays a lot of foolishness and weakness by human standards.

Verses 27-28 are clearly linked together by the three occurrences of the phrase "God chose the ______________ of the world in order to (i{na, hina ) . . ." Each of these three phrases is a direct expansion upon the threefold reference to the social standing given in 1:26. The verbal and conceptual links between the threefold social references of 1:26 and the theology of 1:27-28 is somewhat obscured in English translations. The following chart of the links will help make Paul's correlation of the ideas of 1:26 with 1:27-28 clearer.

Corinthian Status God's Choice God's Purpose

Not many wise ( sophos ) Foolish things To shame the wise

( sophos )

Not many influential Weak things To shame the strong

Not many of noble birth Lowly things To nullify existing

( eugenes ) ( agenes ) things

The concept of God shaming the strong and boastful is a rich and pervasive theme of Scripture, typified by the verse which reads, "The Lord Almighty planned it, to bring low the pride of all glory and to humble all who are renowned on the earth" (Isa 23:9).

1:28 He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things - and the things that are not - to nullify the things that are,

1:29 so that no one may boast before him.

This verse provides the results and rationale of God's queer choices throughout history. The upshot of Paul's point is that God's intention was to remove all possibility of mankind's boasting. The term boast is used here because it specifically represents one of the fundamental causes of the quarreling and division at Corinth. Unlike the sin of boasting that is referred to in other Scriptures and is rooted in ritual or moralistic self-righteousness, Paul here mentions a type of boasting that is rooted in party loyalty and worldly evaluation. In the presence of God and in light of the divine modus operandi highlighted in 1:27-28, every form of human boasting is precluded once for all, especially a boasting in human status (cf. 3:21).

1:30 It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God - that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption.

Paul has explicitly mentioned the term God thirteen times in the section 1:18-29 and has thereby maintained a visible theocentric focus. In verse 30 Paul gives attention to Christ, though still in the framework of a theocentric Godhead. This theocentricity is evident in the phrase "it is because of him (God) that you are in Christ." This attention to the work of Christ, or rather God's work (from God) in Christ is intended to prepare the way for the Scripture quotation in 1:31 which clearly points to Christ. Paul reaffirms a Christ-centered focus for God's wisdom given to Christians. The Apostle then explains what God's wisdom consists of for those in Christ Jesus. The three concepts of righteousness (dikaiosuvnh, dikaiosynç), holiness (aJgiasmov", hagiasmos ) and redemption (ajpoluvvtrwsi", apolytrôsis) are all well known doctrinal concepts in the Pauline corpus. Fee captures Paul's sense here in these words, "[God's] wisdom does not have to do with 'getting smart,' nor with status or rhetoric. God's wisdom - the real thing - has to do with salvation through Christ Jesus."

1:31 Therefore, as it is written: "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord."

Because the Christian stands before God in Christ Jesus and because the benefits of righteousness, holiness, and redemption come through Christ, Christ is the only one in whom the believer should boast. To a church whose fragmentation arose as a result of boasting, Paul gives the exhortation that boasting is only acceptable if it is boasting in the Lord. It is only from the immediate context that one can identify the term Lord with Jesus Christ.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

McGarvey: 1Co 1:10

Now I beseech you [a voice of entreaty], brethren, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ [a voice of authority, enforced by threatened judgment (1Co 4:21). In this Epistle Paul has already used the name of Jesus nine times, thus emphasizing its virtue before he uses it as the symbol of supreme authority: as Chrysostom says, "he nails them to this name"], that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfected together in the same mind and in the same judgment . [The pride of Corinth showed itself largely in philosophical conceit, and the citizens who vaunted their superior intelligence were divided into sects, of whom Aristotle, Plato, Zeno, Epicurus, and later philosophers, were the heads. The church became inflated with this same intellectual vanity, and apparently sought to make Christianity the rival of philosophy by exalting her humble teachers to be heads of religio-philosophical sects, and rivals of Christ himself. As to this sinful condition the apstle gives an injunction, covering three points: 1. Unity of speech. 2. Unity of organization. 3. Unity of mind and judgment. They may be treated in their order as follows: 1. Paul first strikes at their speech, because then, as now, speculative discourses, philosophical dissertations, unscriptural reasonings, vapid dialectics for display's sake, etc., had become a fruitful cause of division. It is this speculative, argumentative spirit which genders confessions and creeds. 2. He strikes next at the divisions themselves, as the finished, completed evil complained of. But the divisions which he censures were mere parties in the church, not sects disrupting it, nor organized denominations professing to be "branches of the church." These greater divisions, and hence greater evils, came centuries later. 3. He proposes unity of mind and judgment as the ideal condition -- the condition in which he had left them, and to which he would now restore them. The "mind" represents the inner state, the "judgment" the outward exhibition of it in action. In all this, Paul bespeaks not a partial, but a perfect, unity. "Perfected together" is a very suggestive phrase. Perfection of knowledge brings unity of thought and action, but defective understanding results in division. If one body of men, therefore, grows in truth faster than another, the tardiness of the latter tends to divide. All should grow and be perfected together. Hence, it becomes the duty of the growing disciple to impart his knowledge, and the correlative duty of the ignorant disciple to freely receive it.]

McGarvey: 1Co 1:11

For it hath been signified [made known] unto me concerning you, my brethren [as they indeed were, despite their shortcomings], by them that are of the household of Chloe [no doubt one of their number], that there are contentions among you .

McGarvey: 1Co 1:12

Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ .

McGarvey: 1Co 1:13

Is Christ divided? [the church is called the "body of Christ" (1Co 12:12-13 ; 1Co 12:27), and Paul asks if that body can be cut in pieces and parceled out to human leaders] was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul? [Paul shows the disinterestedness of his rebuke by centering it more especially upon those who had honored him as their leader, thus showing, as Bengel says, that "he disliked Paulinists as much as he did Petrinists." Jesus became the Author of our salvation, and the head of the church through suffering upon the cross (Heb 2:10), and Paul, in order to be his rival, should not only have been crucified for his followers, but his sacrifice should have been as efficacious for the cleansing of sin and the procuring of salvation as was Christ's. This was, of course, preposterous. Again, if Paul was incompetent as the head of a religious body, his followers also had not properly qualified themselves as his disciples, for they had not been baptized into Paul's name, but being baptized into Christ they had put on Christ (Gal 3:27), and, becoming thus members of Christ, how could they belong to Paul? What Paul thus spoke of himself could be said with equal force of either Apollos or Cephas.]

McGarvey: 1Co 1:14

I thank God [who, foreseeing the future, prevented him from making such a mistake] that I baptized none of you, save Crispus [the ruler of the synagogue -- Act 18:8] and Gaius [from whose house Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans -- Rom 16:23];

McGarvey: 1Co 1:15

lest any man should say that ye were baptized into my name . [Paul knew that they would think it unreasonable that he should be accused of baptizing in his own name, but it was equally unreasonable in them to suppose that he was making disciples in his own name. Though many converts were made at Corinth, they appear to have been baptized by Paul's assistants, Silas and Timothy, and the few whom he baptized with his own hand were no doubt converts made before Paul's two friends arrived from Thessalonica. We should note how inseparably connected in Paul's thought were the sacrifice of the cross and the baptism which makes us partakers in its benefits -- Rom 6:3-11]

McGarvey: 1Co 1:16

And I baptized also the household of Stephanas [this man, being then present with Paul in Ephesus, probably reminded the apostle of his baptism]: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other . [Inspiration did not make the apostle remember such matters.]

McGarvey: 1Co 1:17

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not in wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made void . [A baptism is part of the commission (Mat 28:19). Paul was sent to baptize; but it was not necessary that the apostle should administer the rite in person. It sufficed if he saw to it that it was done (Joh 4:2). Paul does not here mean to assert that he preached without study or forethought. His words must be construed in the light of the context; which show that he intends to deny that he encumbered the gospel message with any philosophical reasoning.]

Lapide: 1Co 1:1-31

RANSLATED AND EDITED

BY W. F. COBB, D.D.

EDINBURGH: JOHN GRANT

31 George IV. Bridge

1908

SAINT PAUL's

FIRST EPISTLE TO THE

CORINTHIANS

EDITORS PREFACE

In translating the Comments of Cornelius à Lapide on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, the Translator has endeavoured, next to accuracy, to secure a reproduction of the spirit of the Commentator.

The Translator, accordingly, has limited his efforts to a reproduction of the matter, and as far as possible of the form and spirit off the original, believing that most readers would prefer to see for themselves what Cornelius à Lapide believed to be the plain meaning of Holy Scripture, and to appreciate the piety which he brought to its elucidation. The only liberties taken with the original consist in an attempt to shorten a little its terrible prolixity, and in the correction of a few obvious mistakes on matters of fact.

W. F. C.

November 1895.

CHAPTER I.

CONTENTS

Achaia, or the peninsula commonly called the Morea, had in olden times several famous cities. The metropolis of these was the celebrated emporium of Corinth, famed, says Chrysostom, for its two ports, of which Lechæum stood on the Ionian and Schonus on the Ægean Sea. Hence poets, as, e.g., Ovid ( Fasti iv.), frequently called it bimaros.

Corinth is said to have had its foundation from Sisyphus, the robber son of Æolus, and to have been called Corcyra (Strabo, lib. 8.), and afterwards Ephyre. Having been destroyed, it was rebuilt by Corinth, son of Marithon, or of Pelops, according to Suidas, or according to others of Orestes, and was called after his name. Cicero, in his speech pro lege Maniliâ, calls this city the light of the whole of Greece. Its natural position was so strong that the Romans found great difficulty in reducing it.

1 Corinth abounded in wealth, in merchandise of all kinds, and in metals, especially brass or copper. This Corinthian copper was well known and in great request; so much so that Pliny ( lib. iv., c. 2) says that it was reckoned equal to gold or silver. From this wealth were derived the pride, gluttony, self-indulgence, lust and ostentatious living of the Corinthians, and it became a proverbial saying that it was not every man's luck to go to Corinth. Demosthenes replied to a harlot who asked for eight talents of gold as her hire that he did not give so high a price for repentance. For the same reason the Apostle is called upon to rebuke their vices, and especially in ch. vi.

2 At Corinth flourished a large number of orators and philosophers, amongst whom was Periander, one of the Seven Men of Greece. Paul, we can see, went to Corinth because it gave him so excellent an opportunity for spreading the Gospel. There he converted many to Christ, by the of the Lord who appeared to him in a vision at Corinth and said, "Be not afraid but speak, and hold not thy peace, for I am with thee and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee; for I have much people in thus city." Under Paul's preaching the Corinthian Christians made such progress that Paul himself speaks (i. 5; xiv. 26) of their wisdom, prudence, gift of prophecy, and other gifts bestowed on them by God.

3 From this there arose among the Corinthians pride, self-seeking, and strife, and especially after the arrival of Apollos. Some then came to prefer him to Paul, as a more polished and eloquent speaker. Thence came schisms; whole one party would boast, "I am of Paul," and another, "I am of Apollos." This caused Paul to write to them this Epistle, in which, through the first four chapters, he tries to lead them away from pride in human wisdom and eloquence, and from all contentious support of their teachers, Paul and Apollos, and to bring them to the humility of the Cross, to the doctrine of the faith in Christ.

4 The Corinthians had written to Paul, asking him to resolve certain difficulties they felt (vii. 1), which he does in this letter. After dealing in the first four chapters with their schisms and striving after empty wisdom, he proceeds in ch. v. to order the fornicator to be excommunicated, and in ch. vi., to rebuke them for this sin of fornication, and for going to law before heathen judges. In ch. vii. he answers their first question about matrimony and virginity, and lays down the laws of Christian marriage, putting over against it and before it the evangelical counsel of virginity and celibacy. Then in chs. viii. and x., he deals with the question of eating of things offered to idols, and lays down that such eating was lawful bot needed caution, lest the weaker brethren should be offended. In ch. xi., he replies to their third question, one concerning the veiling of women, as well as their fourth about the Eucharist and Agapæ. In ch. xii., he discourses of the gifts of the Spirit, pointing out that different gifts were distributed by the Holy Spirit to different people. Ch. xiii. dwells on the pre-eminent place among the gifts and graces of the Spirit occupied by charity. Ch. xiv. is an answer to the fifth question of the Corinthians, as to whether the gift of tongues was superior to the gift of prophecy. He answers in the negative. Ch.xv. resolves their sixth doubt, and gives manifold proofs of the resurrection, and describes its gifts, its mode, and order. In ch. xvi. he orders a collection to be made for the poor saints at Jerusalem, and he closes all with salutations.

5 Both this and the Second Epistle were written before that to the Romans; for, as Chrysostom points out, the collection which he orders here (1 Cor. xvi. 2), he speaks of in Rom. xv. 25, 26, as having already taken place. The Greek MSS. say that thus Epistle was written at Philippi and sent by Timotheus, and in this they are supported by the Syriac and the Regia Latina. But it seems more likely from xvi. 8, and other passages, that it was written at Ephesus (Acts xix. 1 ), in A.D. 57 (Baronius and Œcumenius).

Ver. 1.— Sosthenes. He was chief ruler of the synagogue at Corinth; having been converted to Christ by Paul, he was severely beaten for his faith before Gallio, the Proconsul (Act 18:17), and after his death was placed among the Saints.—November 28th.

Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints [supply, Paul writes and salutes in praying], grace be unto you and peace from God. For called to be saints the Syriac translates, called and saints. For in the Greek it is not the participle λεγόμενος or κεκλημένος, i.e., summoned, named, called; but, κλητὸς a word which denotes having a call to holiness, or holy by way of call, called to holiness.

Note first, that Paul throughout this chapter and everywhere else holds up to admiration this benefit of calling. Secondly, that this and all other benefits he humbly and devoutly ascribes to the Divine benevolence and to the power of humility. Chrysostom has here a noteworthy passage in the moral part of his first homily.

Thirdly, it is plain from this, in opposition to Pelagius, that, not for our merits, but by the mere grace of God, have we been called to the faith and the grace of Christ. Again, that all Christians were formally called Saints: not because they were really so, but by way of call, profession, duty.

Fourthly, he calls them saints in Christ, that is sanctified through the merits of Christ, namely, in Baptism and its consequent gifts.

Fifthly: " the church," and the " called to be saints " are the same thing. For the latter is in opposition and is explanatory of the former: so that if you ask, What is the Church? I shall answer from this passage of S. Paul: It consists of those called to be saints, or it is a congregation and assembly of the faithful, who have been called to holiness.

Whence, sixthly, it is evident from here that the Church is visible; for Paul writes these things not to an abstract idea, but "to the church which is at Corinth," which was able to read and see his letters, as is plain.

Seventhly, from this place it is evident that there is the same Church everywhere, a part of which was the Church at Corinth. Whence he says: " With all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours;" i.e., all Christians, wherever they exist: whether with me in this place of ours, or in any other place you please. Theirs, then, viz., of the Corinthians, and ours, viz., of me and Sosthenes. He adds this, that no one might suppose when he said Jesus Christ our Lord, that he meant to say that Christ is the Lord of Paul and Sosthenes alone, So Chrysostom says: "By this Paul tacitly enjoins the Corinthians that they ought to lay aside contentions and to be of one mind, as being members of the same Church, and of the sane Head, Christ." Next, he reminds them that he writes this letter specially indeed to the Corinthians, but, nevertheless, that he wishes it to be a circular letter to all Christians, in the same way that the letters of the other Apostles and of the Bishops in those first ages were circular letters.

Cajetan's interpretation of " ours," that it means, "Our jurisdiction extends itself to Corinth and to the Corinthians, so that the city and district of Corinth is both theirs and ours," is forced. Lastly, why that is called the Church, or the summoning, or the assemvly of those called to the faith, which formerly was called the synagogue, that is, the congregation; and what it is, its nature and its marks, see in Bellarmine in his sound and learned dissertation on the Church ( lib. i ., c 1, 2 et seq.)

Ver. 4.— I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ. "For the grace," in Greek, ε̉πὶ τὴ χάριτι, that is, on account of the grace of God, which is given you in Christ, i.e., through Christ. See Can. 25. "The source," says S. Bernard ( Serm. 13 in Song ), "of all the springs and rivers is the sea: but the source of all virtue and knowledge is the Lord Jesus Christ: the continence of the flesh, the energy of the heart, the rectitude of the will, all flow from that spring: let the heavenly stream be given back to its source" (by thanksgiving), "so that the farthest parts of the earth may be replenished ; 'I will not give my glory to another,' saith God" (Isa 48:11).

Ver. 5.— That in everything ye are enriched by Him (by Christ), in all utterances (of the preaching of the Gospel), and in all knowledge, that is, in spiritual understanding of Him. In other words, I give thanks to God, because by me and Apollos He put before you, richly, the preaching and doctrine of the Gospel and a perception and understanding of it.

Ver. 6.— Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you—i.e., by which, as by two testimonies, the Christian faith was founded and established in you. For the Greeks interpret the Greek καθώς, i.e., even as, by enallage, δι ών, through which, that is, the word and knowledge. Others interpret, Even as the testimony, thus: by which things, viz., by the preaching of the Gospel, and by the knowledge of it, as by a sure testimony, it is known that you are faithful and disciples of Christ.

Ver. 7.— Waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, in His second Advent, when you will receive from Christ an abundant supply of all graces, and your consummation in heavenly glory.

Ver. 8.— Who shall also confirm you, so far as His part is; i.e., shall give grace which can confirm you, and shall confirm you indeed, if you are willing to receive it, to use it, and to confirm yourselves in the faith and love of Christ: shall confirm you, I say, for this, that ye may be, and may persevere unto the end (of life) blameless; that is, unaccused, whom no one can charge with having committed anything against the faith and love of Christ. The Apostle speaks to the whole Church, in which the greater number were holy and blameless, although some few were sowing schisms, and these in the following verse he reproves and condemns.

In the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is an ellipse common with the Apostle: for we must supply, that ye may be and may appear, blameless in that day of the advent and judgment of Christ.

Ver. 9.— God is faithful, by whom ye were called into the of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Note, faithful with S. Paul is the same as constant, truthful, as I shall show on 1 Tim i. 15; not, according to Calvin, as though God saves those only who have been effectually called by Him, and all of them; and as though He bids and makes each one of them believe with a firm faith that he will be saved. For if so, why, in the next verse, anxious about the salvation of the Corinthians, does he condemn their divisions? Had not the Corinthians believed?—and yet, having lapsed into schisms, they had incurred the danger of damnation, and, therefore, Paul endeavours to avert it from them. The faithful, therefore, can lapse into sin and be damned. God, then, is said to be faithful, because, not without cause, will He, O Corinthians, withdraw His help from you which He began to give, and afterwards promised that He would give, in order that you might persevere and be confirmed in the faith and fellowship of Jesus; nor will He desert you unless He be first deserted by you; as the Council of Trent teaches (following S. Augustine). Sess. vi. c. 11 and 13, where it lays down the same three things which the Apostle does here: (1.) That God gives the grace of Christ to all the justified: because, if they are willing, they are able to persevere in righteousness. (2.) That they by their own will can fall from it. (3.) That no one knows whether he will persevere, and whether he is of the number of the elect, unless he has a special revelation of it from God.

Note secondly. Paul here calls the communion of the faith, grace and glory of Christ which is enjoyed in the Church of Christ, the fellowship of His Son ; or that partaking of Christ in which we gave a fellowship of sonship, inheritance, the Sacraments, and all the benefits of Christ. In other words: Ye are called to be sons of God, fellows, members, brothers, and co-heirs of Christ: so Anselm, Ambrose, Theophylact and Chrysostom (whom see), and 1Jo 1:3. And here notice: although, as the Apostle says, all faithful Christians are of the fellowship of Christ, yet some are more so than others: that is to say, those who share more largely of the life and grace of Christ: as those who follow, not only the precepts, but also the counsels of Christ; even as the Apostles were more of the fellowship of Christ than other Christians.

Ver. 10.— I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, into whose one and the same fellowship, family, house, and Church we are all called, as many as are faithful and Christians, that ye all speak the same thing— that is to say, that, like brothers, ye agree in words and in speech, and that ye all say at the same time "I am of Christ;" but let not one say, "I am of Paul," another, "I of Apollos." And, again, that ye agree not only in speech, but also in mind: otherwise your verbal confession would be feigned and false. Whence he adds as the root of concord:—

That ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment, that ye think the same think the same thing and agree among yourselves in Christ, that ye be fitly united to each other in one mind and spirit in Christ. For the Greek signifies, aptly and harmoniously to join and cement anything, so that the parts agree with each other and with the whole. And because a thing is then perfect and complete when it has in this way been neatly and harmoniously united, hence the word signifies also to perfect, as Psa 8:2;  2Co 8:11. Be perfect, i.e., mutually agree amongst yourselves and with your Head; and Psa 40:6 (Sept.).

Ver. 11.— For it hath been declared unto me by them of Chloë. Some think that Chloë is the name of a place, but this place is nowhere else mentioned; nor does the Greek well allow Chloë to be a place. Whence more truly Chrysostom and the Syriac suppose it to be the name of a family or of a woman, and then the meaning is, I have heard from the family of Chloë. By a similar Greek idiom it is said, Rom 16:10-11: "Salute them which are of Aristobulus, of Narcissus," viz., of the house and family.

Ver. 12.— That every one of you; i.e., Whoever of you contend with one another, and foment any part of schism. (For there were among the Corinthians many others well-disposed and peaceful, unconnected with schism, and consequently with the following words): says, in turn, alternately or respectively; for not each one was saying, I am of Paul, I of Apollos, I of Cephas, but in turn; since one would say, I am of Paul, another, I of Apollos, a third, I of Cephas. In the words "every one," therefore, there is a distributive and disjunctive force familiar to the Hebrews; for every one ambitiously and contentiously was saying, "I am of Paul," &c., I am of Paul, viz., a disciple, a catechumen; I of Cephas, that is to say, taught or baptized by the Blessed Pontiff Peter at Antiôch, at Rome, or elsewhere. For Peter had not yet been at Corinth, as is deduced from ch. iv. 15. Whence Baronius thinks that these are the words of those who were avoiding divisions, which had properly arisen because of Paul and Apollos, as appears in ch. iii. 4, and that, to escape from them, while others were boasting of their teachers, they would declare they were the disciples neither of Paul, nor of Apollos but of Peter, the head of the Church; as though they should say, "This man says and boasts that he is the disciple of Paul, that man of Apollos; but I say that I am of Cephas, that is, that I am a disciple of Peter, who is the head of the Church, and the Vicar of Christ: for to him I cling, in him I glory; he converted and baptized me by Paul or Apollos or some other." Whence another rising higher would say: " I am of Christ, who is the supreme Head of Apostles and of the Church, whose Vicar Peter is, whose ministers are Paul and Apollos." For it is to be noted that he adds I am of Christ as the words of those who speak not amiss but rightly, if there is no contention and contempt of the Apostles and the Vicars of Christ, as the Anabaptists now despise Prelates; for it became all to say, "We are of Christ," viz., Christians; whereas some called themselves disciples of Paul, or of Apollos, or of Cephas. So Ambrose, Theophylact, S. Thomas. The occasion of the schism seems to have been that Apollos, who was eloquent, acute, and learned in the Scriptures, was then teaching at Corinth (Act 18:27), and compared to him S. Paul seemed to some cold and bald, because he avoided in his preaching all display of knowledge or of rhetorical ornament, as he says himself (ch. 1Co 2:4.)

Lastly, S. Jerome (on Tit. i.) gathers from this passage that Bishops were given jurisdiction over presbyters, so as to remove all scandals, and that the Church before this was governed by the Presbyters in common to the Epistles to Titus.

Ver. 13.— Were ye baptized in the name of Paul? Christ is one, and in His name all were alike baptized. In vain then, he says, do ye contend for us, which of us is to be the greatest, when we are but the ministers of baptism. Hence, theologians teach that the validity of Baptism and the other Sacraments depends not on the disposition of the receiver, or of the minister, but flows from the Sacrament itself.

Note  1. that to be baptized in the name of Christ is the same as to be baptized in the invocation, profession, power, merit, and baptism of Christ, and so to have a right to the name of Christ. Therefore we are called Christians from Christ, and not Paulians, or Apollinians. For the power of excellency which Christ has in Baptism and the other Sacraments, see S. Thomas.

2. S. Thomas and others, as well as the history of the Greek Church, show that that Church uses as its form of Baptism, not "I baptize thee," but "Let the servant of Christ be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," so that no one can say, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos."

3. Erasmus, Faber, and other innovators, wrongly argue that by parity of reasoning it is wrong to say, "I am of Scotus," and "I of Thomas;" "I am a pupil and follower of Francis," "I of Dominic;" because the Apostle is only censuring contentions for the pre–eminence, and the schisms of which some at Corinth boasted, and which divided the Church into hostile factions: so that they attributed the power and excellence of Baptism and of the faith not to Christ, but to Paul or Apollos. But this is no condemnation of monastic institutions, or of the schools and academies of the philosophers and theologians; for though they differ from one another in their customs, their rites, and opinions, yet they are joined together in the same faith, the same Christian charity and humility. If any one does otherwise, his religion will be vain, and we will hand over his vanity and contentiousness to be corrected by S. Paul with that of the Corinthians. This is the sin of the individual, not of the Order; as in this chapter it is the sin of individual Corinthians that is dealt with, not that of the Church. Far more truly and suitably may we use this passage against the schisms of modern innovators. For they say, "I am of Calvin," or "I of Luther," or "I of Menno," and this in matters of faith and religion. For Calvin teaches one faith, Luther another, Menno another. But the diversity of Religious Orders makes for the greater beauty, strength, and unity of the Church; just as a camp is beautified, strengthened and united by the due distribution of its legions. For without this distribution it would be in confusion.

The religious of the various Orders are united not only under one head, the Supreme Pontiff, in the one Church, but also by their living under the same Order, whether their state be lay or cleric. For the Religious Orders make, as it were, one legion in the Church, and that its strongest one. As, then, the members of the same body are joined in one, and as the soldiers of the same legion are more united to one another than the soldiers of different legions, so the Religious who are aspiring to the height of perfection are bound together more closely than all others by the bond of religion and of prayer to God.

If there is amongst them who calumniates, envies, opposes another Order that man's religion is vain; he is not a Religious, nay, he is not a Christian, but a heathen; he is not led by the spirit of God, but by that of the devil. For the true Religious says with S. Bernard in his Apology, " For one Order I work; to all others I show charity. " In work, I am a Franciscan, in charity a Dominican, an Augustinian, a Benedictine, &c. And therefore I am a religious of all Orders; I have work for one, charity for all. Therefore I rejoice in the good of all Orders: I am pleased at the prosperity of all, I envy none. For all are mine, and I belong to all. Is Christ divided in the different orders? God forbid. For the same Christ is the Institutor, Author, and Governor of all Religious Orders, and that makes for their greater concord. Let not then that which ought to be the cause of greater harmony be the cause of the most disgraceful division, which is hateful to God, lest we hear the words, "Whereas there is among you envying and strife and divisions, are ye not carnal?" And again, "Is thine eye evil because I am good?" If it has pleased God to add Order to Order, to raise up new ones to supplement the old, to give them fresh supplies of His grace and of His Spirit, who can find fault with God? who can envy the new Orders? who deprive the Church of such workmen? Suppose that they do carry off the prize; I will rejoice that God is honoured through them, and that more souls are saved; and may I be a sharer of their labours, for I seek not mine own glory, but that of God.

Ver. 16.— And I baptized also the house of Stephanas. Stephanas, says Theophylact, was a well–known inhabitant of Corinth, whose faith and charity are praised by S. Paul ch. 1Co 16:17).

Ver. 17.— For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel. Preaching and the administration of the Sacraments are the two duties of Pastors, but especially the former. And therefore the chief work of Bishops, Archbishops, and Primates is to preach the Gospel: and this they are bound to do themselves, unless lawfully hindered (Council of Trent, Sess. v. c. 2, and Sess. iv. c. 4). But they may with Paul intrust the administration of Baptism and the other Sacraments to Parish Priests and their assistants.

Not with wisdom of words. I.e., with eloquence and rhetorical adornment, not according to the Gospel. The Greek word for wisdom gives us Sophists, the Greek orators who particularly pleaded in the law courts. Of this are modern innovators in religion, who rightly style themselves "ministers of the word." Not so did Paul, " lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect," i.e., should become emptied of its force, by men supposing that they had obtained salvation, and their belief in the faith through human eloquence, instead of by the power of the Passion of Christ. This was the origin of the schism of those who said, "I am of Paul," "I of Apollos," because the eloquence of Apollos was pleasing to some of the more fastidious Corinthians, and to those who loved eloquence; while on the other, Paul pleased those who sought for the spirit rather than the words, inasmuch as he was unskilled indeed in rhetoric but not in knowledge. And thence it is that S. Paul here and in the next three chapters attacks and abases in different ways eloquence and worldly wisdom. The "wisdom of words" can be taken for natural philosophy, of the wisdom of human reason; for it is opposed to the Cross in ver.18; and again, in verses 19, 20–27, he explains it as philosophy and human reason and prudence. (Maldonatus.)

Ver. 18.— For the preaching of the Cross is to them that perish foolishness. Any declaration about the salvation bestowed by the Cross, or about our redemption by the Cross and Passion of Christ, seems foolishness to men who are sceptical and perverse, and therefore ready to perish. Isaiah, too, says this in the person of Christ: "Behold, I and the children whom the Lord hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel" (Isa 8:18). See also Heb 2:13.

Ver. 19.— For it is written. This is from Isa 29:14, where, following the Hebrew, the verbs are transitive, but the sense is the same. Note that Paul refers to the whole circle of worldly wisdom what the Prophet said of the wisdom of the Jews alone, which was Pharisaic. For both are alike in this connection, and the meaning is, "I will make men unwilling to use worldly wisdom for their salvation, but only the Gospel and the Cross of Christ."

Ver. 20.— Where is the wise? The Gentile philosopher.

Where is the scribe? The Jewish doctor.  S. Paul is quoting Isa 33:18.

Note, as the Greeks called their wise men philosophers, and the Chaldeans theirs magi, so the Jews called theirs sopharim, "scribes." "Scribes" is from the same root as "Scripture," and implies that they were occupied with the Holy Scriptures. Their duty, in fact, was to preserve the Holy Scriptures in their integrity, to carefully correct all transcripts, to interpret them by writing and by word of mouth, and to write out or state the answers they gave to questions about the Law. (Epiphan. hæres. 16).

Where is the disputer of this world? The student of physical science who narrowly investigates the secrets of nature and the world. In other words, philosophers and scribes have been cast aside, and all the wise of this world thrown down and put to confusion by the preaching of the Apostles, by the glory of the Gospel. (So S. Chrysostom.)

Paul here and in the following verses is aiming at philosophers both ancient and modern, and not at such Christians as Dionysius the Areopagite, Hierotheus, Paul himself, Clement of Rome, Nathanael, Gamaliel, Apollos, as the Anabaptists seem to think. He has in his mind the Gentile teachers who at this very time were going round the world, like rivals to the Apostles, and under the garb of piety, wisdom, and eloquence were attempting to attract to themselves, and away from the Apostles, the various nations, as though they alone taught true wisdom, and the way to virtue, righteousness, and salvation; as, e.g., Musonius, Dio, Epictetus, Damys, Diogenes Minor, Apollonius of Tyana, who was greatly looked up to by the Greeks at that time because of his mystic powers, and was given a statue at Ephesus, and placed among the gods. (Baronius, Annals, A.D. 75.)

Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? I.e., has shown to be foolish: a manifestation of its true nature is described as if it were a change of its essence. It is foolish, he says, seen in the light of the Cross and of Christ and of salvation. The light of this knowledge requires faith, not subtlely.  S. Ambrose says, " The knowledge of fishermen has made foolish the knowledge of philosophers," since it has surpassed their limits, and the limits of nature.

So, too, did God by His creative work show the folly of the saying of the philosophers, that "Out of nothing nothing comes," and that in consequence the universe was uncreate and eternal. So in His Incarnation did He show the folly of the saying, "God cannot be contained by a body, time, and place;" and in His Passion the saying, "God cannot suffer and die." So in the Eucharist He shows the foolishness of their principles and of those of our modern innovators who say, "An accident cannot exist without a subject; a body cannot be in a point; two bodies cannot be in the same place at the same time." For though these things are out of Nature's reach, yet they are not impossible to God, who is Omnipotent, and transcends all nature.

S. Paulinus quotes this passage of S. Paul's in a letter (27) to Aper, who had been a lawyer and then had embraced the monastic life, and was, therefore, exposed to ridicule. From this he confirms him in his purpose, and shows him how to despise the laughter and sneers of men. " I congratulate you," he says, " on having scorned that wisdom which is rejected of God, and on having preferred to have fellowship rather with Christ's little ones than with the wise of the world. It is from this that you have merited the grace from God of the hatred of men; this would not be had you not begun to be a true follower of Christ. " And a little lower, in showing the fruit and dignity of his purpose, he says, " Rejoice and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven; for it is not you that they hate, but Him who has begun to be in you, whose work is in you, whose humility they despise, whose holiness they loathe. Joyfully recognise yourself to be a sharer in this good with Prophets and Apostles. From the beginning of the world Christ has ever suffered and triumphed in His own: in Abel He was killed by His brother; in Noah He was mocked by His son; in Abraham He was a pilgrim; in Isaac He was offered up; in Jacob He served; in Joseph He was sold; in Moses exposed and forced to flee; in the Prophets stoned and persecuted; in the apostles tossed about on sea and land; in His Martyrs often slain and in different ways. In you, too, He suffers reproaches, and thus world hates Him in you; but thanks be to Him that He overcomes when He is judged and triumphs in us." Again, praising and admiring his change of life, he says, " Where now is the once feared advocate and judge? Would that I had wings to fly to you, to see you no longer yourself, but changed from a lion to a calf—to see Christ in Aper, who has now laid aside his ferocity and strength, and become a lamb unto God instead of a wild boar of this world. For you are a boar, but of the corn-field, not of the forest; you are rich in the good fruit of the holy discipline, and have fed yourself with the fruit of virtues. "

Ver. 21.— For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. Mark the phrase, "in the wisdom of God," God shows His wisdom in the marvellous structure and government of the world, as S. Thomas says. In other words, the world in its foolishness knew not God practically in His wisdom stamped on His Creation, as the Author of its salvation, and Leader to a life of bliss; nor yet speculatively, because philosophers regarded God as powerless to create; they thought Him to act under necessity, and to be void of providence, &c.

Hence it is that God has revealed Himself and His salvation to the world in a way which seems to the world foolishness, viz., by the Cross. He has thus stooped to men, and become as or were foolish among them; just as a teacher will sometimes act as a boy, and talk as a boy, amongst boys. So Christ, because He was not understood as God, revealed Himself to men, as a man, and one liable to suffering. This is wisdom unspeakable. See S, Thomas, Anselm, and others.

Ver. 22.— For the Jews require a sign . . . but we preach Christ crucified. A Theban, when asked what he thought of the Romans, said that "the Romans boasted themselves in their spears, the Greeks on their eloquence, the Thebans in their virtues." But the Apostle says that he and other Christians boast themselves in Christ crucified. This is our spear, our eloquence, and our virtue.

Ver. 23.— Into the Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks foolishness. Notice here, with S. Chrysostom ( Hom. iv. moral in loco, and above on ver.17), that the power of the Cross shines forth not only in itself but also in its preaching: (1.) In the fact that the Apostles, few in number, simple fishermen, poor, unlearned, unknown, and Jews, in all these respects hateful to the world, yet brought the world into subjection to the Cross. (2.) In the fact that they subdued most bitter enemies, demons, sin, death, hell, kings, princes, philosophers, orators, Greeks, barbarians, laws, judgments. Long-existing religions, and time-honoured traditions. (3.) In that they persuaded men by simple preaching, and not by arms, wisdom, or eloquence. (4.) In that in so short a time they spread the faith of Christ over the whole world. (5.) In that by the grace of Christ they overcame most cheerfully and courageously what is hardest to be borne by the natural strength of man, the threats of tyrants, scourgings, deaths, and tortures. (6.) In that they preached a doctrine not about a glorious God, but a crucified One, and Him their Saviour to be believed in and adored; and a law of Christ displeasing to nature and flesh. Wherefore Tertullian ( lib. contra Jud.) beautifully and fitly compares the Kingdom of Christ with the kingdoms of all kings and people, and prefers it before them all: " Solomon," he says, " reigned, but only in the borders of Judæa from Dan to Beersheba : Darius reigned over the Babylonians and Parthians, but not further; Pharaoh reigned over the Egyptians, but over them only. The kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar stretched only from India to Ethiopia. Alexander of Macedon, after subduing all Asia and other countries, could not keep what he had conquered. So have the Germans, Britons, Moors, and Romans bounds set to their dominions. But the kingdom of Christ has reached to all parts, His name is believed on everywhere, is worshipped by all nations, everywhere reigns, is everywhere adored; He is equal to all, King over all, Judge over all, God and Lord of all. "

Ver. 25.— Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. That is, say Ambrose and Anselm, the foolishness and weakness of God, or what men think is the foolishness and weakness in God and in Christ incarnate and suffering, as e.g., His humanity, morality, Passion and Cross, was just that by which Christ, when seemingly conquered, yet most wisely and most powerfully conquered men, Satan, and the whole world. In other words, God's wisdom and strength by what was foolish and weak, viz., the Cross. And therefore Jerome and S. Augustine explain the passage of Habakkuk (iii. 4) " He had horns coming out of His hands," thus: The strength and weapons by which, as by horns, Christ slew His foes were the arms of the Cross to which the hands of Christ ere nailed. Hence it is that the cross in the sky appeared to Constantine the Great as he was going to battle against Maxentius, with the inscription, "In this sign thou shalt conquer" (Euseb., Life of Constantine, lib. i. c. 22).

Literally and morally the power and wisdom of the Cross are seen (1.) in that on the Cross God showed His supreme love to us, that so He might draw us to Him; for God, under no necessity, with no prospect of advantage to Himself, of His own will stooped to the Cross from love of man, solely. This He yet did with such wisdom that no damage was dine by it to the loftiness and glory of His Godhead; for the Godhead in Him suffered nothing, but He bore all His suffering in the Manhood which He had assumed. (2.) In that on the Cross He redeemed man, not by the power of His Godhead, but through the righteousness and humility of His Passion, as S. Augustine says. (3.) In that on the Cross He set before us a most perfect example of obedience, constancy, endurance of punishment, patience, fortitude, and all virtues, as well as mortification of vices. (4.) In that on the Cross He condemned the wisdom and pride of the world, and gave to man, who had fallen through pride and self–indulgence, a mirror of life, viz., a mode of recovery through humility and the Cross. (See also S. Thomas. 3, p. qu. 46, art. 3 and 4, and S. Augustine, De Trin. lib. xiii. c. 12.)

S. Bernard, in his exhortation to the Soldiers of the Temple (c. 11), says: " The weakness of Christ was no less beneficial to us than His majesty; for although the power of His Godhead ordered the removal of the yoke of sin, yet the weakness of His flesh destroyed by death the rights of death over man. And therefore the Apostle beautifully says: 'The weakness of God is stronger than men.' But His foolishness by which He was pleased to save the world, so as to confound the wise; which made Him, though He was in the form of God and equal to God, empty Himself, and take upon Him the form of a servant; by which, though he was rich, He yet for our sake became poor, though He was great He became little, though he was high yet He became humbled, though He was powerful He became weak; through which He hungered, thirsted, and was weary on the journey, and suffered all that His own will and no necessity laid upon Him; this foolishness of His, was it not to us the way of prudence, the form of righteousness, the example of holiness? Therefore the Apostle also adds, 'The foolishness of God is wiser than men.' Death then set us free from death, life from error, grace from sin. And truly His death won the victory through His righteousness; because the Just One, by paying what he never took, rightly recovered all that He had lost."

Hence it is that Francis and the greatest Saints have sought to be considered foolish by the world, in order that they might the rather please God. Some religious Orders, indeed, so regard this as the height of perfection and Christian wisdom that they enjoin their members to love, desire, and embrace contempt, ridicule, insults, and injuries, and to long to be considered fools, just as eagerly as worldly men seek for a reputation for wisdom, for honour, and renown. They do this to teach them in this way (1.) to utterly despise the world; (2.) to humiliate themselves and uproot their innate desire of honour, praise, glory, and high position; (3.) to be more like Christ, and to clothe themselves with His garments and His marks, who for our sakes, and to give us an example of virtue and perfection, chose these things Himself, willed to be considered foolish, and became a scorn of men, and the outcast of the people, They say, therefore, with S. Paul, "God forbid that I should glory save in the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified to me and I to the world."

All this does the Cross of Christ teach if you often meditate on it; nay, the Cross is the fount of wisdom. S. Bonaventura, when asked where he had drunk in so much wisdom, showed a crucifix almost worn away by kisses.  S. Jacoponus, a man of good birth and of great learning, after having learned from the Cross of Christ to become foolish to the world, was asked by Christ, who appeared to him in a friendly and familiar way, why he was so enamoured of this foolishness, and he answered with his customary pious pleasantry, "Because Thou, Lord, hast been more foolish than I." In short, S. Chrysostom ( Hom. 4 on the Cross and the Robber ) sums up the power and praise of the Cross as follows: " If you to know the power of the Cross, and what I have to say in its praise, listen: The Cross is the hope of Christians, the resurrection of the dead, the way of them that despair, the staff of the lame, the consolation of the poor, the curb of the rich, the destruction of the proud, the punishment of them that live badly, victory over the demons, subjection of the devil, the instructor of the young, nourishment of the needy, hope of the hopeless, the rudder of seafarers, haven to the storm–tossed, wall to the besieged, father to the fatherless, defender of widows, counsellor of the just, rest to the weary, guardian of little ones, head of men, end of the aged, light to them that sit in darkness, the magnificence of kings, an everlasting shield, wisdom of the foolish, liberty to the slaves, a philosophy for kings. law ro the lawless, the boast of martyrs, the self-denial monks, the chastity of virgins, the joy of priests, the foundation of the Church, the destruction of temples, the rejection of idols, a stumbling-block to the Jews, perdition to the ungodly, strength to the weak, physician to the sick, bread to the hungry, water to the thirsty, clothing to the naked. "

Ver. 26.— For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called. The for gives the reason of what had gone before. This verse contains another proof of what was said in ver. 21, " It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. " For this is proved in two ways: (1.) in ver. 23, from the object of preaching, viz., the Cross, by which God was pleased to save the world, but which to the world seems foolishness; (2.) from the ministers of preaching, viz., the Apostles, whose duty it was to preach salvation through the Cross, and who were men of no account, unpolished, despised, and foolish in the eyes of the world.

Again, the particle for fitly joins this verse to the preceding; ver. 25 gives an indefinite and general statement which is true, not only of the Cross, but also of the preachers of the Cross, as Athanasius points out ( Ad Antiochum, qu. 129).

This particle, then, declares the likeness of the Apostles to the Cross that they preached. It is as if S. Paul had said: God willed to use the foolishness and weakness of the Cross, and with it to overcome and subdue to Himself the wisdom and power of all men; and we see this, not only in the Cross itself, and its victory, but also in the Apostles who preach the Cross: for God has not chosen the wise and powerful of this world, but the Apostles, who are poor, simple, and foolish in the eyes of the world, that they might carry the banner of the Cross on high throughout the whole world, and bring all men into obedience to the faith of the Cross, and that they all might believe and hope for their righteousness and salvation through the Cross of Christ.

It is a reason drawn from likeness or analogy. For such as the Cross was—worthless, despicable, and foolish before the world—such should be all preachers of the Cross. For God in His wonderful wisdom has so well adapted everything to the Cross, which is the burden of all preaching, that not only the preachers but believers too should be like the Cross; for the first who were called to the faith were men of low birth, of no reputation, unknown, sinners, publicans, and harlots.

Ye see your calling. The reason and mode of your calling. Because the Apostles who called you are not wise, according to this wisdom, which knows not that which is spiritual and Divine. So S, Thomas applies the words to the Apostles, who called others. S. Chrysostom, however, applies them and rightly (from ver. 2) to those who had been called and converted; for many unlearned gad been converted to Christ, and but few who were learned and nobly born. The words, then, mean: Ye see of what kind are both caller and called.

Some wise and powerful, of course, as, e.g., Dionysius the Areopagite, Paulus the Proconsul, Nicodemus, S. Paul himself, but they were few. Moreover, the Apostle is speaking mainly of the Apostles, who were the first called, though they were poor and of no reputation. And therefore S. Ambrose (on S. Luk 6:13), says: " See the counsel of God. He chose not the wise, the rich, the noble, but fishermen and publicans to train, that He might not be thought to have drawn any to His grace by His wisdom, to have redeemed us by His riches, to have won us to Him by the influence of power or birth; and that so, not love of disputation, but truth by its reaonableness might prevail. " S. Augustine (vol. x. Serm. 59) says, "Great is the mercy of our Maker. He knew that if the Senator were chosen, he would say, 'I was chosen because of my rank.' If the rich man were chosen, he would say, 'I was chosen for my wealth.' If a king, he would put it down to his power; if an orator, to his eloquence; if a philosopher, to his wisdom. 'For the present,' says the Lord, 'those proud men must be rejected: they are too haughty. Give Me first that fisherman. Come, poor men. You have nothing, you know nothing; follow Me. The empty vessel must be brought to the plentiful stream.' The fisherman let down his nets; he received grace, and became a Divine orator. Now while the words of the fishermen are read, orators bow their heads in reverence." It seems, therefore, that what some fable about the royal birth and renown of the Apostle Bartholomew is groundless.

Ver. 27.— But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise. The words "foolish, weak, base," form a climax, and are used by S. Paul to describe the faithful who had been called to Christ, or rather the Apostles themselves, who had called them. He contrasts them as uncultivated, poor, base, and hence foolish in the eyes of the world, and the world's laughing-stock, with the wise, strong, and powerful of the world.

Things which are not. This is applied to the same persons as being contemptible and reckoned of no account. In other words, God chose the despised Apostles, who were thought nothing of, that He might destroy, and, as it were, bring to nought things that are, i.e., which are highly esteemed, as e.g., the wise and mighty of the world.

Observe that three things which the world is wont to admire, viz., wisdom, power, and birth, were passed over by God when He called men to faith, righteousness, and salvation; and on the other hand that three things opposite to these were chosen by Him, viz., want of wisdom, of power, and of birth. This was done to show that the work was from God, and that this calling as to be ascribed to the grace of God, and not to human excellence. Thus, in the second century after the Apostles, He chose Agnes, a maiden of thirteen years, who amazed and confounded her judges and all the heathen who saw her by her wonderful fortitude. Well, therefore, does the Collect for her day run: " Almighty and everlasting God, who choosest the weak things of the world to confound the strong, mercifully grant that we who keep the feast of Thy Virgin and Martyr S. Agnes, may receive the fruit of her prayers. " Such too were SS. Agatha, Lucy, Dorothy, Barbara, and a countless number of others whom God seems to have raised up to show the power of His grace in their weakness. Therefore in their Collect the Church prays: " O God, who, amongst other marvels of Thy power, hast also conferred upon feeble women the victory of martyrdom, mercifully grant that we, who keep the 'birthday' of Thy blessed Virgin and Martyr, N., may by her example come to Thee, "

Ver. 30.— But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus. By the gift of God Himself, by His grace, were ye called to believe in Christ. So Anselm. To be in Christ is to have been incorporated with Him in Baptism, or to be in the Church of Christ, and in Christianity.

Who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption. This righteousness, say our modern innovators, is imputed, because it is ours, not substantially and inherently, but is merely the external righteousness of Christ imputed to us; before God we seem righteous. But I reply: If this be true, then in the same way the active redemption wrought by Christ, which S. Paul here joins with righteousness, will be imputed to us, and consequently we shell be redeemers of ourselves, which is absurd. In the second place, wisdom is infused into us, and so is faith, and so therefore is righteousness; for the Apostle classes together the righteousness and wisdom of Christ as both alike ours.

I say, then, with Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm, Ambrose, and S. Thomas, that the sense of this passage is this: Christ is made unto us the author and cause of real Christian wisdom, redemption, sanctification, and righteousness.

1. By way of satisfaction and meritoriously; and this is what the Apostle specially has in his mind here: because Christ paid man's debt with the most precious price of His own Blood, and so made sanctification for man, and merited for us righteousness, wisdom, and sanctification. In this way He was made for us righteousness, because the righteousness, i.e., the satisfaction of Christ, is ours, just as much as if we had ourselves made satisfaction to God. And hence it is that theologians teach that the satisfaction of Christ is applied to us in justification through the Sacraments, as if naturally first, and that then as a natural consequence our sins are forgiven through that satisfaction, and grace is infused. This condemns the error of Peter Abélard, in which he is followed by the Socinians, who teach that Christ was the teacher of the world, not its redeemer—nay more, that He was sent by the Father to give to man an example of perfect virtue, but not to free him from sin or to redeem him. S. Bernard refutes this in Ep. 190, to Pope Innocent, where he says: " Christ is the end of the law to every one that believeth. In short, S. Paul says that He was made to us righteousness by God the Father. Is not then that righteousness mine which was made for me? If my guilt is brought against me, why am I not given the benefit of my righteousness? And indeed what is given me is safer than what is innate. For this has whereof it may glory, but not before God. But the former, since it is effectual to salvation, has no ground of glorying, except in the Lord. 'For if I be righteous, yet will I not lift up my head,' says Job, lest the answer come, 'What hast thou that thou didst not receive? But if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory as if thou hast not received it?' This is the righteousness of man in the blood of his Redeemer, which Abélard, that man of perdition, scoffs and sneers at, and so tries to empty of its force, that he holds and argues that all that the Lord of Glory did in emptying Himself . . . in suffering indignities . . . is to be reduced to this, that it was all done that He might by His life and teaching give to man a rule of life, and by His suffering and death set up a goal of charity." Abélard's argument was fallacious and frivolous: the devil, he said, had no right over man; therefore man needed no liberator. The premiss is doubtless true when understood of lawful right, but not of usurped right, under which man through sin by his own free will had submitted himself to the power of the devil, of sin, and of hell.

2. By way of example; because the righteousness of Christ os the most perfect example, to which all our righteousness ought to be conformed. In this sense S. Paul's meaning is, Christ is an example and mirror of righteousness.

3. Efficiently; because Christ effects and produces this righteousness in us through His Sacraments, and because He teaches the Saints true wisdom and understanding; as, e.g., how to live a good and Christian life, by what road to attain to heaven, and how we must strive after bliss.

4. As our end; because Christ Himself and His glory are the end of our righteousness and sanctification. S. Bernard, in his 22nd Sermon on the Canticles, deals with these four, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, redemption, symbolically. In the first place, he adapts them to the four works of Christ. He says, " Christ was made for us wisdom in His preaching, righteousness in the forgiveness of our sins, sanctification in the life that He spent with sinners, redemption in the sufferings that He bore for sinners. " And again further on he says, " Christ was made for us by God wisdom by teaching prudence, righteousness by forgiving our trespasses, sanctification by the example He set of temperance and of chaste life, redemption by the example He left of patience and of fortitude in dying. Where, I ask, is true wisdom, except in the teaching of Christ? Whence comes true righteousness but from the mercy of Christ? Where is there true temperance but in the life of Christ? Where true fortitude save in the Passion of Christ? "

In the second place, S. Bernard naturally adapts these four to the four virtues, prudence, justice, temperance and fortitude, which Christ imparts to us. He goes in to say: " Only those, then, who have been imbued with His doctrine are to be called prudent; only those, who by His mercy have obtained forgiveness of their sins, are to be called righteous; only those are to be called temperate who strive to imitate His life; only those are to be called brave who bravely bear adversity and show patience like His. In vain surely does any one strive to acquire virtues, if he thinks that they are to be obtained from any other source but the Lord of virtues, whose teaching is the school of prudence, whose mercy the working of righteousness, whose life the mirror of temperance, whose death the pattern of fortitude. "

Ver. 31.— That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. He is quoting not the words but the sense of Jer 9:23. So Ambrose, Theophylact, Anselm, St, Thomas. In Jeremiah the passage runs: "Thus saith the Lord, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches, but let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth Me." This it is to glory in the Lord. Jeremiah is speaking of liberation from the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, and from the slaughter of the Chaldeans, which were then threatening the Jews. In other words, then, he says: The Jews glory in counsels of their wise men, in the strength of their soldiers, in the riches of Jerusalem, as though these would make them secure against the Chaldeans; but they err, for their true glory is to know and understand God, that is, His Providence, an that it is He alone who worketh mercy, and mercifully sets free whom He will, and not the wisdom, might, or riches of man. Moreover, He alone inflicts just punishment on whom He will, and no wise, mighty, or rich man can set free from this—even as, O Jews, He will inflict it on you, and will bring it to pass, that death (that is, the Chaldeans, shall bring death upon you) shall climb up into your houses, though your windows, and slay all your little ones.

The Apostles rightly adapts this passage to those who were calling others, or who had been called to Christianity, that no one may attribute the grace of Christ to himself, his virtues, or the gifts of nature, but only to Christ, and consequently his tacit exhortation is: "Do not, O Corinthians, glory in yourselves, or in Paul, or in Apollos, your teachers, but in the Lord alone." For this is what in the beginning he proposed to prove, and therefore all that is here said must be referred to it. Anselm says: " That man glories in the Lord only who knows that it is not of himself, but of Him, not only that he is, but also that it is well with him. " Again that glories in the Lord who, if he has anything which makes him pleasing to God, holds that he has received it, not because of his own wisdom, power, good works, talent, or merits, but merely through the grace of God. Thirdly, he who in all that he does seeks not his own glory, but that of the Lord.

S. Bernard wrote a noteworthy sermon on these words of the Apostle; see also Sermon 25 on Canticles. He says: " Moreover, the whole glorying of the Saints is within and not without, that is, not in the flower of grass, or the mouth of the vulgar, but in the Lord; for God alone is the sole judge of their conscience, Him alone they desire to please, and to please Him is their only real and chief glory. " And Sermon 13 on Canticles: " Brothers, let none of you desire to be praised in this life. For whatever favour you gain for yourselves here which you do not refer to Him, you steal from Him. For whence, thou dust that perishest, whence comes thy glory? " And in his Sentences: " The Apostles knew that glory properly belongs to the Creator, and not to the creature. But he also knew that the rational creature so seeks after glory that it can scarcely or perhaps never overcome this desire, just because it was made in the image of the Creator. Therefore he gave the most wholesome advice when he said: ' Since you cannot be persuaded not to glory, let him that glorieth glory in the Lord. '" Let us, too, say in company with the Psalmist, "Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto Thy name give the praise," and with the four and twenty elders who cast their crowns before the throne, "Blessing and honour and glory and power be unto Him that sitteth on the throne, and to the Lamb for ever and ever" (Rev 5:13).

Commentary -- Other

Critics Ask: 1Co 1:17

1 CORINTHIANS 1:17 —Did Paul oppose water baptism?

PROBLEM: Paul declares that Christ did not send him to baptize. Yet Christ commissioned His disciples to “make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” ( Matt. 28:19 ). Does Paul contradict Christ?

SOLUTION: Paul was not opposed to baptism, but neither did he believe it was a condition of salvation (see comments on Acts 2:38 ). Paul himself was baptized by water ( Acts 9:18 ; 22:16 ), and he taught water baptism in his epistles (cf. Rom. 6:3- 4 ; Col. 2:12 ). Indeed, in this very passage ( 1 Cor. 1 ), Paul admits that he baptized several people (vv. 14 , 16 ) as he did the Philippian jailor after he was saved ( Acts 16:31-33 ). While Paul believed water baptism was a symbol of salvation, he did not believe it was part of the Gospel or essential to salvation.   

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

First Corinthians

From Ephesus a.d. 54 Or 55

By Way of Introduction

It would be a hard-boiled critic today who would dare deny the genuineness of I Corinthians. The Dutch wild man, Van Manen, did indeed argue that Paul wrote no epistles if indeed he ever lived. Such intellectual banality is well answered by Whateley’s Historic Doubts about Napolean Bonaparte which was so cleverly done that some readers were actually convinced that no such man ever existed, but is the product of myth and legend. Even Baur was compelled to acknowledge the genuineness of I and II Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (the Big Four of Pauline criticism). It is a waste of time now to prove what all admit to be true. Paul of Tarsus, the Apostle to the Gentiles, wrote I Corinthians.

We know where Paul was when he wrote the letter for he tells us in 1Co_16:8 : " But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost." That was, indeed, his plan, but the uproar in Ephesus at the hands of Demetrius caused his departure sooner than he expected (Acts 18:21-20:1; 2Co_2:12.). But he is in Ephesus when he writes.

We know also the time of the year when he writes, in the spring before pentecost. Unfortunately we do not know the precise year, though it was at the close of his stay of three years (in round numbers) at Ephesus (Act_20:31). Like all the years in Paul’s ministry we have to allow a sliding scale in relation to his other engagements. One may guess the early spring of a.d. 54 or 55.

The occasion of the Epistle is made plain by numerous allusions personal and otherwise. Paul had arrived in Ephesus from Antioch shortly after the departure of Apollos for Corinth with letters of commendation from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18:28-19:1). It is not clear how long Apollos remained in Corinth, but he is back in Ephesus when Paul writes the letter and he has declined Paul’s request to go back to Corinth (1Co_16:12). Some of the household of Chloe had heard or come from Corinth with full details of the factions in the church over Apollos and Paul, clearly the reason why Apollos left (1Co_1:10-12). Even Cephas nominally was drawn into it, though there is no evidence that Peter himself had come to Corinth. Paul had sent Timothy over to Corinth to put an end to the factions (1Co_4:17), though he was uneasy over the outcome (1Co_16:10.). This disturbance was enough of itself to call forth a letter from Paul. But it was by no means the whole story. Paul had already written a letter, now lost to us, concerning a peculiarly disgusting case of incest in the membership (1Co_5:9). They were having lawsuits with one another before heathen judges. Members of the church had written Paul a letter about marriage whether any or all should marry (1Co_7:1). They were troubled also whether it was right to eat meat that had been offered to idols in the heathen temples (1Co_8:1). Spiritual gifts of an unusual nature were manifested in Corinth and these were the occasion of a deal of trouble (1Co_12:1). The doctrine of the resurrection gave much trouble in Corinth (1Co_15:12). Paul was interested in the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1Co_16:1) and in their share in it. The church in Corinth had sent a committee (Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus) to Paul in Ephesus. He hopes to come himself after passing through Macedonia (1Co_16:5.). It is possible that he had made a short visit before this letter (2Co_13:1), though not certain as he may have intended to go one time without going as he certainly once changed his plans on the subject (2Co_1:15-22). Whether Titus took the letter on his visit or it was sent on after the return of Timothy is not perfectly clear. Probably Timothy returned to Ephesus from Corinth shortly after the epistle was sent on, possibly by the committee who returned to Corinth (1Co_16:17), for Timothy and Erastus were sent on from Ephesus to Macedonia before the outbreak at the hands of Demetrius (Act_19:22). Apparently Timothy had not fully succeeded in reconciling the factions in Corinth for Paul dispatched Titus who was to meet him at Troas as he went on to Macedonia. Paul’s hurried departure from Ephesus (Act_20:1) took him to Troas before Titus arrived and Paul’s impatience there brought him to Macedonia where he did meet Titus on his return from Corinth (2Co_2:12.).

It is clear therefore that Paul wrote what we call I Corinthians in a disturbed state of mind. He had founded the church there, had spent two years there (Acts 18), and took pardonable pride in his work there as a wise architect (1Co_3:10) for he had built the church on Christ as the foundation. He was anxious that his work should abide. It is plain that the disturbances in the church in Corinth were fomented from without by the Judaizers whom Paul had defeated at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts 15:1-35; Gal_2:1-10). They were overwhelmed there, but renewed their attacks in Antioch (Gal_2:11-21). Henceforth throughout the second mission tour they are a disturbing element in Galatia, in Corinth, in Jerusalem. While Paul is winning the Gentiles in the Roman Empire to Christ, these Judaizers are trying to win Paul’s converts to Judaism. Nowhere do we see the conflict at so white a heat as in Corinth. Paul finally will expose them with withering sarcasm (2 Corinthians 10-13) as Jesus did the Pharisees in Matthew 23 on that last day in the temple. Factional strife, immorality, perverted ideas about marriage, spiritual gifts, and the resurrection, these complicated problems are a vivid picture of church life in our cities today. The discussion of them shows Paul’s many-sidedness and also the powerful grasp that he has upon the realities of the gospel. Questions of casuistry are faced fairly and serious ethical issues are met squarely. But along with the treatment of these vexed matters Paul sings the noblest song of the ages on love (chapter 1Co_13:1-13) and writes the classic discussion on the resurrection (chapter 1 Corinthians 15). If one knows clearly and fully the Corinthian Epistles and Paul’s dealings with Corinth, he has an understanding of a large section of his life and ministry. No church caused him more anxiety than did Corinth (2Co_11:28).

JFB: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

The AUTHENTICITY of this Epistle is attested by CLEMENT OF ROME [First Epistle to the Corinthians, 47], POLYCARP [Epistle to the Philippians, 11], and IRENÆUS [Against Heresies, 4.27.3]. The city to which it was sent was famed for its wealth and commerce, which were chiefly due to its situation between the Ionian and Ægean Seas on the isthmus connecting the Peloponese with Greece. In Paul's time it was the capital of the province Achaia and the seat of the Roman proconsul (Act 18:12). The state of morals in it was notorious for debauchery, even in the profligate heathen world; so much so that "to Corinthianize" was a proverbial phrase for "to play the wanton"; hence arose dangers to the purity of the Christian Church at Corinth. That Church was founded by Paul on his first visit (Acts 18:1-17).

He had been the instrument of converting many Gentiles (1Co 12:2), and some Jews (Act 18:8), notwithstanding the vehement opposition of the countrymen of the latter (Act 18:5), during the year and a half in which he sojourned there. The converts were chiefly of the humbler classes (1Co 1:26, &c.). Crispus (1Co 1:14; Act 18:8), Erastus, and Gaius (Caius) were, however, men of rank (Rom 16:23). A variety of classes is also implied in 1Co 11:22. The risk of contamination by contact with the surrounding corruptions, and the temptation to a craving for Greek philosophy and rhetoric (which Apollos' eloquent style rather tended to foster, Act 18:24, &c.) in contrast to Paul's simple preaching of Christ crucified (1Co 2:1, &c.), as well as the opposition of certain teachers to him, naturally caused him anxiety. Emissaries from the Judaizers of Palestine boasted of "letters of commendation" from Jerusalem, the metropolis of the faith. They did not, it is true, insist on circumcision in refined Corinth, where the attempt would have been hopeless, as they did among the simpler people of Galatia; but they attacked the apostolic authority of Paul (1Co 9:1-2; 2Co 10:1, 2Co 10:7-8), some of them declaring themselves followers of Cephas, the chief apostle, others boasting that they belonged to Christ Himself (1Co 1:12; 2Co 10:7), while they haughtily repudiated all subordinate teaching. Those persons gave out themselves for apostles (2Co 11:5, 2Co 11:13). The ground taken by them was that Paul was not one of the Twelve, and not an eye-witness of the Gospel facts, and durst not prove his apostleship by claiming sustenance from the Christian Church. Another section avowed themselves followers of Paul himself, but did so in a party spirit, exalting the minister rather than Christ. The followers of Apollos, again, unduly prized his Alexandrian learning and eloquence, to the disparagement of the apostle, who studiously avoided any deviation from Christian simplicity (1Co 2:1-5). In some of this last philosophizing party there may have arisen the Antinomian tendency which tried to defend theoretically their own practical immorality: hence their denial of the future resurrection, and their adoption of the Epicurean motto, prevalent in heathen Corinth, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die" (1Co 15:32). Hence, perhaps, arose their connivance at the incestuous intercourse kept up by one of the so-called Christian body with his stepmother during his father's life. The household of Chloe informed Paul of many other evils: such as contentions, divisions, and lawsuits brought against brethren in heathen law courts by professing Christians; the abuse of their spiritual gifts into occasions of display and fanaticism; the interruption of public worship by simultaneous and disorderly ministrations, and decorum violated by women speaking unveiled (contrary to Oriental usage), and so usurping the office of men, and even the holy communion desecrated by greediness and revelling on the part of the communicants. Other messengers, also, came from Corinth, consulting him on the subject of (1) the controversy about meats offered to idols; (2) the disputes about celibacy and marriage; (3) the due exercise of spiritual gifts in public worship; (4) the best mode of making the collection which he had requested for the saints at Jerusalem (1Co 16:1, &c.). Such were the circumstances which called forth the First Epistle to the Corinthians, the most varied in its topics of all the Epistles.

In 1Co 5:9, "I wrote unto you in an Epistle not to company with fornicators," it is implied that Paul had written a previous letter to the Corinthians (now lost). Probably in it he had also enjoined them to make a contribution for the poor saints at Jerusalem, whereupon they seem to have asked directions as to the mode of doing so, to which he now replies (1Co 16:2). It also probably announced his intention of visiting them on way to Macedonia, and again on his return from Macedonia (2Co 1:15-16), which purpose he changed hearing the unfavorable report from Chloe's household (1Co 16:5-7), for which he was charged with (2Co 1:17). In the first Epistle which we have, the subject of fornication is alluded to only in a way, as if he were rather replying to an excuse set up after rebuke in the matter, than introducing for the first time [ALFORD]. Preceding this former letter, he seems to have paid a second visit to Corinth. For in 2Co 12:4; 2Co 13:1, he speaks of his intention of paying them a third visit, implying he had already twice visited them. See on 2Co 2:1; 2Co 13:2; also see on 2Co 1:15; 2Co 1:16. It is hardly likely that during his three years' sojourn at Ephesus he would have failed to revisit his Corinthian converts, which he could so readily do by sea, there being constant maritime intercourse between the two cities. This second visit was probably a short one (compare 1Co 16:7); and attended with pain and humiliation (2Co 2:1; 2Co 12:21), occasioned by the scandalous conduct of so many of his own converts. His milder censures having then failed to produce reformation, he wrote briefly directing them "not to company with fornicators." On their misapprehending this injunction, he explained it more fully in the Epistle, the first of the two extant (1Co 5:9, 1Co 5:12). That the second visit is not mentioned in Acts is no objection to its having really taken place, as that book is fragmentary and omits other leading incidents in Paul's life; for example, his visit to Arabia, Syria, and Cilicia (Gal 1:17-21).

The PLACE OF WRITING is fixed to be Ephesus (1Co 16:8). The subscription in English Version, "From Philippi," has no authority whatever, and probably arose from a mistaken translation of 1Co 16:5, "For I am passing through Macedonia." At the time of writing Paul implies (1Co 16:8) that he intended to leave Ephesus after Pentecost of that year. He really did leave it about Pentecost (A.D. 57). Compare Act 19:20. The allusion to Passover imagery in connection with our Christian Passover, Easter (1Co 5:7), makes it likely that the season was about Easter. Thus the date of the Epistle is fixed with tolerable accuracy, about Easter, certainly before Pentecost, in the third year of his residence at Ephesus, A.D. 57. For other arguments, see CONYBEARE and HOWSON'S Life and Epistles of St. Paul.

The Epistle is written in the name of Sosthenes "[our] brother." BIRKS supposes he is the same as the Sosthenes, Act 18:17, who, he thinks, was converted subsequently to that occurrence. He bears no part in the Epistle itself, the apostle in the very next verses (1Co 1:4, &c.) using the first person: so Timothy is introduced, 2Co 1:1. The bearers of the Epistle were probably Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (see the subscription, 1Co 16:24), whom he mentions (1Co 16:17-18) as with him then, but who he implies are about to return back to Corinth; and therefore he commends them to the regard of the Corinthians.

JFB: 1 Corinthians (Outline)

• THE INSCRIPTION; THANKSGIVING FOR THE SPIRITUAL STATE OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH; REPROOF OF PARTY DIVISIONS: HIS OWN METHOD OF PREACHING ONLY CHRIST. (1Co. 1:1-31)
• PAUL'S SUBJECT OF PREACHING, CHRIST CRUCIFIED, NOT IN WORLDLY, BUT IN HEAVENLY, WISDOM AMONG THE PERFECT. (1Co. 2:1-16)
• PAUL COULD NOT SPEAK TO THEM OF DEEP SPIRITUAL TRUTHS, AS THEY WERE CARNAL, CONTENDING FOR THEIR SEVERAL TEACHERS; THESE ARE NOTHING BUT WORKERS FOR GOD, TO WHOM THEY MUST GIVE ACCOUNT IN THE DAY OF FIERY JUDGMENT. THE HEARERS ARE GOD'S TEMPLE, WHICH THEY MUST NOT DEFILE BY CONTENTIONS FOR TEACHERS, WHO, AS WELL AS ALL THINGS, ARE THEIRS, BEING CHRIST'S. (1Co. 3:1-23)
• TRUE VIEW OF MINISTERS: THE JUDGMENT IS NOT TO BE FORESTALLED; MEANWHILE THE APOSTLES' LOW STATE CONTRASTS WITH THE CORINTHIANS' PARTY PRIDE, NOT THAT PAUL WOULD SHAME THEM, BUT AS A FATHER WARN THEM; FOR WHICH END HE SENT TIMOTHY, AND WILL SOON COME HIMSELF. (1Co. 4:1-21)
• THE INCESTUOUS PERSON AT CORINTH: THE CORINTHIANS REPROVED FOR CONNIVANCE, AND WARNED TO PURGE OUT THE BAD LEAVEN. QUALIFICATION OF HIS FORMER COMMAND AS TO ASSOCIATION WITH SINNERS OF THE WORLD. (1Co 5:1-13)
• LITIGATION OF CHRISTIANS IN HEATHEN COURTS CENSURED: ITS VERY EXISTENCE BETRAYS A WRONG SPIRIT: BETTER TO BEAR WRONG NOW, AND HEREAFTER THE DOERS OF WRONG SHALL BE SHUT OUT OF HEAVEN. (1Co 6:1-11)
• REFUTATION OF THE ANTINOMIAN DEFENSE OF FORNICATION AS IF IT WAS LAWFUL BECAUSE MEATS ARE SO. (1Co 6:12-20)
• REPLY TO THEIR INQUIRIES AS TO MARRIAGE; THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE IN OTHER THINGS IS, ABIDE IN YOUR STATION, FOR THE TIME IS SHORT. (1Co. 7:1-40) The Corinthians in their letter had probably asked questions which tended to disparage marriage, and had implied that it was better to break it off when contracted with an unbeliever.
• ON PARTAKING OF MEATS OFFERED TO IDOLS. (1Co 8:1-13) Though to those knowing that an idol has no existence, the question of eating meats offered to idols (referred to in the letter of the Corinthians, compare 1Co 7:1) might seem unimportant, it is not so with some, and the infirmities of such should be respected. The portions of the victims not offered on the altars belonged partly to the priests, partly to the offerers; and were eaten at feasts in the temples and in private houses and were often sold in the markets; so that Christians were constantly exposed to the temptation of receiving them, which was forbidden (Num 25:2; Psa 106:28). The apostles forbade it in their decree issued from Jerusalem (Acts 15:1-29; Act 21:25); but Paul does not allude here to that decree, as he rests his precepts rather on his own independent apostolic authority.
• HE CONFIRMS HIS TEACHING AS TO NOT PUTTING A STUMBLING-BLOCK IN A BROTHER'S WAY (1Co 8:13) BY HIS OWN EXAMPLE IN NOT USING HIS UNDOUBTED RIGHTS AS AN APOSTLE, SO AS TO WIN MEN TO CHRIST. (1Co. 9:1-27)
• DANGER OF FELLOWSHIP WITH IDOLATRY ILLUSTRATED IN THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL: SUCH FELLOWSHIP INCOMPATIBLE WITH FELLOWSHIP IN THE LORD'S SUPPER. EVEN LAWFUL THINGS ARE TO BE FORBORNE, SO AS NOT TO HURT WEAK BRETHREN. (1Co. 10:1-33)
• CENSURE ON DISORDERS IN THEIR ASSEMBLIES: THEIR WOMEN NOT BEING VEILED, AND ABUSES AT THE LOVE-FEASTS. (1Co. 11:1-34) Rather belonging to the end of the tenth chapter, than to this chapter.
• THE USE AND THE ABUSE OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS, ESPECIALLY PROPHESYING AND TONGUES. (1Co. 12:1-31)
• CHARITY OR LOVE SUPERIOR TO ALL GIFTS. (1Co 13:1-13)
• SUPERIORITY OF PROPHECY OVER TONGUES. (1Co. 14:1-25)
• RULES FOR THE EXERCISE OF GIFTS IN THE CONGREGATION. (1Co 14:26-40)
• THE RESURRECTION PROVED AGAINST THE DENIERS OF IT AT CORINTH. (1Co. 15:1-58)
• DIRECTIONS AS TO THE COLLECTION FOR THE JUDEAN CHRISTIANS: PAUL'S FUTURE PLANS: HE COMMENDS TO THEM TIMOTHY, APOLLOS, &C. SALUTATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS. (1Co. 16:1-24)

TSK: 1 Corinthians 1 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

1Co 1:1, After his salutation and thanksgiving, 1Co 1:10. he exhorts them to unity, 1Co 1:12. and reproves their dissensions; 1Co 1:18, God destroys the wisdom of the wise, 1Co 1:21. by the foolishness of preaching; 1Co 1:26, and calls not the wise, mighty, and noble, 1Co 1:28. but the foolish, weak, and men of no account.

Poole: 1 Corinthians 1 (Chapter Introduction)

CORINTHIANS CHAPTER 1

Corinth (the inhabitants of which are called Corinthians) was an eminent city of Achaia, (that Achaia which is now called the Morea), and was situated on an isthmus, or neck of land, betwixt the Aegean and Ionian Seas; so was very convenient for merchandise, and by merchandise came to great riches, which gave them great temptations to luxury, drunkenness, whoredom, &c. They were very infamous for the latter, as we read in writers, and grown to that impudence, that they made the increase of harlots a part of their prayers to their idols, and made the bringing of harlots into the city a part of their vows. Lais was a harlot amongst them, very famous in civil history. And as pride usually attendeth wealth, so they also were a people very proud and puffed up. They were also anciently famous for pagan learning, and had amongst them Stoics and Epicureans, who laughed at the resurrection of the body, and looked upon incest, adultery, and fornication, as very venial things, if at all unlawful. We read of Paul’ s first coming thither from Athens, Act 18:1 , where, Act 16:11 , he continued eighteen months; there he converted Crispus, 1Co 1:8 , and Sosthenes, and many believed and were baptized. Paul went from thence to Ephesus, 1Co 16:18,19 . To the church thus planted at Corinth Paul writeth this Epistle, at what time is not certain; but he is thought to have written it from Ephesus, whither he came, Act 19:1 , the second time, and, as appears from 1Co 1:10 , was going and coming to and from that city between two and three years. The occasion of his writing this Epistle will appear to any who consideringly reads it. He had heard from some who were of the house of Chloe, 1Co 1:11 , of factions and contentions that were amongst them, and had heard it reported that they suffered an incestuous person to abide in their communion, 1Co 5:1 . They had also written to him for his resolution in several cases and questions about marriage, divorce, &c. He had also heard of several disorders amongst them relating to their communion in the Lord’ s supper, and of some amongst them who denied the resurrection. For the allaying of these heats, and quieting their divisions, and for the direction of them in those cases about which they wrote to him, and the setting them right in the doctrine of the resurrection, and directing them in the true and profitable use of their gifts, and in the right celebration of the Lord’ s supper, and the quickening the exercise of their charity, he writes this Epistle; which is supposed to be placed in our Bibles next to the Epistle to the Romans, (though plainly written in order of time before), because that as that Epistle most fully discourseth the doctrine of justification, so this most fully resolves questions concerning church order and government. It is a book of holy writ concerning the Divine authority of which there was never any doubt, nor hath any portion of holy writ (for the quantity of it) a greater variety of matter, nor more of those dosnohta , things hard to be understood, which St. Peter 2Pe 3:16tells us are in this apostle’ s Epistles; the difficulty of which much ariseth from our ignorance of some rites used in the primitive church, but long since disused, and the usages of that country different from ours.

MHCC: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

The Corinthian church contained some Jews, but more Gentiles, and the apostle had to contend with the superstition of the one, and the sinful conduct of the other. The peace of this church was disturbed by false teachers, who undermined the influence of the apostle. Two parties were the result; one contending earnestly for the Jewish ceremonies, the other indulging in excesses contrary to the gospel, to which they were especially led by the luxury and the sins which prevailed around them. This epistle was written to rebuke some disorderly conduct, of which the apostle had been apprized, and to give advice as to some points whereon his judgment was requested by the Corinthians. Thus the scope was twofold. 1. To apply suitable remedies to the disorders and abuses which prevailed among them. 2. To give satisfactory answers on all the points upon which his advice had been desired. The address, and Christian mildness, yet firmness, with which the apostle writes, and goes on from general truths directly to oppose the errors and evil conduct of the Corinthians, is very remarkable. He states the truth and the will of God, as to various matters, with great force of argument and animation of style.

MHCC: 1 Corinthians 1 (Chapter Introduction)

(1Co 1:1-9) A salutation and thanksgiving.

(1Co 1:10-16) Exhortation to brotherly love, and reproof for divisions.

(1Co 1:17-25) The doctrine of a crucified Saviour, as advancing the glory of God.

(1Co 1:26-31) And humbling the creature before him.

Matthew Henry: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians

Corinth was a principal city of Greece, in that particular division of it which was called Achaia. It was situated on the isthmus (or neck of land) that joined Peloponnesus to the rest of Greece, on the southern side, and had two ports adjoining, one at the bottom of the Corinthian Gulf, called Lechaeum, not far from the city, whence they traded to Italy and the west, the other at the bottom of the Sinus Saronicus, called Cenchrea, at a more remote distance, whence they traded to Asia. From this situation, it is no wonder that Corinth should be a place of great trade and wealth; and, as affluence is apt to produce luxury of all kinds, neither is it to be wondered at if a place so famous for wealth and arts should be infamous for vice. It was in a particular manner noted for fornication, insomuch that a Corinthian woman was a proverbial phrase for a strumpet, and korinthiazein , korinthiasesthai - to play the Corinthian, is to play the whore, or indulge whorish inclinations. Yet in this lewd city did Paul, by the blessing of God on his labours, plant and raise a Christian church, chiefly among the Gentiles, as seems very probable from the history of this matter, Acts 18:1-18, compared with some passages in this epistle, particularly 1Co 12:2, where the apostle tells them, You know that you wee Gentiles, carried away to those dumb idols even as you were led, though it is not improbable that many Jewish converts might be also among them, for we are told that Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord, with all his house, Act 18:8. He continued in this city nearly two years, as is plain from Act 18:11 and Act 18:18 compared, and laboured with great success, being encouraged by a divine vision assuring him God had much people in that city, Act 18:9, Act 18:10. Nor did he use to stay long in a place where his ministry met not with acceptance and success.

Some time after he left them he wrote this epistle to them, to water what he had planted and rectify some gross disorders which during his absence had been introduced, partly from the interest some false teacher or teachers had obtained amongst them, and partly from the leaven of their old maxims and manners, that had not been thoroughly purged out by the Christian principles they had entertained. And it is but too visible how much their wealth had helped to corrupt their manners, from the several faults for which the apostle reprehends them. Pride, avarice, luxury, lust (the natural offspring of a carnal and corrupt mind), are all fed and prompted by outward affluence. And with all these either the body of this people or some particular persons among them are here charged by the apostle. Their pride discovered itself in their parties and factions, and the notorious disorders they committed in the exercise of their spiritual gifts. And this vice was not wholly fed by their wealth, but by the insight they had into the Greek learning and philosophy. Some of the ancients tell us that the city abounded with rhetoricians and philosophers. And these were men naturally vain, full of self-conceit, and apt to despise the plain doctrine of the gospel, because it did not feed the curiosity of an inquisitive and disputing temper, nor please the ear with artful speeches and a flow of fine words. Their avarice was manifest in their law-suits and litigations about meum - mine, and tuum - thine, before heathen judges. Their luxury appeared in more instances than one, in their dress, in their debauching themselves even at the Lord's table, when the rich, who were most faulty on this account, were guilty also of a very proud and criminal contempt of their poor brethren. Their lust broke out in a most flagrant and infamous instance, such as had not been named among the Gentiles, not spoken of without detestation - that a man should have his father's wife, either as his wife, or so as to commit fornication with her. This indeed seems to be the fault of a particular person; but the whole church were to blame that they had his crime in no greater abhorrence, that they could endure one of such very corrupt morals and of so flagitious a behaviour among them. But their participation in his sin was yet greater, if, as some of the ancients tell us, they were puffed up on behalf of the great learning and eloquence of this incestuous person. And it is plain from other passages of the epistle that they were not so entirely free from their former lewd inclinations as not to need very strict cautions and strong arguments against fornication: see 1Co 6:9-20. The pride of their learning had also carried many of them so far as to disbelieve or dispute against the doctrine of the resurrection. It is not improbable that they treated this question problematically, as they did many questions in philosophy, and tried their skill by arguing it pro and con.

It is manifest from this state of things that there was much that deserved reprehension, and needed correction, in this church. And the apostle, under the direction and influence of the Holy Spirit, sets himself to do both with all wisdom and faithfulness, and with a due mixture of tenderness and authority, as became one in so elevated and important a station in the church. After a short introduction at the beginning of the epistle, he first blames them for their discord and factions, enters into the origin and source of them, shows them how much pride and vanity, and the affectation of science, and learning, and eloquence, flattered by false teachers, contributed to the scandalous schism; and prescribes humility, and submission to divine instruction, the teaching of God by his Spirit, both by external revelation and internal illumination, as a remedy for the evils that abounded amongst them. He shows them the vanity of their pretended science and eloquence on many accounts. This he does through the first four chapters. In the fifth he treats of the case of the incestuous person, and orders him to be put out from among them. Nor is what the ancients say improbable, that this incestuous person was a man in great esteem, and head of one party at least among them. The apostle seems to tax them with being puffed up on his account, 1Co 5:2. In the sixth chapter he blames them for their law-suits, carried on before heathen judges, when their disputes about property should have been amicably determined amongst themselves, and in the close of the chapter warns them against the sin of fornication, and urges his caution with a variety of arguments. In the seventh chapter he gives advice upon a case of conscience, which some of that church had proposed to him in an epistle, about marriage, and shows it to be appointed of God as a remedy against fornication, that the ties of it were not dissolved, though a husband or wife continued a heathen, when the other became a Christian; and, in short, that Christianity made no change in men's civil states and relations. He gives also some directions here about virgins, in answer, as is probable, to the Corinthians' enquiries. In the eighth he directs them about meats offered to idols, and cautions them against abusing their Christian liberty. From this he also takes occasion, in the ninth chapter, to expatiate a little on his own conduct upon this head of liberty. For, though he might have insisted on a maintenance from the churches where he ministered, he waived this demand, that he might make the gospel of Christ without charge, and did in other things comply with and suit himself to the tempers and circumstances of those among whom he laboured, for their good. In the tenth chapter he dissuades them, from the example of the Jews, against having communion with idolaters, by eating of their sacrifices, inasmuch as they could not be at once partakers of the Lord's table and the table of devils, though they were not bound to enquire concerning meat sold in the shambles, or set before them at a feast made by unbelievers, whether it were a part of the idol-sacrifices or no, but were at liberty to eat without asking questions. In the eleventh chapter he gives direction about their habit in public worship, blames them for their gross irregularities and scandalous disorders in receiving the Lord's supper, and solemnly warns them against the abuse of so sacred an institution. In the twelfth chapter he enters on the consideration of spiritual gifts, which were poured forth in great abundance on this church, upon which they were not a little elated. He tells them, in this chapter, that all came from the same original, and were all directed to the same end. They issued from one Spirit, and were intended for the good of the church, and must be abused when they were not made to minister to this purpose. Towards the close he informs them that they were indeed valuable gifts, but he could recommend to them something far more excellent, upon which he breaks out, in the thirteenth chapter, into the commendation and characteristics of charity. And them, in the fourteenth, he directs them how to keep up decency and order in the churches in the use of their spiritual gifts, in which they seem to have been exceedingly irregular, through pride of their gifts and a vanity of showing them. The fifteenth chapter is taken up in confirming and explaining the great doctrine of the resurrection. The last chapter consists of some particular advices and salutations; and thus the epistle closes.

Matthew Henry: 1 Corinthians 1 (Chapter Introduction)

In this chapter we have, I. The preface or introduction to the whole epistle (1Co 1:1-9). II. One principal occasion of writing it hinted, namely, their divisions and the origin of them (1Co 1:10-13). III. An account of Paul's ministry among them, which was principally preaching the gospel (1Co 1:14-17). IV. The manner wherein he preached the gospel, and the different success of it, with an account how admirably it was fitted to bring glory to God and beat down the pride and vanity of men (1Co 1:17 to the end).

Barclay: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS OF PAUL

The Letters Of Paul

There is no more interesting body of documents in the New Testament than the letters of Paul. That is because of all forms of literature a letter is most personal. Demetrius, one of the old Greek literary critics, once wrote, "Every one reveals his own soul in his letters. In every other form of composition it is possible to discern the writercharacter, but in none so clearly as the epistolary." (Demetrius, On Style, 227). It is just because he left us so many letters that we feel we know Paul so well. In them he opened his mind and heart to the folk he loved so much; and in them, to this day, we can see that great mind grappling with the problems of the early church, and feel that great heart throbbing with love for men, even when they were misguided and mistaken.

The Difficulty Of Letters

At the same time, there is often nothing so difficult to understand as a letter. Demetrius (On Style, 223) quotes a saying of Artemon, who edited the letters of Aristotle. Artemon said that a letter ought to be written in the same manner as a dialogue, because it was one of the two sides of a dialogue. In other words, to read a letter is like listening to one side of a telephone conversation. So when we read the letters of Paul we are often in a difficulty. We do not possess the letter which he was answering; we do not fully know the circumstances with which he was dealing; it is only from the letter itself that we can deduce the situation which prompted it. Before we can hope to understand fully any letter Paul wrote, we must try to reconstruct the situation which produced it.

The Ancient Letters

It is a great pity that Paulletters were ever called epistles. They are in the most literal sense letters. One of the great lights shed on the interpretation of the New Testament has been the discovery and the publication of the papyri. In the ancient world, papyrus was the substance on which most documents were written. It was composed of strips of the pith of a certain bulrush that grew on the banks of the Nile. These strips were laid one on top of the other to form a substance very like brown paper. The sands of the Egyptian desert were ideal for preservation, for papyrus, although very brittle, will last forever so long as moisture does not get at it. As a result, from the Egyptian rubbish heaps, archaeologists have rescued hundreds of documents, marriage contracts, legal agreements, government forms, and, most interesting of all, private letters. When we read these private letters we find that there was a pattern to which nearly all conformed; and we find that Paulletters reproduce exactly that pattern. Here is one of these ancient letters. It is from a soldier, called Apion, to his father Epimachus. He is writing from Misenum to tell his father that he has arrived safely after a stormy passage.

"Apion sends heartiest greetings to his father and lord Epimachus.

I pray above all that you are well and fit; and that things are

going well with you and my sister and her daughter and my brother.

I thank my Lord Serapis [his god] that he kept me safe when I was

in peril on the sea. As soon as I got to Misenum I got my journey

money from Caesar--three gold pieces. And things are going fine

with me. So I beg you, my dear father, send me a line, first to

let me know how you are, and then about my brothers, and thirdly,

that I may kiss your hand, because you brought me up well, and

because of that I hope, God willing, soon to be promoted. Give

Capito my heartiest greetings, and my brothers and Serenilla and

my friends. I sent you a little picture of myself painted by

Euctemon. My military name is Antonius Maximus, I pray for your

good health. Serenus sends good wishes, Agathos Daimonboy, and

Turbo, Galloniuson." (G. Milligan, Selections from the Greek

Papyri, 36).

Little did Apion think that we would be reading his letter to his father 1800 years after he had written it. It shows how little human nature changes. The lad is hoping for promotion quickly. Who will Serenilla be but the girl he left behind him? He sends the ancient equivalent of a photograph to the folk at home. Now that letter falls into certain sections. (i) There is a greeting. (ii) There is a prayer for the health of the recipients. (iii) There is a thanksgiving to the gods. (iv) There are the special contents. (v) Finally, there are the special salutations and the personal greetings. Practically every one of Paulletters shows exactly the same sections, as we now demonstrate.

(i) The Greeting: Rom_1:1 ; 1Co_1:1 ; 2Co_1:1 ; Gal_1:1 ; Eph_1:1 ; Phi_1:1 ; Col_1:1-2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:1 .

(ii) The Prayer: in every case Paul prays for the grace of God on the people to whom he writes: Rom_1:7 ; 1Co_1:3 ; 2Co_1:2 ; Gal_1:3 ; Eph_1:2 ; Phi_1:3 ; Col_1:2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:2 .

(iii) The Thanksgiving: Rom_1:8 ; 1Co_1:4 ; 2Co_1:3 ; Eph_1:3 ; Phi_1:3 ; 1Th_1:3 ; 2Th_1:3 .

(iv) The Special Contents: the main body of the letters.

(v) Special Salutations and Personal Greetings: Rom 16 ; 1Co_16:19 ; 2Co_13:13 ; Phi_4:21-22 ; Col_4:12-15 ; 1Th_5:26 .

When Paul wrote letters, he wrote them on the pattern which everyone used. Deissmann says of them, "They differ from the messages of the homely papyrus leaves of Egypt, not as letters but only as the letters of Paul." When we read Paulletters we are not reading things which were meant to be academic exercises and theological treatises, but human documents written by a friend to his friends.

The Immediate Situation

With a very few exceptions, all Paulletters were written to meet an immediate situation and not treatises which he sat down to write in the peace and silence of his study. There was some threatening situation in Corinth, or Galatia, or Philippi, or Thessalonica, and he wrote a letter to meet it. He was not in the least thinking of us when he wrote, but solely of the people to whom he was writing. Deissmann writes, "Paul had no thought of adding a few fresh compositions to the already extant Jewish epistles; still less of enriching the sacred literature of his nation.... He had no presentiment of the place his words would occupy in universal history; not so much that they would be in existence in the next generation, far less that one day people would look at them as Holy Scripture." We must always remember that a thing need not be transient because it was written to meet an immediate situation. All the great love songs of the world were written for one person, but they live on for the whole of mankind. It is just because Paulletters were written to meet a threatening danger or a clamant need that they still throb with life. And it is because human need and the human situation do not change that God speaks to us through them today.

The Spoken Word

One other thing we must note about these letters. Paul did what most people did in his day. He did not normally pen his own letters but dictated them to a secretary, and then added his own authenticating signature. (We actually know the name of one of the people who did the writing for him. In Rom_16:22 Tertius, the secretary, slips in his own greeting before the letter draws to an end). In 1Co_16:21 Paul says, "This is my own signature, my autograph, so that you can be sure this letter comes from me." (compare Col_4:18 ; 2Th_3:17 .

This explains a great deal. Sometimes Paul is hard to understand, because his sentences begin and never finish; his grammar breaks down and the construction becomes involved. We must not think of him sitting quietly at a desk, carefully polishing each sentence as he writes. We must think of him striding up and down some little room, pouring out a torrent of words, while his secretary races to get them down. When Paul composed his letters, he had in his mindeye a vision of the folk to whom he was writing, and he was pouring out his heart to them in words that fell over each other in his eagerness to help.

INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS TO THE CORINTHIANS

The Greatness Of Corinth

A glance at the map will show that Corinth was made for greatness. The southern part of Greece is very nearly an island. On the west the Corinthian Gulf deeply indents the land and on the east the Saronic Gulf. All that is left to join the two parts of Greece together is a little isthmus only four miles across. On that narrow neck of land Corinth stands. Such a position made it inevitable that it should be one of the greatest trading and commercial centres of the ancient world. All traffic from Athens and the north of Greece to Sparta and the Peloponnese had to be routed through Corinth, because it stood on the little neck of land that connected the two.

Not only did the north to south traffic of Greece pass through Corinth of necessity, by far the greater part of the east to west traffic of the Mediterranean passed through her from choice. The extreme southern tip of Greece was known as Cape Malea (now called Cape Matapan). It was dangerous, and to round Cape Malea had much the same sound as to round Cape Horn had in later times. The Greeks had two sayings which showed what they thought of it--"Let him who sails round Malea forget his home," and, "Let him who sails round Malea first make his will."

The consequence was that mariners followed one of two courses. They sailed up the Saronic Gulf, and, if their ships were small enough, dragged them out of the water, set them on rollers, hauled them across the isthmus, and re-launched them on the other side. The isthmus was actually called the Diolkos, the place of dragging across. The idea is the same as that which is contained in the Scottish place name Tarbert, which means a place where the land is so narrow that a boat can be dragged from loch to loch. If that course was not possible because the ship was too large, the cargo was disembarked, carried by porters across the isthmus, and re-embarked on another ship at the other side. This four mile journey across the isthmus, where the Corinth Canal now runs, saved a journey of two hundred and two miles round Cape Malea, the most dangerous cape in the Mediterranean.

It is easy to see how great a commercial city Corinth must have been. The north to south traffic of Greece had no alternative but to pass through her; by far the greater part of the east to west trade of the Mediterranean world chose to pass through her. Round Corinth there clustered three other towns, Lechaeum at the west end of the isthmus, Cenchrea at the east end and Schoenus just a short distance away. Farrar writes, "Objects of luxury soon found their way to the markets which were visited by every nation in the civilized world--Arabian balsam, Phoenician dates, Libyan ivory, Babylonian carpets, Cilician goatsair, Lycaonian wool, Phrygian slaves."

Corinth, as Farrar calls her, was the Vanity Fair of the ancient world. Men called her The Bridge of Greece; one called her The Lounge of Greece. It has been said that if a man stands long enough in Piccadilly Circus he will in the end meet everyone in the country. Corinth was the Piccadilly Circus of the Mediterranean. To add to the concourse which came to it, Corinth was the place where the Isthmian Games were held, which were second only to the Olympics. Corinth was a rich and populous city with one of the greatest commercial trades in the ancient world.

The Wickedness Of Corinth

There was another side to Corinth. She had a reputation for commercial prosperity, but she was also a byword for evil living. The very word korinthiazesthai, to live like a Corinthian, had become a part of the Greek language, and meant to live with drunken and immoral debauchery. The word actually penetrated to the English language, and, in Regency times, a Corinthian was one of the wealthy young bucks who lived in reckless and riotous living. Aelian, the late Greek writer, tells us that if ever a Corinthian was shown upon the stage in a Greek play he was shown drunk. The very name Corinth was synonymous with debauchery and there was one source of evil in the city which was known all over the civilized world. Above the isthmus towered the hill of the Acropolis, and on it stood the great temple of Aphrodite, the goddess of love. To that temple there were attached one thousand priestesses who were sacred prostitutes, and in the evenings they descended from the Acropolis and plied their trade upon the streets of Corinth, until it became a Greek proverb, "It is not every man who can afford a journey to Corinth." In addition to these cruder sins, there flourished far more recondite vices, which had come in with the traders and the sailors from the ends of the earth, until Corinth became not only a synonym for wealth and luxury, drunkenness and debauchery, but also for filth.

The History Of Corinth

The history of Corinth falls into two parts. She was a very ancient city. Thucydides, the Greek historian, claims that it was in Corinth that the first triremes, the Greek battleships, were built. Legend has it that it was in Corinth that the Argo was built, the ship in which Jason sailed the seas, searching for the golden fleece. But in 146 B.C. disaster befell her. The Romans were engaged in conquering the world. When they sought to reduce Greece, Corinth was the leader of the opposition. But the Greeks could not stand against the disciplined Romans, and in 146 B.C. Lucius Mummius, the Roman general, captured Corinth and left her a desolate heap of ruins.

But any place with the geographical situation of Corinth could not remain a devastation. Almost exactly one hundred years later, in 46 B.C. Julius Caesar rebuilt her and she arose from her ruins. Now she became a Roman colony. More, she became a capital city, the metropolis of the Roman province of Achaea, which included practically all Greece.

In those days, which were the days of Paul, her population was very mixed. (i) There were the Roman veterans whom Julius Caesar had settled there. When a Roman soldier had served his time, he was granted the citizenship and was then sent out to some newly-founded city and given a grant of land so that he might become a settler there. These Roman colonies were planted all over the world, and always the backbone of them was the contingent of veteran regular soldiers whose faithful service had won them the citizenship. (ii) When Corinth was rebuilt the merchants came back, for her situation still gave her commercial supremacy. (iii) There were many Jews among the population. The rebuilt city offered them commercial opportunities which they were not slow to take. (iv) There was a sprinkling of Phoenicians and Phrygians and people from the east, with their exotic customs and their hysterical ways. Farrar speaks of "this mongrel and heterogeneous population of Greek adventurers and Roman bourgeois, with a tainting infusion of Phoenicians; this mass of Jews, ex-soldiers, philosophers, merchants, sailors, freedmen, slaves, trades-people, hucksters and agents of every form of vice." He characterizes her as a colony "without aristocracy, without traditions and without well-established citizens."

Remember the background of Corinth, remember its name for wealth and luxury, for drunkenness and immorality and vice, and then read 1Co_6:9-10 .

Are you not aware that the unrighteous will not inherit the

Kingdom of God? Make no mistake--neither fornicators, nor

idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sensualists, nor homosexuals, nor

thieves, nor rapacious men, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor

robbers shall inherit the Kingdom of God--and such were some of

you.

In this hotbed of vice, in the most unlikely place in all the Greek world, some of Paulgreatest work was done, and some of the mightiest triumphs of Christianity were won.

Paul In Corinth

Paul stayed longer in Corinth than in any other city, with the single exception of Ephesus. He had left Macedonia with his life in peril and had crossed over to Athens. There he had had little success and had gone on to Corinth, and he remained there for eighteen months. We realize how little we really know of his work when we see that the whole story of that eighteen months is compressed by Luke into 17 verses (Act_18:1-17 ).

When Paul arrived in Corinth he took up residence with Aquila and Prisca. He preached in the synagogue with great success. With the arrival of Timothy and Silas from Macedonia, he redoubled his efforts, but the Jews were so stubbornly hostile that he had to leave the synagogue. He took up his residence with one Justus who lived next door to the synagogue. His most notable convert was Crispus, who was actually the ruler of the synagogue, and amongst the general public he had good success.

In the year A.D. 52 there came to Corinth as its new governor a Roman called Gallio. He was famous for his charm and gentleness. The Jews tried to take advantage of his newness and good nature and brought Paul to trial before him on a charge of teaching contrary to their law. But Gallio, with impartial Roman justice, refused to have anything to do with the case or to take any action. So Paul completed his work in Corinth and moved on to Syria.

The Correspondence With Corinth

It was when he was in Ephesus in the year A.D. 55 that Paul, learning that things were not all well in Corinth, wrote to the church there. There is every possibility that the Corinthian correspondence as we have it is out of order. We must remember that it was not until A.D. 90 or thereby that Paulcorrespondence was collected. In many churches it must have existed only on scraps of papyrus and the putting it together would be a problem: and it seems that, when the Corinthian letters were collected, they were not all discovered and were not arranged in the right order. Let us see if we can reconstruct what happened.

(i) There was a letter which preceded 1 Corinthians. In 1Co_5:9 Paul writes, "I wrote you a letter not to associate with immoral men." This obviously refers to some previous letter. Some scholars believe that letter is lost without trace. Others think it is contained in 2Co_6:14-18 and 2Co_7:1 . Certainly that passage suits what Paul said he wrote about. It occurs rather awkwardly in its context, and, if we take it out and read straight on from 2Co_6:13 to 2Co_7:2 , we get excellent sense and connection. Scholars call this letter The Previous Letter. (In the original letters there were no chapter or verse divisions. The chapters were not divided up until the thirteenth century and the verses not till the sixteenth, and because of that the arranging of the collection of letters would be much more difficult).

(ii) News came to Paul from various sources of trouble at Corinth. (a) News came from those who were of the household of Chloe (1Co_1:11 ). They brought news of the contentions with which the church was torn. (b) News came with the visit of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus to Ephesus. (1Co_16:17 ). By personal contact they were able to fill up the gaps in Paulinformation. (c) News came in a letter in which the Corinthian Church had asked Paul guidance on various problems. In 1Co_7:1 Paul begins, "Concerning the matters about which you wrote..." In answer to all this information Paul wrote 1 Corinthians and despatched it to Corinth apparently by the hand of Timothy (1Co_4:17 ).

(iii) The result of the letter was that things became worse than ever, and, although we have no direct record of it, we can deduce that Paul paid a personal visit to Corinth. In 2Co_12:14 he writes, "The third time I am ready to come to you." In 2Co_13:1-2 , he says again that he is coming to them for the third time. Now, if there was a third time, there must have been a second time. We have the record of only one visit, whose story is told in Act_18:1-17 . We have no record at all of the second, but Corinth was only two or three daysailing from Ephesus.

(iv) The visit did no good at all. Matters were only exacerbated and the result was an exceedingly severe letter. We learn about that letter from certain passages in 2 Corinthians. In 2Co_2:4 Paul writes, "I wrote to you out of much affliction and anguish of heart and with many tears." In 2Co_7:8 he writes, "For even if I made you sorry with my letter, I do not regret it though I did regret it; for I see that that letter has grieved you, though only for a while." It was a letter which was the product of anguish of mind, a letter so severe that Paul was almost sorry that he ever sent it.

Scholars call this The Severe Letter. Have we got it? It obviously cannot be I Corinthians, because it is not a tear-stained and anguished letter. When Paul wrote it, it is clear enough that things were under control. Now if we read through 2 Corinthians we find an odd circumstance. In 2Cor 1-9 everything is made up, there is complete reconciliation and all are friends again; but at 2Cor 10 comes the strangest break. 2Cor 10-13 are the most heartbroken cry Paul ever wrote. They show that he has been hurt and insulted as he never was before or afterwards by any church. His appearance, his speech, his apostleship, his honesty have all been under attack.

Most scholars believe that 2Cor 10-13 are the severe letter, and that they have become misplaced when Paulletters were put together. If we want the real chronological course of Paulcorrespondence with Corinth, we really ought to read 2Cor 10-13 before 2Cor 1-9. We do know that this letter was sent off with Titus. (2Co_2:13 ; 2Co_7:13 ).

(v) Paul was worried about this letter. He could not wait until Titus came back with an answer, so he set out to meet him (2Co_2:13 ; 2Co_7:5 , 2Co_7:13 ). Somewhere in Macedonia he met him and learned that all was well, and, probably at Philippi, he sat down and wrote 2Cor 1-9, the letter of reconciliation.

Stalker has said that the letters of Paul take the roof off the early churches and let us see what went on inside. Of none of them is that truer than the letters to Corinth. Here we see what "the care of all the churches" must have meant to Paul. Here we see the heart-breaks and the joys. Here we see Paul, the shepherd of his flock, bearing the sorrows and the problems of his people on his heart.

The Corinthian Correspondence

Before we read the letters in detail let us set down the progress of the Corinthian correspondence in tabular form.

(i) The Previous Letter, which may be contained in 2Co_6:14-18 and 2Co_7:1 .

(ii) The arrival of Chloepeople, of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus, and of the letter to Paul from the Corinthian Church.

(iii) 1 Corinthians is written in reply and is despatched with Timothy.

(iv) The situation grows worse and Paul pays a personal visit to Corinth, which is so complete a failure that it almost breaks his heart.

(v) The consequence is The Severe Letter, which is almost certainly contained in 2Cor 10-13, and which was despatched with Titus.

(vi) Unable to wait for an answer, Paul sets out to meet Titus. He meets him in Macedonia, learns that all is well and, probably from Philippi, writes 2Cor 1-9, The Letter of Reconciliation.

The first four chapters of 1 Corinthians deal with the divided state of the Church of God at Corinth. Instead of being a unity in Christ it was split into sects and parties, who had attached themselves to the names of various leaders and teachers. It is Paulteaching that these divisions had emerged because the Corinthians thought too much about human wisdom and knowledge and too little about the sheer grace of God. In fact, for all their so-called wisdom, they are really in a state of immaturity. They think that they are wise men, but really they are no better than babies.

FURTHER READING

1 Corinthians

F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (NCB; E)

J. Hering, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (translated by A. W. Heathcote and P. J. Allcock)

J. Moffatt, 1 Corinthians (MC; E)

A. Robertson and A. Plummer, 1 Corinthians (ICC; G)

Abbreviations

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

NCB: New Century Bible

TC: Tyndale Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: 1 Corinthians 1 (Chapter Introduction)

An Apostolic Introduction (1Co_1:1-3)

The Necessity Of Thanksgiving (1Co_1:4-9)

A Divided Church (1Co_1:10-17)

Stumbling-Block To The Jews & Foolishness To The Greeks (1Co_1:18-25)

The Glory Of The Shame (1Co_1:26-31)

The Proclamation And The Power (1Co_2:1-5)

Constable: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical Background

Corinth had a long history stretching back into the Bronze Age (before 1200 B.C.).¹ In Paul's day it was a Roman colony and the capital of the province of Achaia. The population consisted of Roman citizens who had migrated from Italy, native Greeks, Jews (Acts 18:4), and other people from various places who chose to settle there.

The ancient city of Corinth enjoyed an ideal situation as a commercial center. It stood just southwest of the Isthmus of Corinth, the land bridge that connected Northern Greece and Southern Greece, the Peloponnesus. This site made Corinth a crossroads for trade by land, north and south, as well as by sea, east and west. In Paul's day large ships would transfer their cargoes to land vehicles that would cart them from the Corinthian Gulf to the Saronic Gulf, or vice versa. There stevedores would reload them onto other ships. If a ship was small enough, they would drag the whole vessel across the four and a half mile isthmus from one gulf to the other. This did away with the long voyage around the Peloponnesus. Later the Greeks cut a canal linking these two gulfs.²

Corinth's strategic location brought commerce and all that goes with it to its populace: wealth, a steady stream of travelers and merchants, and vice. In Paul's day many of the pagan religions included prostitution as part of the worship of their god or goddess. Consequently fornication flourished in Corinth.

"Old Corinth had gained such a reputation for sexual vice that Aristophanes (ca. 450-385 B.C.) coined the verb korinthiazo (= to act like a Corinthian, i.e., to commit fornication)."³

"The old city had been the most licentious city in Greece, and perhaps the most licentious city in the Empire."⁴

The most notorious shrine was the temple of Aphrodite that stood on top of an approximately 1,900 foot high mountain just south of the city, the Acrocorinthus. Hundreds of female slaves served the men who "worshipped" there.⁵ Other major deities honored in Corinth included Melicertes, the patron of seafarers, and Poseidon, the sea god.

"All of this evidence together suggests that Paul's Corinth was at once the New York, Los Angeles, and Las Vegas of the ancient world."⁶

There were several other local sites of importance to the student of 1 Corinthians. These included the bema (judgment seat or platform), the place where judges tried important cases including Paul's (Acts 18:12).⁷ Cenchrea, the port of Corinth on the Saronic Gulf of the Aegean Sea, was the town from which Paul set sail for Ephesus during his second missionary journey (Acts 18:18). Isthmia was another little town east of Corinth, just north of Cenchrea, that hosted the Isthmian Games every two or three years. These athletic contests were important in the life of the Greeks, and Paul referred to them in this epistle (9:24-27).

Paul had arrived in Corinth first from Athens, which lay to the east. There he preached the gospel and planted a church. There, too, he met Priscilla and Aquila, Jews who had recently left Rome. After local Jewish officials expelled the church from the synagogue, it met in a large house next door that Titius Justus owned. Paul ministered in Corinth for 18 months, probably in 51 and 52 A.D. He left taking Priscilla and Aquila with him to Ephesus. Paul then proceeded on to Syrian Antioch by way of Caesarea.

Returning to Ephesus on his third journey Paul made that city his base of operations for almost three years (53-56 A.D.). There he heard disquieting news about immorality in the Corinthian church. Therefore he wrote a letter urging the believers not to tolerate such conduct in their midst. Paul referred to this letter as his "former letter" (1 Cor. 5:9). It is not extant today.

Then he heard from "Chloe's people" that factions had developed in the church. He also received a letter from the church in Corinth requesting his guidance in certain matters. These matters were marriage, divorce, food offered to idols, the exercise of spiritual gifts in the church, and the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem. Those who carried this letter also reported other disturbing conditions in the church. These conditions were the condoning rather than disciplining of immorality, Christians suing one another in the pagan courts, and disorders in their church meetings. These factors led Paul to compose another letter, "1 Corinthians." In it he dealt with the problem of factions, promised to visit them soon, and said he was sending Timothy to Corinth (chs. 1-4). Paul added his responses to the Corinthians' questions to what he had already written. He dealt next with the oral reports (chs. 5-6) and then with the questions that the Corinthian believers had written to him (chs. 7-16). He evidently sent this epistle from Ephesus by trusted messengers in the late winter or early spring of 56 A.D. (cf. 16:8).

It seems that a conflict had developed between the Corinthian church and its founder. There was internal strife in the church, as the epistle makes clear. However the larger problem seems to have been that some in the community were leading the church into a view of things that was contrary to that of Paul. This resulted in a questioning of Paul's authority and his gospel. The key issue between Paul and the Corinthians was what it means to be "spiritual."⁸

"It [1 Corinthians] is not the fullest and clearest statement of Paul's Gospel; for this we must turn to Romans. Nor is it the letter that shows Paul's own heart most clearly, for in this respect it is surpassed by 2 Corinthians, and perhaps by other epistles too. But it has the great value of showing theology at work, theology being used as it was intended to be used, in the criticism and establishing of persons, institutions, practices, and ideas."⁹

Paul's Corinthian Contacts
Paul's founding visit	His "former letter"	The Corin-thians' letter to him	First Corin-thians	Paul's "painful visit"	His "severe letter"	Second Corin-thians	Paul's antici-pated visit

Message¹⁰

A phrase in 1:2 suggests the theme of this great epistle. That phrase is "the church of God which is at Corinth." Two entities are in view in this phrase and these are the two entities with which the whole epistle deals. They are the church of God and the city of Corinth. The church of God is a community of people who share the life of God, are under the governing will of God, and cooperate in the work of God. The city of Corinth was ignorant of the life of God, governed by self-will, and antagonistic to the purposes of God. These two entities stand in vivid contrast to one another and account for the conflict we find in this epistle.

The church of God in view in this epistle is not the universal church but the local church. These two churches are really not that different from one another. The local church is the micro form of the universal church. Moreover the universal church is the macro form of the local church. What is true of one is true of the other. Whatever we find in a local church exists on a larger scale in the universal church. Whatever we find in one local church exists in many local churches. Remember that the New Testament consistently speaks of the church as people, not buildings. The Apostle Paul addressed these people as believers because that is what they were. Today there may be quite a few unsaved people in a local church's membership. This was not the case in the first century. Believers composed local churches. They shared the life of God because the Holy Spirit indwelt them. They had submitted to God's rule over them to some extent. They were people whom God had commissioned to carry the gospel to every creature. We need to bear these things in mind as we read about the church of God in Corinth.

The city of Corinth is the other entity of primary importance in our grasping the major significance of this epistle. What characterizes the world generally marked Corinth. In the first century when other people described a person as a Corinthian they were implying that lust, lasciviousness, and luxury characterized that one. These were the marks of Corinth. Corinth as a city was ignorant of the true God, entirely self-governing as a Roman colony, and self-centered in her world. These traits marked the lives of individual unbelievers in Corinth as well. The city was going in the opposite direction from the direction God had called the church to go.

The atmosphere of this epistle is Paul's concept of the responsibilities of the church in the city. The apostle articulated this underlying emphasis in 1:9. Fellowship involves both privilege and responsibility. On the one hand, all God's resources are at our disposal. On the other hand, all our resources should be at His disposal as well. The church in any place has a debt to the people who live there to proclaim the gospel to them (Rom. 1:14-16). Paul wrote this whole letter out of an underlying sense of the church's responsibility for the city where it existed.

The church in Corinth was struggling to discharge its debt. It was failing in some very important areas: in readiness, in courage, and in conviction to declare the gospel. The Corinthian church was a carnal church. However, its carnality, as big a problem as that was, was only part of a larger problem. The bigger problem was its failure to carry out its God-given purpose in the city, namely to proclaim a powerful spiritual message to the city. The Christians could not fulfill their purpose unless they dealt with their carnality. Why is carnality wrong? It is wrong because it keeps us from fulfilling the purpose for which God has left us on this planet.

In this letter we discover the causes of the church's failure. Another major emphasis is the secrets of the church's success. On the one hand, we find correctives of carnality. On the other, we have construction of spirituality. Let's consider the causes of failure first.

The first cause of failure was the fact that the spirit of the city had invaded the church as a virus. Every evil thing in the church to which Paul referred was prevalent in Corinth. Three things merit particular mention.

One of the symptoms of Corinthian cultural influence was intellectual freedom. There was much interest in intellectual speculation in Corinth as there was in its neighbor city of Athens. The phrase "Corinthian words" was a synonym for rhetoric in Paul's day. Corinth glorified human wisdom. The Corinthians discussed and debated all sorts of opinions. Each intellectual leader had his group of disciples. Discussion of every subject under the sun prevailed with great diversity of opinion. Unfortunately this spirit had invaded the church. There was a veneration of human wisdom among the Christians. They had chosen their own Christian leaders whom they followed as disciples (ch. 1). Intellectual restlessness prevailed in the church as well as in the city. The believers sampled Christian teaching as the general populace dabbled in philosophical argumentation. This extended to such fundamental doctrines as the Resurrection (ch. 15).

Another evidence that the city had invaded the church was the moral laxity that prevailed. Intellectual permissiveness led to the lowering of moral standards. When people view any idea as legitimate, there are few moral absolutes. The worship of Aphrodite on the hill behind the city was extremely immoral, but the unsaved citizens viewed this worship as perfectly acceptable. "Live and let live" was their motto. Regrettably some Corinthians in the church were viewing morals in the same way (ch. 5).

A third mark of the city's effect on the church was personal selfishness. In the city every person did what was right in his own eyes. The result was there was very little concern for other people and their welfare. One of the evidences of this attitude in the church was the Christians' behavior in their meetings. They were not sharing their food with one another (ch. 11). They were also interrupting speakers in the meetings rather than waiting for the speaker to finish what he had to say (ch. 14). Where edification and order should have prevailed, self-glorification and chaos reigned.

These were only symptoms of a deeper problem. The real root issue was that the church had failed to recognize its uniqueness. The Christians had not grasped and retained some central truths the apostles had taught them that identified the essence of their Christianity. Paul reminded them of these things in this epistle.

They had forgotten the central importance of the message of the Cross of Christ. This was a message not subject to debate. It rested on eyewitness testimony and divine revelation, not human speculation. Christians should unite around this message, share a common commitment to it, and make it the subject of their proclamation. We should appreciate the unity of the body of Christ while at the same time glorying in the diversity of its leaders.

The Corinthians had also forgotten the central importance of the power of the resurrection of Christ. The same power that raised Christ from the dead is at work in Christians to enable us to live morally pure lives. Immorality is not an option for the believer. One of the most outstanding marks of a Christian should be purity. Because Jesus Christ was pure, we should be pure. Because He was pure, we can be pure.

The Corinthians had also forgotten the importance of Christ's command that we love one another. Selfishness had invaded the church. The believers needed to put the welfare of others, their fellow believers and their unsaved neighbors, before their own personal inclinations and preferences.

One of the central revelations of this epistle then is that the church fails to fulfill her function in the city (i.e., culture) when the spirit of the city invades her. The church allows the spirit of the city to invade her when she forgets that God wants her to be unique. The church fails when it adopts the ideas and activities of its environment rather than those revealed for it in God's Word. In view of this, Paul constantly appealed to his readers to be what they were in reality. We are not the people we were. We are saints (1:2). We need to remember that and act accordingly. We do not need to catch the spirit of our age. We need to correct the spirit of our age. When the church catches the spirit of its age, it catches a disease and becomes anemic, weak, and sickly. We avoid catching this spirit by staying spiritually healthy and by constantly imbibing the message of the Cross. We do it by exercising the power of the Resurrection and by keeping others rather than self primary.

I have already begun to hint at the secrets of the church's success, the second major revelation in this epistle.

The church must realize what it is to fulfill its function in the city. We must appreciate our life in Christ.

The life of the church is the life of an organism (ch. 12). It has one Lord whose life we share. It has one Spirit who governs it distributing abilities, assigning positions, and determining results as He sees fit in view of God's overall purpose. The church has one God--not many as in Corinth--whose glory it should determine to promote. To the extent a church realizes these truths, it will be ready to be successful in the sight of God. If it shares the spiritual life of her Lord, submits to the Spirit's leading, and seeks to glorify God, it will succeed. By separating from the spirit of the city, it can help and lift the city.

The law of the church must be the law of love. This is the opposite of the selfish outlook. Paul emphasized the importance of love in chapter 13.

The power of the church is the Resurrection life of Christ (ch. 15). We presently live between two resurrections, the resurrection of Christ and our own resurrection. These resurrections are facts of history. One has already taken place, and the other is yet to come. Between these resurrections the church must fulfill its function in the world. The life that God has given to every believer is life that has power over death. One who overcame death has given it to us. This life is essentially different from what unbelievers possess. It is eternal divine life. With such life we can face any enemy as we serve God. Even the final enemy, death, cannot hold us. It could not hold Him who gave us His life.

Not only must we appreciate the uniqueness of our life as a church to fulfill our function, but we must also fulfill our function by invading the city. Rather than allowing it to invade us, we must invade it to be successful.

We do this by proclaiming that Jesus is Lord. He is the only Lord. The proof of this is His resurrection.

We also do this by rebuking the immorality of the city, not just by decrying it but, what is more important, by overcoming it in our own lives. We do it by demonstrating the power of Christ's life within us by living morally pure lives.

Third, we do this by counteracting the selfishness of our culture by practicing genuine Christian love. This means living for the glory of God and the good of others rather than putting self first.

The church always fails when it becomes conformed to the maxims, methods, and manners of the city--the world in which it lives. It always succeeds when it stands separate from the city and touches it with its supernatural healing life.

This epistle calls the church in every age to recognize its responsibility to its city. The church is responsible for the intellectual, moral, and social conditions in its city. Unfortunately many churches believe they exist merely to conserve the life of their members. We live in a cultural climate very similar to the one in which the Corinthian Christians lived. It is a culture characterized by intellectual pluralism, situation ethics, and personal selfishness. We face the same challenge the Corinthian believers did. Consequently what this epistle reveals is extremely relevant for us. We have responsibility for how people in our city think, how they behave, and whom they glorify. What they need is the message of the Cross delivered in the power of the Resurrection.

This letter is also a call to separation.

First, we must separate from absolute intellectual freedom and willingly submit our understanding and thinking to the revelation that God has given us in Scripture (chs. 1-4). There is a growing notion that all religions lead to God. Increasingly we hear that it does not matter too much what someone believes because we will all end up in the same place eventually. We need to counter that view with the revelation of the exclusive way of salvation that God has provided for people who are hopelessly lost and dead in their sins.

God has also called us to separation from moral laxity. Our culture is playing down personal morality and marital morality today. We need to proclaim the standards of God in these areas even though we may face strong opposition for doing so. Paul held these standards up in chapters 5-7.

Likewise we need to separate from selfish living. We need to make a break with goals and plans designed to glorify ourselves. Instead we need to evaluate all of our activities by the standard of chapter 13.

By way of application we can conclude several things from these observations about the emphases in this epistle.

First, the influence of the church is the influence of its individual members. The sum of its individual members' influence is the church's influence. Everything that is true of the church, therefore, is true of the individual believer in it to some extent.

Second, there should be perpetual conflict between the church and the city. If there is no conflict, the church is not having its proper influence. It may be that the city has invaded the church.

Third, the message of the church must ever be the message of the Cross and the Resurrection. It is a message of failure and success, of success out of failure. That is the message of hope the city needs to hear. Consequently we need to "be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord," because we know that our labor is not in vain in the Lord (15:58).

Constable: 1 Corinthians (Outline)

Outline

I. Introduction 1:1-9

A. Salutation 1:1-3

B. Thanksgiving 1:4-9

II. Conditions reported to Paul 1:10-6:20

A. Divisions in the church 1:10-4:21

1. The manifestation of the problem 1:10-17

2. The gospel as a contradiction to human wisdom 1:18-2:5

3. The Spirit's ministry of revealing God's wisdom 2:6-16

4. The spiritual yet carnal condition 3:1-4

5. The role of God's servants 3:5-17

6. Human wisdom and limited blessing 3:18-23

7. The Corinthians' relationship with Paul 4:1-21

B. Lack of discipline in the church chs. 5-6

1. Incest in the church ch. 5

2. Litigation in the church 6:1-11

3. Prostitution in the church 6:12-20

III. Questions asked of Paul 7:1-16:12

A. Marriage and related matters ch. 7

1. Advice to the married or formerly married 7:1-16

2. Basic principles 7:17-24

3. Advice concerning virgins 7:25-40

B. Food offered to idols 8:1-11:1

1. The priority of love over knowledge in Christian conduct ch. 8

2. Paul's apostolic defense ch. 9

3. The sinfulness of idolatry 10:1-22

4. The issue of marketplace food 10:23-11:1

C. Propriety in worship 11:2-16

1. The argument from culture 11:2-6

2. The argument from creation 11:7-12

3. The argument from propriety 11:13-16

D. The Lord's Supper 11:17-34

1. The abuses 11:17-26

2. The correctives 11:27-34

E. Spiritual gifts and spiritual people chs. 12-14

1. The test of Spirit control 12:1-3

2. The need for varieties of spiritual gifts 12:4-31

3. The supremacy of love ch. 13

4. The need for intelligibility 14:1-25

5. The need for order 14:26-40

F. The resurrection of believers ch. 15

l. The resurrection of Jesus Christ 15:1-11

2. The certainty of resurrection 15:12-34

3. The resurrection body 15:35-49

4. The assurance of victory over death 15:50-58

G. The collection for the Jerusalem believers 16:1-12

1. Arrangements for the collection 16:1-4

2. The travel plans of Paul and his fellow apostles 16:5-12

IV. Conclusion 16:13-24

A. Final exhortations 16:13-18

B. Final greetings and benediction 16:19-24

Constable: 1 Corinthians

1 Corinthians

Bibliography

Adams, Jay. Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible. Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980.

Andrews, J. N. "May Women Speak in Meeting?" Review and Herald. January 2, 1879. Reprinted in Adventist Review 165:5 (February 4, 1988):17.

Barclay, William. By What Authority? Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1974.

_____. The Letters to the Corinthians. Daily Study Bible series. Second ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1956.

Barrett, Charles Kingsley. A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Harper's New Testament Commentaries series. New York: Harper & Row, 1968.

Bassler, Jouette M. "Paul's Theology: Whence and Whither?" In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 3-17. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Batey, Richard. "Paul's Interaction with the Corinthians." Journal of Biblical Literature 84 (1965):139-46.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Bedale, Stephen. "The Meaning of kephale in the Pauline Epistles." Journal of Theological Studies NS5 (1954):211-15.

Beet, J. Agar. A Commentary on St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians. 6th ed. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1895.

Berding, Kenneth. "Confusing Word and Concept in Spiritual Gifts': Have We Forgotten James Barr's Exhortations?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:1 (March 200):37-51.

Bilezikian, Gilbert G. Beyond Sex Roles. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985.

Blampied, Anne B. "Paul and Silence for The Women' in I Corinthians 14:34-35." Studia Biblica et Theologica 18:2 (October 1983):143-65.

Blomquist, Jean M. "The Effect of the Divorce Experience on Spiritual Growth." Pastoral Psychology 34:2 (Winter 1985):82-91.

Brindle, Wayne A. "Biblical Evidence for the Imminence of the Rapture." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:630 (April-June 2001):138-51.

Bruce, F. F., ed. 1 and 2 Corinthians. New Century Bible series. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, Oliphants, 1971.

_____. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1982.

Buckley, Jack. "Paul, Women, and the Church." Eternity 31:11 (December 1980):30-35.

Burns, J. Lanier. "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 132:527 (July-September 1975):242-49.

Caird, George Bradford. Principalities and Powers. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956.

Calvin, John. The First Epistle of Paul The Apostle to the Corinthians. Translated by John W. Fraser. Edited by David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance. Calvin's Commentaries series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1973.

_____. Institutes of the Christian Religion. 2 vols. Library of Christian Classics series. Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Reprint ed., Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960.

Campbell, Barth. "Flesh and Spirit in 1 Cor 5:5: An Exercise in Rhetorical Criticism of the NT." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36:3 (September 1993):331-42.

Carson, D. A. The Cross & Christian Ministry: An Exposition of Passages from 1 Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, and Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Chadwick, H. "All Things to All Men' (I Cor. IX. 22)." New Testament Studies 1 (1954-55):261-75.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. He That Is Spiritual. 1918; revised ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1967.

_____. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948.

Chitwood, Arlen L. Judgment Seat of Christ. Norman, Ok.: The Lamp Broadcast, Inc., 1986.

Clagett, John Y. "The Concept of Conscience and Its Relation to the Christian Ethic in the Corinthian Epistles." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1971.

Clark, Stephen B. Man and Woman in Christ. Ann Arbor, Mi.: Servant Books, 1980.

Cole, Sherwood A. "Biology, Homosexuality, and Moral Culpability." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:615 (July-September 1997):355-66.

Constable, Robert L. Called Saints: Studies in I Corinthians 1-3 Moody Manna series. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1962.

_____. Live Saints: Studies in I Corinthians 4-16. Moody Manna series. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1966.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "The Gospel Message." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 201-17. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Conybeare, W. J. and Howson, J. S. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. New ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

Conzelmann, H. 1 Corinthians: A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.

Cousar, Charles B. "Expository Articles: I Corinthians 2:1-13." Interpretation 44:2 (April 1990):169-73.

_____. "The Theological Task of 1 Corinthians." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 90-102. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Dahms, John V. "The Subordination of the Son." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:3 (September 1994):351-64.

Darby, John Nelson. Notes of Readings on the Epistles to the Corinthians. London: Moorish, n.d.

_____. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Decker, Rodney J. "The Church's Relationship to the New Covenant." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:607 (July-September 1995):290-305.

Deere, Jack. Surprised by the Power of the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Deluz, Gaston. A Companion to I Corinthians. Edited and translated by Grace E. Watt. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1963.

A Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S. v. "Corinthians, Epistles to the," by G. H. Clayton.

A Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S. v. "Corinthians, First Epistle to the," by A. Robertson.

_____. S. v. "Lord's Day," by N. J. D. White.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

_____. Speaking in Tongues: Seven Crucial Questions. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975.

Dobbins, Richard. "Two Sinister Forces Undermining Clergy Marriages." Ministries 4:1 (Winter 1985-86):31-32, 39.

Dods, Marcus. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1889.

Dollar, George W. "Church History and the Tongues Movement." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):316-21.

Donfried, K. P. "Justification and Last Judgment in Paul." Interpretation 30:2 (April 1976):140-52.

Edgar, Thomas R. "The Cessation of the Sign Gifts." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:580 (October-December 1988):371-86.

_____. Miraculous Gifts: Are They for Today? Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1983.

Ellicott, Charles T. St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians. London: Longmans, Green, 1887.

Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. "Proclaiming the Lord's Death." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 103-32. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Fairbairn, Patrick. The Typology of Scripture. 2 vols. Sixth ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1876.

Farnell, F. David. "Is the Gift of Prophecy for Today?" Bibliotheca Sacra 149:595 (July-September 1992):277-303; 596 (October-December 1992):387-410; 150:597 (January-March 1993):62-88; and 598 (April-June 1993):171-202.

Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1987.

_____. "Tongues--Least of the Gifts? Some Exegetical Observations on 1 Corinthians 12-14." Pneuma 2 (1980):3-14.

_____. "Toward a Theology of 1 Corinthians." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 37-58. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Fiddes, Paul S. "Woman's Head Is Man:' A Doctrinal Reflection upon a Pauline Text." Baptist Quarterly 31:8 (October 1986):370-83.

Fishbane, Michael, "Through the Looking Glass: Reflections on Ezek 43:3, Num 12:8 and 1 Cor 13:8." Hebrew Annual Review 10 (1986):63-74.

Fisk, Bruce K. "Eating Meat Offered to Idols: Corinthian Behavior and Pauline Response in 1 Corinthians 8-10 (A Response to Gordon Fee)," Trinity Journal 10 NS:1 (Spring 1989):49-70.

Foh, Susan T. Women and the Word of God. Philipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1979.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. "The Nature of the Ministry according to Paul," Evangelical Quarterly 54 (1982):129-46.

Furnish, Victor Paul. "Theology in 1 Corinthians." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 59-89. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Gaffin, Richard B., Jr. "Life-Giving Spirit': Probing the Center of Paul's Pneumatology." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 41:4 (December 1998):573-89.

Gangel, Kenneth O. "Biblical Feminism and Church Leadership." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:557 (January-March 1983):55-63.

Geisler, Norman L. "The Significance of Christ's Physical Resurrection." Bibliotheca Sacra 146:582 (April-June 1989):148-70.

Geldard, Mark. "Jesus' Teaching on Divorce: Thoughts on the Meaning of porneia in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9." Churchman 92:2 (1978):134-43.

Gilmour, S. M. "Pastoral Care in the New Testament Church." New Testament Studies 10 (1963-64):393-98.

Glenn, Donald R. "Psalm 8 and Hebrews 2: A Case Study in Biblical Hermeneutics and Biblical Theology." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 39-51. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Godet, F. Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. 2 vols. Translated by A. Cusin. Classic Commentary Library series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1886; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1957.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gromacki, Robert Glenn. The Modern Tongues Movement. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1967.

Grosheide, F. W. Commentary on the First Epistles to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1953.

Grudem, Wayne. "Does kephale (Head') Mean Source' or Authority Over' in Greek Literature? A survey of 2,336 Examples." Trinity Journal 6NS (1985):38-59.

_____. The Gift of Prophecy in 1 Corinthians. Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1982.

_____. The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today. Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1988.

_____ "The Meaning of kephale: A Response to Recent Studies." Trinity Journal 11NS (1990):3-72.

_____. "The Meaning of kephale (head'): An Evaluation of New Evidence, Real and Alleged." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44:1 (March 2001):25-65.

_____. "Prophecy--Yes, But Teaching--No: Paul's Consistent Advocacy of Women's Participation Without Governing Authority." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30:1 (March 1987):11-23.

_____. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994.

_____. "Why Christians Can Still Prophesy." Christianity Today, September 16, 1988, pp.29-31, 34-35.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. Edited by Leslie F. Church. 1 vol. ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Heth, William A. and Wenham, Gordon J. Jesus and Divorce. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1984.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. "Evidence from 1 Corinthians 15." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 225-34. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

Hill, C. E. "Paul's Understanding of Christ's Kingdom in I Corinthians 15:20-28." Novum Testamentum 30:4 (October 1988):297-320.

Hodge, Charles. A Commentary on 1 & 2 Corinthians. 1857 and 1859; reprint ed. Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1983.

Hodges, Zane C. Grace in Eclipse. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. The Hungry Inherit. Chicago: Moody Press, 1972.

_____. "The Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:479 (July-September 1963):226-33.

Hoehner, Harold W. "The Purpose of Tongues in 1 Corinthians 14:20-25." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 53-66. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Holmyard, Harold R., III. "Does 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 Refer to Women Praying and Prophesying in Church?" Bibliotheca Sacra 154:616 (October-December 1997):461-72.

Hooker, Morna D. "Authority on Her Head: An Examination of I Cor. XI. 10." New Testament Studies 10 (1963-64):410-16.

Houghton, Myron J. "A Reexamination of 1 Corinthians 13:8-13." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:611 (July-September 1996):344-56.

House, H. Wayne. "Caught in the Middle," Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):12-14.

_____. "The Ministry of Women in the Apostolic and Postapostolic Periods." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:580 (October-December 1988):387-99.

_____. "Resurrection, Reincarnation, and Humanness." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):131-50.

_____. "Should a Woman Prophesy or Preach before Men?" Bibliotheca Sacra 145:578 (April-June 1988):141-61.

_____. "The Speaking of Women and the Prohibition of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:579 (July-September 1988):301-18.

_____. "Tongues and the Mystery Religions of Corinth." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:558 (April-June 1983):134-50.

Howell, Timothy D. "The Church and the AIDS Crisis." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:593 (January-March 1992):74-82.

Hoyt, Samuel L. "The Judgment Seat of Christ and Unconfessed Sins." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:545 (January-March 1980):32-40.

_____. "The Negative Aspects of the Christian's Judgment." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:546 (April-June 1980):125-32.

Hullinger, Jerry M. "The Problem of Animal Sacrifices in Ezekiel 40-48." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:607 (July-September 1995):279-89.

Hurd, J. C., Jr., The Origin of I Corinthians. New York: Seabury Press, 1965.

Hurley, James B. Man and Woman In Biblical Perspective. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S. v. "Corinthians, First Epistle to the," by R. Dykes Shaw.

Ironside, Harry A. Addresses on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1938.

Irvin, Dorothy. "The Ministry of Women in the Early Church: The Archaeological Evidence." Touchstone 4:1 (January 1986):24-33.

Isaksson, Abel. "Marriage and Ministry in the New Temple." Translated by Neil Tomkinson. Th.D. dissertation, University of Uppsala, 1965.

Jackson, Thomas A. "Concerning Spiritual Gifts: A Study of I Corinthians 12." Faith and Mission 7:1 (Fall 1989):61-69.

Jamieson, Robert; Fausset, A. R.; and Brown, David. Commentary Practical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Revised ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Jeremias, Joachim. "Flesh and Blood Cannot Inherit the Kingdom of God." New Testament Studies 2 (1955-56):151-59.

_____. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus. London: SCM Press, 1969.

Jewett, Paul K. Man as Male and Female. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975.

Johnson, Elliott E. Expository Hermeneutics: An Introduction. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1990.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Johnson, S. Lewis, Jr. "1 Corinthians." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1227-60. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

_____. "The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):309-11.

Justice, Sam. "Clergy Divorce: A Perplexing Problem." Ministries 4:1 (Winter 1985-86):24-25, 29-30.

Keil, C. F. and Delitzsch, Franz. The Pentateuch. 3 vols. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kitchens, Ted G. "Perimeters of Corrective Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):201-13.

Knight, George W., III. The New Testament Teaching on the Role Relationship of Men and Women. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977.

Lacey, W. K. The Family in Classical Greece. London: Thames and Hudson, 1968.

Lampe, W. H. "Church Discipline and the Interpretation of the Epistles to the Corinthians." In Christian History and Interpretation: Studies Presented to John Knox. Edited by W. R. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule, and R. R. Niebuhr. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967.

Laney, J. Carl. "The Biblical Practice of Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):353-64.

_____. The Divorce Myth. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1981.

Lange, John Peter, ed. A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 10: Romans and Corinthians, by J. P. Lange, F. R. Fay, and Christian Friedrich Kling. Translated by J. F. Hurst, Daniel W. Poor, and Conway P. Wing.

Lampe, Peter. "Theological Wisdom and the Word About the Cross:' The Rhetorical Scheme in I Corinthians 1-4." Interpretation 44:2 (April 1990):117-31.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul's First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. 1937. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961.

Lester, Andrew D. "Some Observations on the Psychological Effects of Women in Ministry." Review and Expositor 83:1 (Winter 1986):63-70.

Lias, J. J. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Cambridge Greek Testament Commentary series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1888.

Lightfoot, J. B. Notes on the Epistles of St Paul. Reprint ed. Winona Lake: Alpha Publications, n.d.

Lightner, Robert P. Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1986.

_____. Speaking in Tongues and Divine Healing. Second ed. Schaumburg, Il.: Regular Baptist Press, 1978.

Lindars, Barnabas. "The Sound of the Trumpet: Paul and Eschatology." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:2 (Spring 1985):766-82.

Litfin, A. Duane. "Evangelical Feminism: Why Traditionalists Reject It." Bibliotheca Sacra 136:543 (July-September 1979):259-71.

Lowery, David K. "1 Corinthians." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament pp. 505-49. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

_____. "The Head Covering and the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:2-34." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:570 (April-June 1986):155-63.

_____. "A Theology of Paul's Missionary Epistles." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 243-97. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Malick, David E. "The Condemnation of Homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:600 (October-December 1993):479-92.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. 1 Corinthians. MacArthur New Testament Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984.

_____. Charismatic Chaos. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

_____. The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979.

_____. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

Mare, W. Harold. "1 Corinthians." In Romans-Galatians. Vol. 10 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

McRae, William. Dynamics of Spiritual Gifts. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

Mollenkott, Virginia. Women, Men and the Bible. Nashville: Abingdon, 1977.

Morgan, G. Campbell. The Corinthian Letters of Paul. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1946.

_____. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morris, Leon. The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

Murray, John. Divorce. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1972.

New Scofield Reference Bible. Edited by E. Schuyler English, et al. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

Oldham, Roger Singleton. "Positional and Functional Equality: An Appraisal of the Major Arguments for the Ordination of Women." Mid-America Theological Journal 9:2 (Fall 1985):1-29.

Olshausen, H. Biblical Commentary on St. Paul's First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1851.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. Pattern for Maturity. Chicago: Moody Press, 1966.

_____. Things to Come. Findlay, Oh: Dunham Publishing Co., 1963.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1990.

Poythress, Vern Sheridan. "Modern Spiritual Gifts as Analogous to Apostolic Gifts: Affirming Extraordinary Works of the Spirit within Cessationist Theology." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:1 (March 1996):71-101.

Proctor, John. "Fire in God's House: Influence of Malachi 3 in the NT." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36:1 (March 1993):9-14.

Pyne, Robert A. "The Role of the Holy Spirit in Conversion." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:598 (April-June 1993):203-18.

Quine, Jay A. "Court Involvement in Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:593 (January-March 1992):60-73, and 594 (April-June 1992):223-36.

Ramm, Bernard. Protestant Biblical Interpretation. Revised ed. Boston: W. A. Wilde Co., 1956.

Ramsay, William M. The Cities of St. Paul. New York: Hodder & Stoughton, 1907.

Reaume, John D. "Another Look at 1 Corinthians 15:29, Baptized for the Dead'." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):457-75.

Reese, Alexander. The Approaching Advent of Christ. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1937; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Grand Rapids International Publications, 1975.

Rhyne, C. Thomas. "Expository Articles: I Corinthians 3:1-9." Interpretation 44:2 (April 1990):174-78.

Ridderbos, H. Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975.

Robertson, Archibald, and Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians. International Critical Commentary series. Second ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Rosner, Brian S. "Temple and Holiness in 1 Corinthians 5." Tyndale Bulletin 42 (1991):137-45.

Rosscup, James E. "A New Look at 1 Corinthians 3:12--'Gold, Silver, Precious Stones.'" Master's Seminary Journal 1:1 (Spring (1990):33-51.

Ryrie, Charles C. Balancing the Christian Life. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

_____. Basic Theology. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1986.

_____. "Biblical Teaching on Divorce and Remarriage." By the Author, 1981.

_____. "Contrasting Views on Sanctification." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 189-200. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

_____. The Grace of God. Chicago: Moody Press, 1963.

_____. The Holy Spirit. Handbook of Bible Doctrine series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

_____. The Place of Women in the Church. New York: Macmillan, 1958; reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1968. (A 1978 edition, also published by Moody Press, was titled The Role of Women in the Church.)

_____. The Ryrie Study Bible. Chicago: Moody Press, 1978.

_____. "What Is Spirituality?" Bibliotheca Sacra 126:503 (July-September 1969):204-13.

_____. You Mean the Bible Teaches That . . .. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

_____. "Sinners' Who Are Forgiven or Saints' Who Sin?" Biblitheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):400-12.

Savage, Paula A. "Greek Women's Dress." Biblical Illustrator 12:2 (Winter 1986):17-23.

Scanzoni, Letha and Hardesty, Nancy. All We're Meant to Be. Waco: Word Books, 1975.

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. 8 vols. 1910. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1966.

Sellers, C. Norman. Biblical Conclusions Concerning Tongues. Miami: By the author, n.d.

Simon, W. G. H. The First Epistle to the Corinthians: Introduction and Commentary. London: SCM, 1959.

Smith, Jay E. "Can Fallen Leaders Be Restored to Leadership? Bibliotheca Sacra 151:604 (October-December 1994):455-80.

Smith, Wilbur. "Inheritance and Reward in Heaven." Eternity, March 1977, p. 79.

Smith, William Robertson. Lectures on the Religion of the Semites. 3rd ed. New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1969.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept from the Hour. Fourth ed. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1991.

Sweeting, George. Love Is the Greatest. 1968; revised ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Terry, Milton S. Biblical Hermeneutics. Second ed. Reprinted. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1964.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel. S.v. "erchomai," by Johannes Schneider.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, Robert L. "1 Cor 13:11 Revisited: an Exegetical Update." Master's Seminary Journal 4:2 (Fall 1993):187-201.

_____. "Tongues . . . Will Cease'." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 17:2 (Spring 1974):81-89.

_____. "Prophecy Rediscovered? A Review of The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:593 (January-March 1992):83-96.

_____. Understanding Spiritual Gifts: An exegetical study of 1 Corinthians 12-14. Chicago: Moody Press, 1978.

Thrall, M. E. The First and Second Letters of Paul to the Corinthians. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "First Corinthians Thirteen and The Tongues Question," Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):311-16.

_____. "The Spiritual Man." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:498 (April-June 1968):139-46.

Ukleja, P. Michael. "Homosexuality in the New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:560 (October-December 1983):350-58.

Unger, Merrill F. New Testament Teaching on Tongues. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1971.

Vine, W. E. 1 Corinthians. London: Oliphants, 1951.

von Campenhausen, H. Ecclesiastical Authority and Spiritual Power in the Church of the First Three Centuries. Stanford: Stanford University, 1969.

Wall, Joe L. Going for the Gold. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Waltke, Bruce K. "1 Corinthians 11:2-16: An Interpretation." Bibliotheca Sacra 135:537 (January-March 1978):46-57.

Walvoord, John F. The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

_____. "Contemporary Issues in the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Part IV: Spiritual Gifts Today." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:520 (October-December 1973):315-28. Reprinted as "The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:570 (April-June 1986):109-21.

_____. The Holy Spirit. 1954. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. The Rapture Question. Findlay, Oh: Dunham Publishing Co., 1957.

White, Joel R. "Baptized on Account of the Dead": The Meaning of 1 Corinthians 15:29 in its Context." Journal of Biblical Literature 116:3 (1997):487-99.

White, R. Fowler. "Does God Speak Today Apart from the Bible? In The Coming Evangelical Crisis, pp. 77-90. Edited by John H. Armstrong. Chicago: Moody Press, 1996.

Wilkin, Robert N. "Are All Things Lawful for Believers?" Grace Evangelical Society Newsletter 4:7 (July 1989):2.

_____. "The So-Called So-Called Brother." Grace Evangelical Society News 6:10 (October 1991):2-3.

Wilson, Kenneth T. "Should Women Wear Headcoverings?" Bibliotheca Sacra 148:592 (October-December 1991):442-62.

Yamauchi, Edwin M. "Cultural Aspects of Marriage in the Ancient World." Bibliotheca Sacra 135:539 (July-September 1978):241-52.

Zuck, Roy B. "The Doctrine of Conscience." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):329-40.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

THE FIRST

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE,

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

INTRODUCTION.

Corinth was the capital of Achaia, a very rich and populous city, where St. Paul had preached a year and a half, and converted a great many. See Acts xviii. 10. Now having received a letter from them, (chap. vii. 1.) and being informed of divers disputes and divisions among them, (chap. i. ver. 11.) he wrote this letter to them, and sent it by the same persons, Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, who had brought him their letter, chap. xvi. 17. It was written about the year 56, not from Philippi, as it is commonly marked at the end of the Greek copies, but rather from Ephesus. The subject and main design of this Epistle was to take away the divisions among them about the talents and merits of those who had baptized and preached to them, and to settle divers matters of ecclesiastical discipline. The apostle justifieth his mission, and his manner of preaching, chap. i, ii, iii, and iv. He teacheth them what was to be done with the man guilty of a scandalous sin of incest, chap. v. He speaks of sins against chastity; of matrimony; and of the state of continency, chap. vi and vii. Of meats offered to idols, chap. viii. Of his manner of conversing with them, and what their conversation ought to be, chap. ix and x. Of the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, chap. xi. Of the different gifts of the Holy Ghost, and how to employ them, chap. xii, xiii, and xiv. Of the faith of the resurrection, chap. xv. Of charitable contributions, and of his design of coming again to them, chap. xvi. (Witham) --- St. Paul having planted the faith in Corinth, where he had preached a year and a half, and converted a great many, went to Ephesus. After being there three years, he wrote this first Epistle to the Corinthians, and sent it by the same persons, Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, who had brought their letter to him. It was written about twenty-four years after our Lord's ascension, and contains several matters appertaining to faith and morals, and also to ecclesiastical discipline. (Challoner)

====================

Gill: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 1 CORINTHIANS

This was not the first epistle that was written by the apostle to the Corinthians, for we read in this of his having written an epistle to them before, 1Co 5:9, but this is the first epistle of his unto them, that is now extant; and has been received by the churches, as of divine authority, being written by the inspiration of God, of which there has been no doubt in any age. The apostle himself was nearly two years at Corinth; where he preached with great success; and was the instrument of converting many persons, who by him were formed into a church state, consisting both of Jews and Gentiles, as is clear from many passages in this epistle, and whom be left in good order, and in great peace and harmony; but quickly after his departure, false teachers got in among them, and bad principles were imbibed by many of them, and evil practices prevailed among them, and they fell into factions and parties, which occasioned the apostle to write this epistle to them, as well as their writing to him concerning certain things, they desired to have his judgment and opinion of, 1Co 7:1, It is thought to be written about the year of Christ 55, and in the first year of Nero, though some place it in the year 59. It was written not from Philippi, as the subscription added to it affirms, but from Ephesus, as appears from 1Co 16:8, and, it may be, after the uproar raised there by Demetrius, as should seem from a passage in 1Co 15:32. The matter of it is various. The apostle first rebukes them for their schisms and divisions; suggests that their regard to the wisdom of men, and the philosophy of the Gentiles, had brought the simplicity of the Gospel into contempt with them; blames them for their conduct in the case of the incestuous person, and urges them to put him away from them; reproves them for going to law with one another before Heathen magistrates, and warmly inveighs against fornication; and then answers several questions, and resolves several cases concerning marriage; treats of things offered to idols, and of the maintenance of ministers; and dissuades from idolatry, and all appearance of it; takes notice of the unbecoming conduct of the members of the church at the Lord's supper; and discourses concerning the nature and use of spiritual gifts, and commends charity above them; observes and corrects some irregularities in the use of their gifts; proves by various arguments the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, which some of them denied; exhorts to a collection for the poor saints, and to several other things, and concludes the epistle with the salutations of others, and of himself.

Gill: 1 Corinthians 1 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 1 CORINTHIANS 1

This chapter contains the general inscription of the epistle, the usual salutation, and a special thanksgiving for blessings received; after which the apostle intimates the occasion of his writing, the divisions about their ministers, which gives him an opportunity of discoursing concerning the nature, end, use, and efficacy of the preaching of the Gospel. The inscription is in 1Co 1:1, in which an account is given of the persons concerned in this epistle; and first of Paul, the only inspired writer of it, who is described by his name, by which he went among the Gentiles; by his office, an apostle of Jesus Christ; and by the manner in which he came into it, being called to it not through any merit of his own, but through the sovereign will and pleasure of God: and next mention is made of Sosthenes, a brother minister of the Gospel, who was with the apostle, and joined in the salutation of the church, to whom the epistle is written; who are described, by their general character, a church of God; by the place of their abode, and seat of their church state, Corinth; and by their special characters, sanctified in Christ by election, and saints through the effectual calling; and with them are joined all other saints in Achaia, that belonged to them and the apostle, that called upon the name of the Lord; and then follows the salutation in 1Co 1:3, usual in all the epistles; after that a thanksgiving to God for the grace they had by Christ in general, 1Co 1:4, and particularly for their gifts of utterance and knowledge, which were plentifully bestowed upon them, 1Co 1:5, and were a confirmation to them of the Gospel of Christ, 1Co 1:6, and by which it appeared, that they were not behind other churches in these things; and are commended for their waiting for the coming of Christ, 1Co 1:7, by whom the apostle assures them, they would be so confirmed in the mean while, as to be presented blameless by him in that day, 1Co 1:8, of which they might be assured from the faithfulness of God, who had called them to communion with Christ, 1Co 1:9, upon which he exhorts them to unity of affection and judgment, for this end, that there might be no schisms among them; and this he does in a way of entreaty, and that by the name of Christ, and from the consideration of their being brethren, 1Co 1:10, suggesting hereby, that there were divisions among them: and signifies, that he had good reason to believe it, having had an account of them from a family of repute among them, 1Co 1:11, and then expressly mentions what their differences were about, namely, their ministers, 1Co 1:12, and uses arguments to dissuade them from their dividing principles and practices; showing, that one was their Lord and master, Christ, who was crucified for them, and in whose name they were baptized, and not his ministers, 1Co 1:13, and since some among them made an ill use of their having been baptized by the apostle, he is thankful that he had baptized no more of them, and mentions by name those that he had baptized, 1Co 1:14, and gives a reason for it, taken from the principal end of his mission by Christ, which was to preach the Gospel, and not only or chiefly to baptize, 1Co 1:17. The manner in which he was sent to preach, and did preach it, is observed by him, not in the words of human wisdom; and that for this reason, lest either the Gospel should be of no use, or the effect of it should be ascribed to a wrong cause; and then be obviates an objection that might be made to this way of preaching, that hereby the Gospel would be brought into contempt; to which he answers, by granting that it would be, and was reckoned foolishness by them that were blinded and were lost; and by observing on the other hand, that it was effectual to saving purposes to others, 1Co 1:18, and though the former sort might be the wise and prudent of this world, this need seem no strange thing, since the infatuation of such persons is no other than what was foretold would be, as appears from a testimony out of Isa 29:14, cited in 1Co 1:19, upon which some questions are put, and inquiries made, after men of wisdom and learning, whose wisdom God made foolish, 1Co 1:20, the reason of which was, because they did not make a right use of their natural wisdom in the knowledge of God, wherefore it was his pleasure to save men by means esteemed foolishness by them, 1Co 1:21, and these wise men, who accounted the preaching of the Gospel foolishness, are distinguished into two sorts, Jews and Gentiles; the one requiring miracles to confirm it, the other seeking wisdom in it, 1Co 1:22, but finding neither, though there were really both, the preaching of a crucified Christ was a stumbling to the one, and folly to the other, 1Co 1:23, though those that were called by grace from among them, whether Jews or Gentiles, had different sentiments of it, and of Christ preached in it, in whose esteem he was the power and wisdom of God, 1Co 1:24, the reason of which was, because there are superior wisdom and power in Christ and his Gospel, which the apostle, an ironical concession, calls the foolishness and weakness of God, to the wisdom and power of men, 1Co 1:25, and instances in the effectual calling and conversion of the Corinthians, who for the most part were not the wise, the mighty, and noble, 1Co 1:26, but the foolish, weak, and base; and the end of God, in the call of such, was to draw a veil over and bring to confusion the wisdom and power of men, 1Co 1:27, and also that no creature whatever should dare to glory before him, 1Co 1:29, but the true object of glorying in is pointed at, the Lord Jesus Christ; and the reason of it, all blessings of grace being in him, and from him, is suggested, 1Co 1:30, so that whoever glories, should glory in him, 1Co 1:31.

College: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

FOREWORD

Since the past few decades have seen an explosion in the number of books, articles, and commentaries on First Corinthians, a brief word to the readers might help them know what to expect or not to expect from this commentary. This commentary is intended for use by studious lay people, Bible teachers, and seminary students. Most scholars and specialists in the area of New Testament will probably find this commentary's treatment of 1 Corinthians and its problems too elementary. Because of the intended audience for this work and the constraints of length, the user should be aware of certain acknowledged limitations. There are at least four of these:

1. This commentary does not pretend to look at every problem, real or imaginary, which has caught the eye of previous scholarship.

2. The commentary does not attempt to cite continuously the interpretations of leading Christian thinkers as they have written on this Pauline letter.

3. Interpretations are given on individual passages without always citing the full evidence and without working through the attendant arguments, either for or against particular views.

4. Only a moderate number of footnotes have been used. In addition, the vast majority of the secondary literature cited will be English language and will, when possible, be in book form. The nonspecialist for whom this commentary is intended has little interest in or access to technical materials, journal literature, or foreign language materials.

Those who wish to study this letter of Paul in more detail should look to some of the more technical commentaries (e.g., Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians ).

I owe a special word of thanks to two individuals. My friend Gail Brady graciously typed the entire manuscript of this commentary for me. My friend and colleague Prof. Allen Black read the entire manuscript for me and saved me and my readers from more than one instance of an inappropriate choice of words as well as an occasional overstatement.

I dedicate this volume to my parents who shared with me over the years their own faith, hope, and love.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

INTRODUCTION

METHODOLOGY

The text of Scripture known as 1 Corinthians has provided a well from which believers have drunk for almost two millennia. This portion of Scripture has served the church as a resource for theology, for homiletical exposition, for pastoral issues, and more recently as a source for reconstructing social dimensions and dynamics of early Pauline Christianity. Whatever else one wants to say about 1 Corinthians, it cannot be doubted that it has had a significant impact on the Christian church.

Notwithstanding the necessity and value of this diversity of perspectives and interpretive methodologies which have come across the stage of Christian history, this present work is more narrowly focused in its approach. This work is primarily a historical-exegetical commentary, the goal of which is to understand and set forth the ideas, doctrines, and feelings Paul communicated in the letter of 1 Corinthians. The phrase "ideas, doctrines, and feelings" is not intended to describe an "intellectual history" of the great Apostle. Rather, Paul's ideas, doctrines, and feelings, as recorded in 1 Corinthians, are engendered and evoked by a series of practices and beliefs, diverse in themselves, coming from individuals and groups in the church of God at Corinth.

A decision to write a historical-exegetical commentary brings with it several assumptions and commitments.

1. This means in the first instance that the feelings, doctrines, and ideas of Paul must, as far as possible, be understood in the historical framework, both in which he wrote them and in which the first readers lived. A historical-exegetical approach has little in common with simplistic attempts to modernize Paul, to re-create him after the image of western Christianity. To be sure, every practicing believer knows firsthand the need to bring forward, with God's help and wisdom, the meaning of the ancient text into the modern world. How strange it appears, however, when those who wish to contextualize the Gospel in the modern setting have not invested the time and effort to first learn what it meant in its original context. Just as a good translation of Russian literature into French requires that one be familiar with both languages, so a good translation of the ideas of Paul's letter to the Corinthians into modern idiom requires a competent grasp of the original meaning of this letter as well as the modern world.

2. A commitment to a historical-exegetical methodology means that one must always recognize that Paul's letter to the Corinthians is an occasional document, arising in the first instance as direct responses to ad hoc issues and problems in the lives of believers living in a certain region of the Roman Empire, at a specific time, and under particular historical and cultural circumstances. Since the historical method infers that Paul's commands, arguments, and instructions were given in direct response to the issues raised by the lives and ideas of the Corinthians, one must openly acknowledge that 1 Corinthians may not address every issue that we, living two millennia later, hope it would. In fact, 1 Corinthians was not even adequate or appropriate for addressing the problem in all the Pauline churches. I am certain, for example, that the churches of Galatia would have been perplexed to receive 1 Corinthians as a solution to their specific problems. Indeed, even at Corinth it had to be supplemented by 2 Corinthians.

Not only does the historical method help restrain us from foisting our own agendas and ecclesiastical problems upon that small group of believers who lived at a particular time in Roman Achaia almost 2000 years ago, it also serves as a restraint for those who would twist the Scriptures and put forth their own ideology masquerading as exegesis. Time and again commentators have found a theology or doctrinal imprimatur in the text of 1 Corinthians which, even if generally true, has little in common with Paul's own intention and goals for this letter. Throughout the centuries preachers and theologians have strolled through the cafeteria of 1 Corinthians, appetite whetted, looking for some word, idea, or verse to place upon the plate from which they feed the church. At some point this kind of pragmatism in handling Scripture, which is driven by a variety of appetites, must be labeled as malpractice, and the student of Scripture needs to obey again the pastoral admonition to become "a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15).

Even though a historical-exegetical method is the underpinning of this commentary, it is in no way the final task for the church in the interpretation of 1 Corinthians. Rather, the historical-exegetical approach should be the first step, and a necessary one, which is followed by many other steps taken by believers who, through the course of their journey, translate the manifold and variegated message of 1 Corinthians for the contemporary and global church of Jesus Christ. The individual tools and methods used in this process of contextualization would hopefully come from the guidance of God as well as study in the traditional theological disciplines of homiletics, systematic theology, pastoral theology, ethnotheology, and the like.

THE LETTER OF 1 CORINTHIANS

DESTINATION

The letter of 1 Corinthians was sent by Paul and Sosthenes to the congregation of believers in the city of Corinth. This is in contrast to 2 Corinthians, which was written not only to believers in Corinth but also to believers in the province of Achaia, of which Corinth was the capital (2 Cor 1:1). The content of 1 Cor 5:9 "I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people" makes it evident that the letter of 1 Corinthians is not Paul's first written communication with the church at Corinth since he here refers to a previous letter he had already sent them and which they apparently misunderstood (5:9-11).

DATE

Even though the Acts of the Apostles was not written for the purpose of providing a historical framework for the Pauline Corpus, there are instances where Acts and facts from ancient historical records do supplement the letters of Paul. One very important way in which Acts supplements the less specific material in the Pauline letters is in regard to chronology. Without the chronological framework of Acts, it would be much harder to know how to arrange in sequence materials from Paul's letters and to assign dates to them. It is our good fortune to be able to assign dates to about five episodes mentioned in Acts, and thereby, assign relative dates to parts of Paul's correspondence. One of these instances is the case of Acts 18 where Luke narrates the beginning of the Pauline mission in Corinth. At that point we have firm evidence for the date of the Christian mission based upon supplemental historical data. In particular, Acts indicates that Paul's work at Corinth took place while Gallio was the proconsul of Achaia (Acts 18:12). This Roman official, who was the brother of the Roman philosopher Seneca, is known from ancient Roman literature as well as archaeological data. It is this latter realm of evidence which helps specify the time of his career when he was proconsul in Corinth. This would put Paul's work at Corinth and his appearance before Gallio in the early 50s. Acts 18:11 indicates that Paul worked in Corinth for 18 months; this means that Paul's correspondence in 1 Corinthians would have occurred in approximately A.D. 55. While some interpreters have attempted to get even more precise with the dating, it seems that A.D. 55 is as specific as the evidence can support.

PROVENANCE

Paul was actually not far from Corinth when he wrote 1 Corinthians. First Corinthians 16:8 points decisively to a site on the eastern side of the Aegean Sea, in Ephesus, on the western coast of the Roman province of Asia. Travel between large port cities such as Corinth and Ephesus was frequent and relatively easy in the Roman world. Consequently, it is no surprise to find Corinthians visiting Paul, and Paul and his co-workers making visits from Asia to Corinth.

ROMAN CORINTH

The Greek city of Corinth had suffered defeat at the hands of the expanding Roman Republic in 146 B.C. The archaeological evidence does not support, however, the idea that in the ensuing years all life and Greek influence vanished from this conquered and partially desolate site. While the Greek Corinth was clearly defeated, it was not totally deserted in the decades following 146 B.C. When Julius Caesar, shortly before his assassination in 44 B.C., reestablished the city as a Roman colony, it would have quickly become a city which was dominantly, but not exclusively, Roman. Consequently, any study of Paul's letter to the church of God at Corinth must take seriously the fact that Paul was addressing a city which had been, since 44 B.C., a Roman colony ( Colonia Laus Iulia Corinthiensis ). Roman colonies were typically established as outposts for promoting Roman culture, religion, language, and political systems as well as providing lands for retired Roman soldiers. And even though Corinth was located geographically in Greece, there is no doubt that Roman mores and ideas impacted the local populace since, as Aulus Gellius noted (2nd cent. A.D.), Roman colonies "seemed to be miniatures, as it were, and in a way copies" of the Roman people. Therefore, Corinth possessed all the appropriate Roman laws, magistrates and officials.

Because of Corinth's mercantile character and important geographical location, it quickly attracted new residents from throughout the eastern Mediterranean. Consequently, by the time of Paul's arrival in Corinth, almost one century after its reestablishment as a city, the population would have included not only Romans, but also Greeks, Jews, Egyptians, Syrians, etc.

ORIGIN, STRUCTURE AND CONTENT OF 1 CORINTHIANS

Even though there is not a consensus among interpreters regarding the exact nature and causes of the problems which Paul treats in 1 Corinthians, there is general agreement that the letter is organized around the cluster of problems which Paul is striving to remedy by his apostolic instruction. The letter is basically a series of smaller units of thought, each of which seems to be directed to a particular aberration in the beliefs and/or practices of the Corinthians. Paul's style in the letter is to acknowledge the existence of a sin or problem, address the sin or problem, and then move on to the next one.

Paul's information about these various problems at Corinth did not come from firsthand knowledge of his own nor through inspiration. The majority, if not all, of Paul's information about the various issues with which he dealt in the letter came most likely from two distinct human sources. The information and problems treated in 1 Cor 1-6 came from those from the house of Chloe. First Corinthians 1:11 states that "some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you," thereby identifying Paul's source of information for the problem he treats in 1 Cor 1-4. The wording of 1 Cor 5:1 "It is actually reported" points probably to additional information in 1 Cor 5-6 which was also supplied by those from Chloe's house. If this is not the case, then we have no idea who provided this report of immorality among the Corinthians.

A second major source for Paul's information is mentioned in 1 Cor 7:1 when he wrote, " Now for the matters you wrote about ." Paul is expressly acknowledging here that the list of issues and problems that he is going to respond to came from a document authored and sent by Corinthian believers to him. Numerous modern interpreters believe, rightly so in my opinion, that this Corinthian document informed Paul not only about the issue discussed in 1 Cor 7:1ff, but also the matters discussed at 8:1ff ( Now about food sacrificed to idols), 12:1ff ( Now about spiritual gifts), and 16:1ff ( Now about the collection for God's people).

At least two points can be drawn from this information. The first is that the Corinthians themselves should receive credit for the broad outline of what was discussed and treated in 1 Corinthians. In addition, one ought not overlook the fact that Paul's treatment of the Corinthians' problems is a treatment of the problems as communicated to him through an unnamed informant of one of the women members of the congregation and through a letter (authors unknown) sent to Paul which already had, regardless of its tone, an agenda for which Paul was not responsible. It is obvious, then, that even though no one seriously doubts the Pauline authorship of 1 Corinthians, it is important for the interpreter to appreciate the complex role of the Corinthians in their contribution to the content and structure of the epistle.

PROBLEMS AT CORINTH

The task of identifying and reconstructing the multiple problems within the church of God at Corinth on the basis of Paul's letter to them is not a simple one. Writing decades ago on this very problem Prof. Kirsopp Lake commented,

The difficulty which undoubtedly attends any attempt to understand the Epistles of St. Paul is largely due to the fact that they are letters; for the writer of letters assumes the knowledge of a whole series of facts, which are, as he is quite aware, equally familiar to his correspondent and to himself. But as time goes on this knowledge is gradually forgotten and what was originally quite plain becomes difficult and obscure; it has to be recovered from stray hints and from other documents by a process of laborious research, before it is possible for the letters to be read with anything approaching to the ease and intelligence possessed by those to whom they were originally sent.

There are some scholars who wish to interpret most, if not all, of the problems in 1 Corinthians as arising from one group of individuals at Corinth. The evidence of 1 Corinthians does not, in my judgment, support such a theory. There are, admittedly, aspects of this approach which are attractive. Common traits, to be sure, can be found among some of the problems. For example, Paul refers to the sin of boasting as an ingredient in more than one of the problems within the Corinthians fellowship. Likewise, the terms "division" ( , schisma ) (1 Cor 1:10; 11:18) and "dissension" (also schisma ) (1 Cor 12:25) are used by Paul in describing more than one problem situation among the letter's recipients. This common denominator of schisma does not require the conclusion that the problems of "party loyalty" in 1 Cor 1-4, abuse of the Lord's Meal in 11:17-22, and misunderstanding and misuse of spiritual gifts in 12-14 must all be traced back to a common theological aberration, to the same social stratum in the church, or to a particular house church in Corinth.

Since the goal in this commentary is to interpret 1 Corinthians as Paul's coherent letter, we must respect Paul's own categorization of the issues at Corinth if we want to understand the intent of his instruction and flow of thought as he responded and gave directions to the church of God at Corinth. If direct and explicit social links between the organizational subunits within 1 Corinthians can be isolated, so much the better for exegesis. However, to this point in time many of the rhetorical, sociological and anthropological reconstructions of the Christian community(ies) at Corinth resemble, at times, a Procrustean Bed rather than a picture put together on the basis of an exegetical-historical model.

Throughout the modern period of Pauline interpretation scholars have regularly commented on the issue of Paul's opponents at Corinth. In this interpretive context, the term opponent has become almost synonymous with those who promoted or participated in the spiritual aberrations opposed by Paul in 1 Corinthians. More recently, however, other scholars have rightly attempted to both refine and redefine the term opponent. From this ongoing discussion two points are relevant to this study of 1 Corinthians. First, one must not automatically equate the personalities, groups and aberrations behind 2 Corinthians with those behind 1 Corinthians. There is no compelling reason to believe that the two letters were written to address the exact same problems. In fact, the internal evidence leads away from such a position. (1) 1 Corinthians was written only to the church in Corinth, while 2 Corinthians was written not only to the church in Corinth but also to all believers in all the Roman province of Achaia, of which Corinth was the capital. (2) Most of the key terms and ideas of each letter are not found in the other. (3) The tenor and literary characteristics of each letter are distinctive.

The second observation from the contemporary discussion of Pauline opponents is the question of whether every spiritual aberration within a Pauline church should be interpreted as intentional and direct opposition to Paul himself. It is not a question of whether Paul ever had opponents (e.g., 2 Corinthians, Galatians), but whether the term opponent is the appropriate term for everyone who was guilty of spiritual perceptions and doctrines different than Paul's or whose lifestyle was not in harmony with Paul's ethical teachings. John Calvin touched on this point in his commentary on 1 Corinthians when he wrote, "Now, I have good reason for thinking that those worthless fellows, who had caused trouble in the Corinthian church, were not open enemies of the truth." Calvin's point is well taken and his caution in using the term opponent will be followed in this work. More explicit and extended discussions on the topic of opponents will be found at the appropriate junctures in the commentary itself.

OUTLINE OF 1 CORINTHIANS

The recognition of literary units in 1 Corinthians is part and parcel of the task of exegesis. The opening and closing of units of thought are not merely arbitrary literary embellishments nor are they just convenient ways to structure Paul's thought and feelings. These units put linguistic and semantic limits on the words and thoughts of Paul. The recognition of these demarcations in 1 Corinthians is mandated, since it helps ensure that the flow of Paul's rhetorical argument remains within the limits set by the Apostle himself. Moreover, a respect for the conceptual units and subunits of Paul's letter will greatly reduce the tendency to make his words mean more than he intended them to mean. This tendency to generalize Paul's thought and words beyond the immediate rhetorical setting comes at a high price, since it can only be maintained by denying the occasional nature of the Pauline correspondence as well as the universally recognized fact that meaning emerges from rhetorical and contextual usage.

Introduction etc. 1:1-9

Issue 1 Disunity and Community Fragmentation 1:10-4:20

Issue 2 Reports of Immorality 5:1-6:20

Issue 3 Sexuality/Celibacy/Marriage 7:1-40

Issue 4 Foods Offered to Idols 8:1-11:1

Issue 5 Liturgical Aberrations 11:2-34

Issue 6 Misunderstanding of Spiritual Gifts 12:1-14:40

Issue 7 Misunderstanding of Believers' Resurrection 15:1-58

Issue 8 Instruction for the Collection 16:1-11

Concluding topics 16:12-24

HISTORICAL MATRIX FOR THE CORINTHIAN PROBLEMS

Without going into the multifaceted issues about the historical evidence from Acts for Paul's churches and how this relates to the evidence for Paul and his churches from his own letters, it seems prudent to rely initially and primarily upon the evidence of 1 Corinthians itself rather than Luke's material in Acts to understand the nature and extent of the problems in the church at Corinth. To be specific, one must not falsely conclude, on the basis of the Lukan picture of a predominant Jewish matrix of the church in Corinth, that Jewish beliefs and practices provide the matrix for most of the aberrations within the Corinthian church. In this regard, Gordon Fee is correct when he points out that many of the problems at Corinth are explicitly traced by Paul to the converts' pagan heritage. It can be argued, furthermore, that even those issues not explicitly traced to pagan heritage by Paul can be best understood by seeing them against the backdrop of Greco-Roman rather than Jewish mores and values.

The issues depicted in 1 Corinthians arose directly from the lives of that first generation Christian community, most of whom had been believers no more than 48 months. Since Paul nowhere implies in 1 Corinthians that the Corinthian problems were introduced by outsiders, the most reasonable course to follow in evaluating the origin of the Corinthian issues is to investigate the urban setting of Roman Corinth from which the converts came. This means that the religious and cultural perspectives which shaped the beliefs and practices of those whom Paul addressed in this letter provide the best circumstantial evidence and clues for the interpretation of 1 Corinthians.

While the need to recognize the Greco-Roman matrix of the Corinthian problems might seem self-evident, the history of the interpretation of 1 Corinthians clearly reveals that not all interpreters have shared this methodological concern. In practice this approach to 1 Corinthians means that:

1. One must not attribute the Jewishness of Paul and the Scriptural basis of his own theology to those recent converts whom he was correcting. To extract texts and vocabulary from Jewish sources (e.g., Mishnah, Dead Sea Scrolls, Gospels, etc.) to understand the matrix of the Corinthians' problems is highly suspect. The fact that Paul often cites Scripture to remedy the problems at Corinth speaks more of his own Jewish heritage, his apostolic ministry, and his convictions that all Christians are to be guided by Scripture than it does that there was some significant Jewish background to the Corinthian problems.

2. The mores, patterns of culture and specific religious institutions of Greco-Roman paganism must be seen as the soil in which the Corinthian problems were germinated and grew.

3. The specific condition of the Corinth of Paul's day should be taken as the immediate setting for the converts. One must exercise caution in using information about an earlier Greek Corinth which had been destroyed in the second century B.C. and no longer existed in Paul's day in order to describe the Corinth of Paul's day.

4. One must recognize the multicultural nature of Corinth at Paul's time. It was geographically Greek, it was administratively and politically Roman, and its denizens came from throughout the central and eastern parts of the Mediterranean Basin. Consequently, one must reckon with ethnic influences in Paul's Corinth which reflect Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Syrian, Jewish, and Anatolian influences.

5. Vague and anachronistic labels such as gnosticism should be avoided until appropriate historical evidence and documentation can be discovered and shown to be relevant to the issues at Corinth addressed by Paul. A commitment to the notion of a gnostic background to 1 Corinthians still has advocates, though their numbers are surely down from that of the 19th and earlier part of the 20th century. Quite recently, for example, Pheme Perkins argued that

. . . gnostic mythologizing does form part of the horizon within which the New Testament should be interpreted. Students of Christian origins have become accustomed to comparing the New Testament material with a wide variety of Jewish and Greco-Roman sources. The same efforts of analysis and comparison should be applied to the gnostic material.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander, L.C.A. "Chronology of Paul." In Dictionary of Paul and His Letters . Ed. G.F. Hawthorne et al. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993, pp. 115-123.

Aune, David E. The New Testament in Its Literary Environment . Library of Early Christianity. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1987.

________________ . Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983.

Banks, R. "Church Order and Government." DPL , pp. 131-137.

Barnett, P.W. "Apostle." DPL, pp. 45-51.

________________ . "Opponents of Paul." DPL , pp. 644-653.

________________ . "Revolutionary Movements." DPL , pp. 812-819.

________________ . "Tentmaking." DPL , pp. 925-927.

Barrett, C.K. The First Epistle to the Corinthians . New York: Harper, 1968.

Beasley-Murray, G.R. "Baptism." DPL , pp. 60-66.

Beker, J.C. Paul the Apostle. The Triumph of God in Life and Thought. Phliadelphia: Fortress, 1980 .

Belleville, L.L. "Moses." DPL , pp. 620-21.

Black, M. "1 Cor. 11:2-16-A Re-investigation." Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity , Vol. 1. Ed. Carroll D. Osburn. Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Co., 1993, pp. 191-218.

Blomberg, Craig L. The Historical Reliability of the Gospels. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1987 .

Blue, B.B. "Food Offered to Idols and Jewish Food Laws." DPL , pp. 306-310.

________________ . "Apollos." DPL , pp. 37-39.

Bruce, F.F. 1 and 2 Corinthians. London: Butler & Tanner Ltd., 1971.

Bultmann, Rudolf. Theology of the New Testament . 2 vols. Trans. by K. Grobel. New York: Charles Scribners, 1951, 1955.

Calvin, John. The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians. Calvin's New Testament Commentaries. Trans. J.W. Fraser, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960.

Cantarella, Eva. Pandora's Daughters. The Role and Status of Women in Greek and Roman Antiquity . Trans. M.B. Fant; Foreword by M.R. Lefkowitz. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987.

Carson, D.A. Showing the Spirit. A Theological Exposition of I Corinthians 12-14 . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987.

Carson, D.A., Douglas Moo, and Leon Morris. Introduction to the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Casson, Lionel. Travel in the Ancient World . Toronto: Hakkert, 1974.

Chamblin, J.K. "Freedom/Liberty." DPL , pp. 313-316.

Chrysostom, Dio. The Eighth Discourse, on Virtue , 9-10. Vol. 1. Trans. by J.W. Cohoon. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1949.

Clarke, Andrew D. Secular & Christian Leadership in Corinth. A Socio-Historical & Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 1-6 , Vol. 18. Arbeiten zur Geshichte des Antiken Judentums & des Urchristentums. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1993.

Comfort, P.W. "Idolatry." DPL , pp. 424-426.

Conzelmann, Hans. I Corinthians . Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.

Cottrell, Jack . Feminism and the Bible: An Introduction to Feminism for Christians. Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Co.,1992.

________________ . Gender Roles and the Bible: Creation, the Fall, and Redemption. Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Co.,1994.

de Lacey, D.R. "Holy Days." DPL , pp. 402-404.

Donfried, Karl. "Chronology: New Testament." In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 1. Ed. D.N. Freedman, et al. New York: Doubleday, 1992-1994, pp. 1011 & 1022.

Dover, K.J. "Classical Greek Attitudes to Sexual Behaviour." In Women in the Ancient World. The Arethusa Papers . Ed. John Peradotto and J.P. Sullivan. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1984.

Ellis, E.E. "Coworkers, Paul and His." DPL , pp. 183-189.

Engels, Donald. Roman Corinth: An Alternative Model for the Classical City . Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1990.

Everts, J.M. "Conversion and Call of Paul." DPL , pp. 156-160.

________________ . "Financial Support." DPL , pp. 295-300.

Fee, Gordon. First Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987 .

________________ . God's Empowering Presence. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994 .

________________ . "Gifts of the Spirit." DPL , pp. 339-347.

________________ . New Testament Exegesis . Rev. ed. Louisville: Westminster Press, 1993.

Ferguson, E. Demonology of the Early Christian World . Lewiston, NY: E. Mellin Press, 1984.

________________ . Backgrounds of Early Christianity. Second Edition. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993 .

Fitzmyer, J. "A Feature of Qumran Angelology and the Angels of 1 Cor. xi.10." New Testament Studies 4 (1957-1958): 48-58.

________________ . "Another Look at KEFALH in 1 Cor. 11.3." NTS 35 (1989): 503-511.

________________ . Paul and His Theology. A Brief Sketch . 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1989.

Fuller, R.M. "Rewards." DPL , pp. 819-820.

Fung, R.Y.K. "Body of Christ." DPL , pp. 76-82.

________________ . "Cursing, Accursed, Anathema." DPL , pp. 199-200.

Furnish, Victor P. "Corinth in Paul's Time - What Can Archaeology Tell Us?" Biblical Archaeology Review 15 (1988): 16-17.

________________ . II Corinthians . Anchor Bible. Vol. 32A. New York: Doubleday, 1984.

________________ . "Theology in First Corinthians." In Pauline Theology . Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians. Ed. David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991 .

Gellius, Aulus. Noctes Atticae 16.13.9. The Attic Nights of Aulus Gellius . Vol. 3. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961.

Gill, D.W.J. "The Importance of Roman Portraiture for Head-Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16." Tyndale Bulletin 41 (1990): 245-260 .

Gillespie, Thomas W. The First Theologians. A Study in Early Christian Prophecy . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.

Green, J.B. "Death of Christ." DPL , pp. 201-209.

Green, Michael. I Believe in the Holy Spirit . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.

Guthrie, Donald and Ralph Martin. "God." DPL , pp. 354-369.

Gundry-Volf, Judith M. "Apostasy, Falling Away, Perseverance." DPL , pp. 42-43.

Haacker, Klaus. "Gallio." In ABD. Vol. 2, pp. 901-903.

Hafemann, S.J. "Corinthians, Letters to." DPL , pp. 164-179.

Hansen, G.W. "Rhetorical Criticism." DPL , pp. 822-826.

Hengel, Martin. Crucifixion in the Ancient World. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977 .

Hock, Ronald F. The Social Context of Paul's Ministry. Tentmaking and Apostleship. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.

Hodge, Charles. An Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965.

Holladay, Carl. First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians. Living Word Commentaries . Vol. 8. Austin, TX: Sweet Publishing Company, 1979 .

Hooker, M.D. "Authority on Her Head: An Examination of 1 Cor. XI.10." New Testament Studies. Vol 10 (1963-1964): 410-416.

Horsley, G.H.R. "Invitation to the Kline of Sarapis." New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity. Vol.1, 1981, pp. 5-9.

Hurd, John C. The Origin of 1 Corinthians. New York: Seabury Press, 1965.

Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary. New Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Kent, John H. Corinth . Vol. VIII, Pt. III. The Inscriptions 1926-1950. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1966.

Kim, S. "Jesus, Sayings of." DPL , pp. 474-492.

Kistemaker, Simon. Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993.

Klein, W.M., C.L. Blomberg, and R.L. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation . Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

Kraemer, Ross S. "Non-literary Evidence for Jewish Women in Rome and Egypt." In Rescuing Creusa. New Methodological Approaches to Women in Antiquity . Ed. M. Skinner. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University Press, 1987.

Kümmel, W.G. Introduction to the New Testament . Rev. ed. Trans. H.C. Kee. Nashville: Abingdon, 1975.

Lake, Kirsopp. The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul: Their Motive and Origin , p. vii. Cited by John C. Hurd, The Origin of 1 Corinthians . New York: Seabury Press, 1965.

Luter, A. B., Jr. "Grace." DPL , pp. 372-374.

MacMullen, Ramsay. Paganism in the Roman Empire . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981.

McKnight, S. "Collection for the Saints." DPL , pp. 143-147.

McRay, John. Archaeology and the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991.

Malherbe, A.J. Moral Exhortation, A Greco-Roman Sourcebook . Ed. W.A. Meeks. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986.

Malick, D.E. "The Condemnation of Homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27." Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (1993) 327-340.

________________ . "The Condemnation of Homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9." Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (1993): 479-492.

Marshall, I.H. "Lord's Supper." DPL , pp. 569-575.

Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians . Word Biblical Commentary, 40. Waco: Word, 1986.

________________ . The Spirit and the Congregation . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984.

Michaels, J.R. "Peter." DPL , pp. 701-703.

Mitchell, Margaret M. Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation. An Exegetical Investigation of the Language and Composition of 1 Corinthians. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993 .

Mohrlang, R. "Love." DPL , pp. 575-578.

Morris, Leon. "Sacrifice Offering." DPL , pp. 856-858.

________________ . "Faith." DPL , pp. 285-291.

Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome. St. Paul's Corinth . Text and Archaeology . Good News Studies, 6. Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1983.

Nepos, Cornelius. Great General of Foreign Nations. Preface 4. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960.

Nock, Arthur Darby. "The Vocabulary of the New Testament." Journal of Biblical Literature 52 (1933): 131-139.

Noll, S.F. "Qumran and Paul." DPL , pp. 777-783.

O'Brien, Peter T. "Church." DPL , pp. 123-131.

________________ . Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul . Supplements to Novum Testamentum 49. Leiden: E.J. Brill. (1977): 107-137.

________________ . "Letters, Letter Form." DPL , pp. 550-553.

Osburn, Carroll D., Ed. "The Interpretation of 1 Cor 14:34-35." Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity . Vol. 1. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1993.

Oster, Richard E., Jr. "Christianity in Asia Minor." In ABD . Vol. 1. Ed. D.N. Freedman et al. New York: Doubleday, 1992, pp. 948-949.

________________ . "Use, Misuse and Neglect of Archaeological Evidence in Some Modern Works on 1 Corinthians." Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 83 (1992): 58-67.

________________ . "When Men Wore Veils to Worship." New Testament Studies . Vol. 34. (1988): 481-505.

Osiek, Carolyn. "The Feminist and the Bible: Hermeneutical Alternatives." In Feminist Perspectives on Biblical Scholarship . Ed. Adela Y. Collins. Chino, CA: Scholars Press, 1985.

Perkins, Pheme. Gnosticism and the New Testament . Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Plass, Ewald M., Ed. What Luther Says: A Practical In-Home Anthology for the Active Christian . St. Louis: Concordia, 1991.

Plautus. Curculio 37-38. Trans. by P. Nixon. Loeb Classical Library, 5 vols. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1959.

Pliny the Elder. Natural History 28.2(3).10, 11. Translation taken from Jo-Ann Shelton, As the Romans Did: A Source Book in Roman Social History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1968.

Plutarch. Bravery of Women 249E. Cited by K.O. Wicker. Plutarch's Ethical Writings and Early Christian Literature. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1978 .

Pomeroy, S.B. Women in Hellenistic Egypt from Alexander to Cleopatra . Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1990.

Porter, Stanley. "Holiness, Sanctification." DPL, pp. 397-402.

Reasoner, M. "Citizenship, Roman and Heavenly." DPL , pp. 139-141.

Reese, D.G. "Demons, New Testament." ABD . Vol. 2., 140-142.

Ridderbbos, Herman N. Paul: An Outline of His Theology . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.

Robeck, C.M., Jr. "Tongues." DPL , pp. 939-943.

Robertson, Archibald and Alfred Plummer. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. The International Critical Commentary. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1914.

Sampley, J. Paul. Walking Between the Times. Paul's Moral Reasoning. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991.

Sanders, E. P. Judaism. Practice and Belief 63 BCE-66 CE . Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1992.

Schmithals, Walther. Gnosticism in Corinth; an investigation of the letters to the Corinthians . Trans. J.E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1971.

Scroggs, Robin. The New Testament and Homosexuality: Contextual Background for Contemporary Debate. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983.

________________ . "Paul and the Eschatological Women." Journal of the American Academy of Religion 40. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press (1972): 283-303.

Silva, M. "Old Testament in Paul." DPL , pp. 630-642.

Smith, D. "The Egyptian Cults at Corinth." Harvard Theological Review 70. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press (1977): 201-231.

South, James T. "A Critique of the 'Curse/Death' Interpretation of I Corinthians 5.1-8." New Testament Studies. 39 (1993): 539-561.

Spittler, R.P. Testament of Job. In The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha . Vol.1. Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments. Ed. J.H. Charlesworth. Garden City: Doubleday, 1983.

Stein, R.H. "Jerusalem." DPL , pp. 463-474.

Stuart, Douglas. "Exegesis." ABD . Ed. D.N. Freeman, et al. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Sumney, Jerry. Identifying Paul's Opponents . Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement 40. Sheffield: JSOT, 1990.

Theissen, G. The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity . Trans. H. Schütz. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982.

Towner, P.H. "Household and Household Codes." DPL , pp. 417-419.

Trebilco, P. "Itineraries, Travel Plans, Journeys, Apostolic Parousia." DPL , pp. 446-456.

Vermes, G., Trans. The Dead Sea Scrolls in English . Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1968.

Walters, James. Ethnic Issues in Paul's Letter to the Romans: Changing Self-definitions in Earliest Roman Christianity . Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1993.

West, Allen B. Corinth . Vol. VIII. Pt. II. Latin Inscriptions 1896-1926. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1931.

Winter, Bruce. "Rhetoric." DPL , pp. 820-822.

Wiseman, James. "Corinth and Rome I:228 B.C.-A.D. 267." In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt . Edited by H. Temporini and W. Haase. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter (1979) II.7.1: 491-496.

Witherington, Ben III. Conflict and Community in Corinth. A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Yamauchi, Edwin. Pre-Christian Gnosticism: A Survey of the Proposed Evidences . 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

ABD . . . Anchor Bible Dictionary

AUSS . . . Andrews University Seminary Studies

BA . . . Biblical Archaeology

BAGD . . . Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker

BAR . . . Biblical Archaeology Review

BiblThecSac . . . Bibliotheca Sacra

BJRL . . . Bulletin of the John Rylands Library

BTr . . . Bible Translator

CMM . . . Introduction to the New Testament by Carson, Moo, L. Morris

ChrSt . . . Christian Standard

DPL . . . Dictionary of Paul and His Letters

ed. . . . edited by

EQ . . . Evangelical Quarterly

ExpT . . . Expository Times

HTR . . . Harvard Theological Review

JBL . . . Journal of Biblical Literature

JSNT . . . Journal of Studies in the New Testament

JETS . . . Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JTS . . . Journal of Theological Studies

n. . . . note

NovT . . . Novum Testamentum

NTS . . . New Testament Studies

RevEx . . . Review and Expositor

TB . . . Tyndale Bulletin

TDNT . . . Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

TS . . . Theological Studies

trans . . . translated by

WThJ . . . Westminster Theological Journal

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: 1 Corinthians (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. INTRODUCTION - 1:1-9

A. Salutation - 1:1-3

B. Thanksgiving - 1:4-9

II. DISUNITY AND COMMUNITY FRAGMENTATION - 1:10-4:21

A. Divisions in the Church - 1:10-17

1. Report Received by Paul - 1:10-12

2. Christ Undivided - 1:13-17

B. Christ the Wisdom and Power of God - 1:18-2:5

1. The Message of the Cross - 1:18-19

2. Both Jews and Gentiles Offended - 1:20-25

3. God's Choice of Foolish Things - 1:26-31

4. Paul's Message Not Based on Eloquence - 2:1-5

C. Wisdom and Spiritual Maturity - 2:6-3:4

1. God's Secret Wisdom - 2:6-9

2. The Teaching of the Spirit - 2:10-16

3. Divisions a Sign of Worldliness - 3:1-4

D. God the Master Builder - 3:5-23

1. Paul and Apollos Merely Servants - 3:5-9

2. Building on the Foundation Laid by Paul - 3:10-17

3. God's View of Wisdom - 3:18-23

E. Apostles of Christ - 4:1-21

1. The Apostles as Servants of Christ - 4:1-5

2. Overcoming Human Pride - 4:6-7

3. Honor and Dishonor - 4:8-13

4. Paul's Warning as Father - 4:14-17

5. Arrogance to Be Confronted - 4:18-21

III. REPORTS OF IMMORALITY - 5:1-6:20

A. Discipline for the Immoral Brother - 5:1-13

1. The Corinthians' Pride in Tolerance - 5:1-5

2. Getting Rid of the Old Yeast - 5:6-8

3. Separating From Evil - 5:9-13

B. Lawsuits among Believers - 6:1-11

1. Settling Disputes in the Church - 6:1-8

2. The Inheritance of the Wicked - 6:9-11

C. Sexual Immorality - 6:12-20

1. The Body As a Member of Christ- 6:12-17

2. The Body As the Temple of the Holy Spirit - 6:18-20

IV. SEXUALITY, CELIBACY, AND MARRIAGE - 7:1-40

A. Godly Use of Sexuality - 7:1-7

B. Celibacy vs. Marriage - 7:8-11

C. Divorce and Separation - 7:12-16

D. Remaining as You Were Called - 7:17-28

E. Freedom from Concern - 7:29-40

V. DEALING WITH IDOLATRY - 8:1-11:1

A. Food Sacrificed to Idols - 8:1-13

1. The General Principle - 8:1-3

2. The Nonreality of Idols - 8:4-6

3. The Weak Brother's Dilemma - 8:7-8

4. The Proper Use of Freedom - 8:9-13

B. The Rights of an Apostle - 9:1-27

1. Paul's Rights as Apostle - 9:1-6

2. General Principle Stated - 9:7-14

3. Paul's Deferment of Rights - 9:15-18

4. To the Jew as a Jew - 9:19-23

5. Looking Forward to the Prize - 9:24-27

C. Warnings From Israel's History - 10:1-13

1. Wandering in the Desert - 10:1-5

2. Punishment for Sins - 10:6-10

3. Examples for Us - 10:11-13

D. Idol Feasts and the Lord's Supper - 10:14-22

1. The Lord's Supper a Participation - 10:14-17

2. The Lord's Table and the Table of Demons - 10:18-22

3. The Christian's Freedom - 10:23-11:1

VI. LITURGICAL ABERRATIONS - 11:2-34

A. Propriety in Worship - 11:2-16

1. Head Coverings in Worship - 11:2-10

2. Hair in the Nature of Things - 11:11-16

B. The Lord's Supper - 11:17-34

1. The Corinthians' Practice - 11:17-22

2. The Lord's Supper As Instituted - 11:23-26

3. Self-examination to Avoid Judgment - 11:27-34

VII. MISUNDERSTANDING OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS - 12:1-14:40

A. Spiritual Gifts - 12:1-11

1. Influence of the Spirit - 12:1-3

2. Different Gifts for a Common Good - 12:4-11

B. One Body, Many Parts - 12:12-31a

1. One Body in Christ - 12:12-13

2. Body Members Not Independent - 12:14-20

3. Special Honor for Weaker Parts - 12:21-26

4. Application to the Body of Christ - 12:27-31a

C. Love - 12:31b-13:13

1. Gifts Without Love Pointless - 12:31b-13:3

2. The Virtues of Love - 13:4-7

3. The Permanence of Love - 13:8-13

D. Gifts of Prophecy and Tongues - 14:1-25

1. Tongues and Prophecy Compared - 14:1-5

2. Tongues and Clarity - 14:6-12

3. The Spirit and the Mind - 14:13-19

4. Maturity and Spiritual Gifts - 14:20-25

E. Orderly Worship - 14:26-40

1. Control of Tongues and Prophecy - 14:26-33

2. Submission of Women - 14:34-35

3. Everything Fitting and Orderly - 14:36-40

VIII. MISUNDERSTANDING OF BELIEVERS' RESURRECTION - 15:1-58

A. The Gospel Paul Preached - 15:1-11

1. Relation of the Corinthians to the Gospel - 15:1-2

2. Basic Issues of the Gospel - 15:3-4

3. Appearances and Apostleship - 15:5-11

B. Christ's Resurrection and the Resurrection

of the Dead - 15:12-34

1. Consequences of Denying the Resurrection - 15:12-19

2. The Fact of Christ's Resurrection - 15:20-28

3. Baptism, Suffering, and the Resurrection - 15:29-34

C. Answers to Some Problems about the

Resurrection - 15: 35-58

1. A Twofold Question - 15:35-41

2. An Explanation of the Resurrection of the Dead - 15:42-50

3. The Secret Revealed - 15:51-58

IX. INSTRUCTION FOR THE COLLECTION - 16:1-11

A. The Collection for God's People - 16:1-4

B. Paul's Travel Plans - 16:5-9

C. Assisting Timothy - 16:10-11

X. CONCLUSION - 16:12-24

A. Personal Requests - 16:12-18

B. Final Greetings - 16:19-24

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV