Paul came to the city of Corinth on his Second Missionary Journey (AD 49-52). He came alone, after being a short time in Athens and actually speaking to the Athenian philosophers. Paul had encountered much difficulty after founding the first churches in what was later to become Europe. He and his team had to flee from Philippi and from Thessalonica after founding churches in these cities. The Jewish agitators followed him and his team to Berea, making it necessary for Paul to flee alone to Athens (Acts 17:15). After spending time there and actually addressing the Athenians at the Areopagus, Paul traveled on alone to Corinth (Acts 18:1ff.) He came in weakness and much distress because of his concern for the welfare of the new churches (1 Cor. 2:3). At Corinth, Paul must have been comforted to make the acquaintance of Aquilla and Priscilla, Jews who were forced out of Rome due to the decree of Emperor Claudius. Paul began working with them in their common trade of tent making. In time, his helpers Silas and Timothy came from Macedonia to join him. Corinth was large enough to have a synagogue, so as his custom was, he attended each Sabbath and began reasoning with the Jews and with the Gentiles who had attached themselves to the synagogue. It was a productive time for Paul in Corinth as Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, became a believer, along with his whole household (Acts 18:8). Many others believed as well. When tensions mounted with the Jews, Paul moved next door to the house of Titus Justus and focused his ministry on the Gentiles. The Lord assured Paul that he had many people in Corinth (Acts 18:10), so Paul stayed a total of a year and a half in the city. At last, the Jews made a united attack on Paul and his company. This happened while Gallio was the proconsul. (v. 12). The mention of this proconsul and the dating of his service enables us to accurately fix the stay of Paul in the city. [1] Gallio would not hear the case against Paul, which further infuriated the Jews. It would help us to understand some things about the city of Corinth. It was an ancient city, but was destroyed by the Roman consul Lucius Mummius Achaicus in 146 BC. However, it was rebuilt in 46 BC by Julius Caesar. Corinth had always been a great commercial center, since it was established on an isthmus controlling two seas, the Aegean to the East and the Ionian to the west. The city also had considerable military importance. Unfortunately, “Corinth was a place where all the evils of the pagan world were on display.” [2] It was the center for the Corinthian goddess Aphrodite. At one time her temple had some 1,000 female prostitutes attached to its worship. [3] In time Corinth gained a terrible reputation for its immorality. Radio preacher and Moody pastor, Warren Wiersbe says, “About the lowest accusation you could make against a man in that day would be to call him a ‘Corinthian.’” [4] No doubt, partly because of the low standard of morality, Paul had a great deal of future trouble with this church. He probably wrote this letter around AD 55, but he likely wrote a total of four letters, with two of them being lost. He probably wrote mostly from Ephesus during his long stay there. There has never been much doubt that Paul wrote this letter. Since the church had many problems, such as immorality and discord, 1 Corinthians turned out to be the longest letter of the apostle. We can be thankful for this letter because it gives us a very good look at life in the earliest Christian churches. In fact, we probably know more about the Corinthian church than any other church in the New Testament. [5] Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes, 1 Corinthians 1:1 We note here that Paul is quick to use the term apostle (Gk. apostolos). In the Greek language it means someone who is sent out or specially commissioned. In Paul’s case he was especially commissioned and sent out by the Lord Jesus (cf. Gal. 1:1). Smith notes how this word usage here is technical and has probably been influenced by the Hebrew institution of saliah. [1] Paul was not far removed in his position from the original twelve founding apostles. Although apostleship to a lesser degree became an ongoing gift to the church (cf. 1 Cor. 12:28-29; Eph. 4:11), there were none later who stood in the position of the original twelve plus Paul, who was apostle to the Gentiles. It seems obvious in reading the letter why Paul declares his apostleship. The Corinthians had challenged his authority (cf. 1:12; 9:1-27). [2] Interestingly, Paul does not use the title “apostle” when writing to the beloved Philippians and Thessalonians, or to his dear friend Philemon. We see here that Paul has Sosthenes in his company. Although it is impossible to be certain, many commentators feel that this man should be identified with the Sosthenes in the Acts 18:17 account. In that passage we learn that Sosthenes, the synagogue ruler, was beaten by frustrated Jews and perhaps some frustrated Greeks, or both. The Jews may have been frustrated by his losing their case before Gallio and the Greeks (if they participated) may well have just been expressing their latent anti-Semitism toward the Jews. There is another possibility. If Sosthenes is the same as in Acts 18, we see that he has now become a beloved brother and helper of Paul. We know that the former synagogue ruler Crispus was converted (Acts 18:8), and it seems possible that Sosthenes may have already had such leanings. That would have certainly helped bring down the pent-up wrath of the Jews upon him. In any case, it was surely a pleasant thing for the Corinthian Christians to realize that one of their own number was now associated with Paul in his great ministry. [3] It is thought by some that this Sosthenes was actually the scribe or amanuensis for this letter. [4] “To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ— their Lord and ours:” (1:2). The expression, “the church of God,” is seen in the Greek “tēi ekklēsiāi tou theou.” This states that the church belongs to God and not to any other as the genitive case makes clear. [5] The word for church (ekklēsiāi) has the meaning of assembly or congregation. In the Greek Bible or Septuagint (LXX), this word is used to translate the Hebrew qahal, or the congregation of Israel. [6] The next word we encounter in this verse is the word “sanctified.” In the Greek language the word is hagiazo, and it means to make holy or to consecrate. The Scottish great, William Barclay, tells us that the root idea of this word is that of separation or being set apart. [7] Thus, the Christian is one set apart and made holy for the work of God and for the glory of God. This concept must have sounded really strange in a depraved city like Corinth. The whole matter of being holy, set apart, or being saints of God is largely misunderstood today. In the first place, we can never be a saint alone. We do not see the Bible talking about Saint Paul, or Saint Andrew. We are saints together. Secondly, the word “saint(s)” is always in the plural except in Philippians 4:21, where, and even here it is used in a corporate sense. [8] It seems that Paul is using several expressions here that are all theologically loaded with special meaning. The expression “in Christ” is a very popular one with the apostle. Mackay tells us that the phrase appears some 169 times in Paul’s epistles. [9] We may never understand the fullness of this expression, that we believers are included in Christ. We are with him, hidden in him and included in him. We are called (Gk. klētois) to be a holy people, his people. We are all called much like Paul himself was called (Acts 9:1-19; 22:3-16; 26:9-18) to be set apart for God’s service. We are called with all his other people, both in the local area and through the whole world. Wiersbe says, “Each church has two addresses: a geographic address (‘at Corinth’) and a spiritual address (‘in Christ Jesus’)…‘sanctified’ or ‘set apart’ by God.” [10] In our introduction we spoke somewhat of the city of Corinth, where this church was located. The city was both famous and infamous. It was the famous capital of Southern Greece or what was known as Achaia. It was famous for its Corinthian brass, which was a mixture of gold, silver and copper. Also it was noted for the Isthmian Games and for the worship of the goddess Aphrodite. [11] Corinth was famous as a shipping center. Since it was located on an isthmus between two seas, cargoes or whole smaller ships were transported the short distance overland between the bodies of water. Ancient seamen were anxious to avoid sailing around the dangerous promontory of Malea. [12] Today there is a canal that connects the seas. Of course, Corinth was also quite infamous for its drunkenness and its loose sexual morals. The Greek word “korinthiazomai” was known all over the empire and it meant, “to live like a Corinthian.” [13] “Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (1:3). This is a standard greeting found in most of Paul’s epistles. The word for grace (charis) is adapted from the Greek “chairein” which means “greeting.” [14] As we mention on other occasions the Father and Son are linked together and treated as one here and in many other places. I always thank my God for you because of his grace given you in Christ Jesus. 1 Corinthians 1:4 The apostle had the unusual habit of thanking God for people (cf. Rom. 1:8; Phil. 1:3; 1 Thess. 1:2). This would be a good habit for all of us to get into. It was appropriate for Paul to praise the people because he would soon launch into a critique of many of their ways. Theodoret of Cyr (c. 393 – c. 458/466), ancient bishop, theologian and commentator says of this: “Paul takes care to sweeten their ears before starting to admonish them.” [15] “For in him you have been enriched in every way— with all kinds of speech and with all knowledge— God thus confirming our testimony about Christ among you” (1:5-6). The Greek word for “enriched” is ploutos and it is the word from which we get “plutocrat,” meaning a very wealthy person. The Corinthians were especially wealthy in spiritual gifts. [16] We will have a listing of these spiritual gifts later in chapters 12 through 14. Here Paul emphasizes the gifts related to speech and knowledge. He will speak of these particular gifts later in 12:8. The Corinthians, like all the other Greeks, were no doubt impressed with the wisdom of their philosophers. Paul knew that this knowledge, if it was ever true, was but a passing thing. The apostle realized that true knowledge is found only in Jesus. He will later speak in Colossians 2:3 of the mystery of Christ, “in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” Therefore you do not lack any spiritual gift as you eagerly wait for our Lord Jesus Christ to be revealed” (1:7). Here we have one of Paul’s most favorite words, the word charisma (Gk. charismati). This word speaks of a gift that is freely given by God to humanity. It is a gift that is totally undeserved and could never be earned by our effort. [17] Paul is not speaking about natural gifts here but about spiritual gifts. These gifts are meant to glorify Christ and edify the church. In this verse Paul speaks of the saints eagerly awaiting the revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Greek word for “revelation” is “apokalupsis” and it is one of the several words that speak of the coming of the Lord. We should note here that in the New Testament, the Greek words for his coming are apparently not distinguished. The words “epiphany” (appearing), “parousia” (advent), “hemera” (day), and “apocalypse” (revelation) are all used interchangeably. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 3:13, we learn that the day (hemera) shall reveal (apokalupto) every man’s work. In 2 Timothy 4:8, the righteous are crowned on that day (hemera) – also those who love his appearing (epiphania). When we read the above verse we must realize that we have lost something very important in our Christian lives. For the most part, we are not eagerly awaiting the coming of the Lord Jesus. We have lost the early Christian excitement about this event. Some of this lack of concern may be due to a massive influx of false theology and escapist eschatology in the last couple of centuries. Also, it may be due to our absorption with the things of this world. “He will also keep you firm to the end, so that you will be blameless on the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1:8). This verse reminds us of some other great passages in the holy word of God. For instance, Jude, in thinking of the last day pressures, lauds “…him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy…” (Jude 1:24). We cannot escape the fact that early Christians greatly desired that they would be found blameless on that last day. We see in scripture that the pressures of the end time will cause many to fall away from the faith and deny the Lord. The Lord will make us firm (Gk. bebaiōsei) and keep us that way amidst all the grave trials of the last day. This word has the meaning of “a properly guaranteed security.” [18] “God is faithful, who has called you into fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1:9). The nineteenth century American theologian, Albert Barnes, reminds us of Philippians 1:6: “… he who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus.” Barnes says, “he will not commence anything which he will not perfect and finish.” [19] For the first time in the epistle the word “fellowship” (Gk. koinéōnian) is used. We are called into fellowship with God and that results in a fellowship with the redeemed. This word means association, partnership, and community. It is a friendship based on Christian knowledge shared in common. [20] We see it often in the New Testament. Paul is here placing great emphasis on Jesus Christ as Lord. Indeed, this was perhaps the earliest confession of the church. The church father, Chrysostom (c. 349-407) remarks how the name of Christ is mentioned more often in this epistle than in any other. [21] I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought. 1 Corinthians 1:10 This epistle is certainly different from many of Paul’s other writings. Usually, he begins with a rather lengthy doctrinal section and then he develops the ethical teachings based upon his doctrine. The Book of Ephesians is a clear example of this. In Ephesians he has the first three chapters on doctrine and the last three on ethical teachings based upon that doctrine. In this epistle, Paul plunges directly into his ethical teaching regarding divisions in the church. [22] The apostle has just spoken of the wonder of that fellowship we have with God and that precious fellowship must extend to the Body of Christ, the church. In the church there must be unity. This does not mean that we must agree on everything. In the earliest church there were many things that they could not agree upon, such as circumcision, the kosher diet, food sacrificed to idols, and the proper day for meeting. Still the Bible declares that they were of one accord or one mind (i.e. Acts 1:14; 4:24; 5:12). God was therefore able to do great things through them. Obviously, the Corinthians were not in one accord, and the work of the Lord was being hindered because of this. Paul charges them that there must not be divisions in their midst. The word for divisions is schismata. In the Greek language it originally was used to denote political parties (cf. Acts 14:4; 23:7). It is from this word that we get the English word “schism.” [23] Pastor, college director and web commentator, David Guzik says: “Although we derive our English word ‘schism’ from this Greek word, it does not really mean a ‘party’ or a ‘faction;’ it properly means ‘tear, or rend.’… Paul’s plea is that they stop ripping each other apart, tearing up the body of Christ….” [24] Rather than being divided and torn asunder, the apostle advises that they be perfectly joined together. The Greek word is katērtismenoi. Barnes says: “The word …denotes properly to restore, mend, or repair that; which is rent or disordered Matthew 4:21; Mark 1:19, to amend or correct that which is morally evil and erroneous Galatians 6:1, to render perfect or complete Luke 6:40 … that their minds were to be disposed toward each other with mutual good will, and that they should live in harmony.” [25] “My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you” (1:11). Several commentators feel that Chloe was probably a wealthy and notable Christian lady who may have had business interests in traveling between Ephesus and Corinth. [26] The message had not come from Chloe herself but from members of her household. This could have included her children, servants or slaves. The great Greek scholar, A.T. Robertson, feels that it could have even been Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus (1 Cor.16:17) who brought the news of schisms. [27] We see here that there were quarrels within the church. The Greek word is erides, meaning contentions and disputes. We should not miss the fact that such things are listed as works of the flesh in Galatians 5:19-21 (cf. 2 Cor. 12:20; 1 Tim. 6:4). “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’” (1:12). The Corinthian church had fallen into parties. Adam Clarke, the early British Methodist theologian, says that there were “Paulians, or followers of St. Paul; Apollonians, or followers of Apollos; Kephians, or followers of Kephas; Christians, or followers of Christ.” [28] If Paul had been a lesser preacher he may have been content to gloat over the fact that some were following him. However, he was quite upset that such a thing could happen. We know from scripture that Apollos was a mighty preacher and that he greatly confounded the Jews (Acts 18:24-28). He was from Alexandria in Egypt, a place famous for its intellectual activity and rhetorical style. Alexandria became a center for the allegorical method of preaching, a technique of squeezing the deeper meanings from the word of God. [29]. We can imagine that he attracted a number of followers, unlike Paul, whom some criticized for his poor speaking (2 Cor. 10:10). Evangelist and commentator, Ray Stedman, tries to recover some of the comments that might have been shared about Apollos: “I am sure there were many in Corinth who were saying, ‘Oh, I love to hear Apollos! He’s a great preacher, a warm, capable, eloquent man, who can make the Old Testament come alive!” [30] Bible professors, Charles Pfeiffer and Everett Harrison, report on a church woman who once confessed, “I almost weep every time I hear my minister pronounce that blessed word Mesopotamia!” [31] Some in Corinth were following Cephas or Peter. We are not told that Peter ever visited Corinth. It is entirely possible, since the epistles of 1 and 2 Peter were addressed to folks living in the northern part of Asia Minor. He must have traveled at least that far. However, the Corinthians were surely acquainted with his teaching. It is to be noted that Peter was regarded as the apostle to the Jewish people (Gal. 2:7). Some may have become attached to him because they favored certain Jewish doctrines. [32] Last of all, there was a party that claimed to be of Christ. There have been a lot of such parties through church history. New Testament Professor, Craig Keener, says of Paul, “…his point is that any division is wrong, even one based on the claim to be of Christ alone…” [33] CAN CHRIST BE DIVIDED? Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? 1 Corinthians 1:13 Keener sees Paul’s argument here as a reductio ad absurdum, or an argument that reduces the opponent to an absurd position. [34] Of course, Paul was not crucified for them and they were not baptized in his name. “Paul now attacks their divisions at their root. There is only one Jesus Christ, and to him, and to him alone, should all look.” [35] Barnes goes on to add here, “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 Savior died to redeem them all.” [36] It is the cross that always brings the believer back to reality. The great F. B. Meyer says, “Everyone needs a Calvary in the heart.” [37] “I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.)” (1:14-16). It is pretty obvious here that Crispus was the former ruler of the synagogue, who had now become a believer in Christ, along with his household (Acts 18:8). Gaius was obviously Paul’s host (Rom. 16:23). Paul also remembers baptizing Stephanas. He later says of him, “You know that the household of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, and they have devoted themselves to the service of the Lord’s people…” (1 Cor. 16:15). It seems that Paul did not personally baptize many people. This task was probably left to local leaders, no doubt to promote unity in the local situation. This in no way indicates that baptism was not important to Paul. Indeed, baptism functioned as an earthly seal to the heavenly work. [38] Hodge says here: “While therefore it is unscriptural to make baptism essential to salvation or a certain means of regeneration, it is nevertheless a dangerous act of disobedience to undervalue or neglect it.” [39] “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel— not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power” (1:17). Obviously, the command to baptize was included in Christ’s great commission of Matt. 28:19. However, Paul had the primary task of preaching the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 26:17-18). Others could be left to do the baptizing. Several commentators feel that Paul was still smarting over his Athens experience. It may be that Paul decided to present the gospel in a very simple manner after that. The Athenian philosophers were certainly eloquent and they made great speeches. However, the true knowledge of God was hidden from them. They did not find God in all their wisdom and their city was filled with idols as a result. When Paul was there he said: “For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship— and this is what I am going to proclaim to you” (Acts 17:23). The early writer, philosopher and orator, Dio Chrysostom (c. 40 – c. 115) describes some of these Greek intellectuals with these uncomplimentary words: “They croak like frogs in a marsh; they are the most wretched of men, because, though ignorant, they think themselves wise; they are like peacocks, showing off their reputation and the number of their pupils as peacocks do their tails.” [40] 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. 1 Corinthians 1:18 The cross is foolishness to the world. We can only imagine how the “learned” folks of the first century must have scoffed at the whole idea of the cross. The Roman cross was for criminals, for the scum of the earth. It was like the electric chair or the gas chamber today. So for Gentile and Jew, the cross just did not make any sense. To the Greek way of thinking God could never come down to earth and suffer as a man. To the philosophers the great characteristic of God was apatheia. This Greek word meant more than apathy. It involved a total inability to feel. If God were to be acquainted with our sorrow it would mean that man had somehow influenced God and therefore was greater than God. Plutarch even felt that if we involved God in human affairs it would be an insult to him. Of course, the idea of the God-man was a revolting one to that society. [41] Keener says of New Testament times: “Those viewed as ‘saviors’ were normally gods, kings, wealthy benefactors or miracle workers. Roman society was built around power and status; power was concentrated in the male head of the household, in wealthy and aristocratic families, and so forth. Associating power with a crucified man – the epitome of weakness – thus made no more sense to ancients than it does to modern people outside Christ.” [42] Australian Bible teacher, Leon Morris, relates a piece of graffito discovered in Rome. It is a picture of a worshipper standing before a crucified figure. The figure has the body of a man but the head of a donkey. The inscription reads: “Alexamenos worships his god.” [43] That is a good example of how the worldly wise in the first century looked upon the Christian’s cross. As James Burton Coffman, the 20th century prolific commentator and preacher says, “A crucified Savior was simply beyond the boundaries of human imagination.” [44] In Jewish thinking the cross was a sure and certain sign that the person on it was cursed of God (Deut. 21:23). Only the worst criminals went to the cross. It could never be a symbol of something good in Jewish eyes. For Paul the cross was everything. It was the power of God to salvation (Rom. 1:16). It was not only the power of God but it was the wisdom of God as well (1 Cor. 1:24). Paul would later say: “For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2). He had apparently made this determination when he first came from Athens in great weakness, and began his ministry to the Corinthians. How we have turned away from the cross in our western societies! Recently the Feminist theologian Delores Williams made this statement: “I don’t think we need folks hanging on crosses and blood dripping and weird stuff.” [45] In the last half-century we have almost stopped singing hymns and songs about the cross. We have almost stopped preaching sermons on the cross as well. Guzik says, “For Paul, the message of the cross was the gospel…So, preaching a high moral standard is not preaching the gospel, preaching the universal fatherhood of God is not preaching the gospel, and preaching the universal brotherhood of man is not preaching the gospel. The gospel is the message of the cross.” [46] “For it is written: ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate’” (1:19). Here Paul quotes from Isaiah 29:14. Today we are literally surrounded with a false wisdom coming from this present evil age. We do not have to look far to see that much of this wisdom is pure folly. There seems to be so little true wisdom around in these postmodern days. We are also surrounded with a so-called knowledge and information, but much of it is based upon consensus rather than upon truth. “According to Google chairman Eric Schmidt, ‘Between the birth of the world and 2003, there were five exabytes of information created. We [now] create five exabytes every two days.’ An Exabyte is one quintillion (10 [48]) bytes. It is hard to visualize such a large number. One Exabyte is roughly 20,000 times the amount of information contained in all of the books ever written. It would take 50,000 years to watch a one-exabyte DVD-quality video.” [47] Sometimes it helps us to stop and take a quick look at the lives of some of our most famous worldly “wise men.” The popular historian, Paul Johnson, helps us do that very thing in his book entitled Intellectuals. His information is quite shocking. He mentions that over the past two hundred years there has been a great increase in the influence of these so-called “intellectuals.” He points out how for the first time in history, and with great audacity, these worldly-wise men have arisen to mightily shape our modern world. Let us consider just a few of the most notable of them who have exerted the greatest influence upon us. Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-78). He is probably the most influential of these “intellectuals.” It is of note that Rousseau, like most Johnson mentions, had a tragic family life. All his adult life he was prone to quarrel ferociously with virtually everyone he dealt with. He lied habitually, and on the back streets of Turin he often exposed his bare bottom to women. Johnson calls him a mentally sick person. He simply did not know how to live. Concerning Therese, his mistress of thirty-three years, he remarked that he never felt a single glimmer of love for her. When she bore a child he persuaded her to abandon the baby in order to save her “honor.” The four other children she bore to him were treated in exactly the same manner. His only love, Sophie d’Houdetot, long after his death, simply referred to him as an “interesting madman.” [48] Karl Marx (1818-1883). Although Marx presented himself as the hero of the working class, Johnson mentions that he never in his whole life visited a mill, factory, or other industrial workplace. According to Johnson, Marx’s major work, Capital, is filled with discrepancies, distortions and errors. His work reflects a disregard and even contempt for truth plus a fundamental failure to understand capitalism. Johnson relates how its content compares with Marx’s own character: his taste for violence, appetite for power, inability to handle money and, his tendency to exploit those around him. His mother once wished that her son would accumulate capital rather than merely writing about it. Marx’s children lived tragic lives and died tragic deaths, mostly by suicide. Finally, during a very dark period of his family’s existence, Marx stooped to father a child through the faithful family servant, Lenchen. The child was kept hidden lest the image of this “great revolutionary leader” be damaged. [49] For sure, Marx must take much of the credit for an estimated 83 million deaths world-wide due to the spread of international Communism. Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980). Sartre possessed a personal philosophy that later became known as existentialism. His personal life, like so many of the so-called intellectuals, was despicable. He was notorious for not taking baths and was disgustingly dirty. He was sexually promiscuous and on one occasion even maintained four mistresses at the same time. One dangerous and well-known problem according to Johnson was that he also tended to seduce his female students. In addition, Sartre could consume phenomenal amounts of both alcohol and barbiturates. Yet, because he was a popular writer and a sort of high priest of many young people, his works received wide acclaim and distribution. By the 1950s, Sartre’s ideas and his existentialism became much in vogue for the beatnik generation. Johnson also describes him as the academic godfather of the numerous terrorist groups that began to arise in the late 1960s. His work did much to inflame Africa and contribute to its many civil wars and murders. Also, the hideous crimes committed in Cambodia and the death of possibly a third of that nation can be traced directly to his philosophy. [50] There are many more sad stories of these supposed intellectuals. It is interesting that many of the ancient Greek philosophers were concerned with morality. Such has not been the case with our modern and postmodern philosophers. We can now see why God is determined to destroy the “wisdom” of the wise. Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 1 Corinthians 1:20 Lutheran pastor and commentator, Paul Kretzmann asks: “What has become of all the learned Greeks whose wisdom was praised so highly? Not one sinner has ever been converted by their sayings and writings; not one person has obtained salvation by following their rules of conduct.” [51] The early church father Origen (184/185 – 253/254) said, “The wisdom of this world and the wisdom of God are not the same thing. God’s wisdom is the true one, without any additives to corrupt it. The world’s wisdom is foolish, even though the simplicity of God’s wisdom makes those who have it appear foolish in the eyes of the world.” [52] One interesting thing about the wisdom of this world is that it simply does not work. This sort of wisdom did not work in the lives of the philosophers themselves and it does not work today. Although people today despise it, God’s wisdom works. It has been proven true through hundreds of generations of the godly. Philosophers are happy to attack God’s wisdom and his law. However, we do not see them disputing the law of gravity for instance. They never try stepping off a four-story building in order to dispute this law. The wisdom of this world is truly foolish and God is showing it up for what it is every day. “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” (1:21). It is interesting that the Greeks in all their wisdom did not find the true God. They had a statue to him that was labeled “the unknown god.” Paul was happy to introduce them to this true God. Unfortunately, in their “wisdom” they were unable to accept him. God’s wisdom is totally unlike man’s wisdom. The prophet Isaiah says, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, ‘declares the LORD.’ As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isa. 55:8-9). Humankind could not be reached by so-called wisdom. God had another plan and that plan was to reach people through the foolishness of preaching. That is God’s way and it is the only way to be saved today. Here is the simple and seemingly foolish message. We are all sinners, and thus we are permanently alienated from God. We must repent of our sins and turn from them. Then in simple faith we must receive Jesus into our hearts, Jesus who is God’s true sacrifice for sin. When we do this, the Bible says that we are saved. It really does not depend on what we know or what we do. It is just a simple step of faith. All this sounds like foolishness to the world, but it is God’s way and it is guaranteed to work. Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 1 Corinthians 1:22-24 The Jews are a very practical people. They look for God’s work to be verified with miraculous signs (Jn. 2:18; 6:30). Unfortunately, they expected a Messianic deliverer to come with great signs and wonders, and that this messiah would deliver them from Roman subjection. This caused them to miss the real Messiah who came as a Suffering Servant and who delivered people primarily in the spiritual realm. Dummelow sums up the peculiarities of the two groups of people: “The Jews will not believe unless a miracle is wrought before their eyes; the Greeks will accept no truth that is not commended by philosophical speculation” [53] The Jews had little interest in speculative thought and the Greeks had little patience with miracles. Rather, they were prone to consider them as superstition. [54] In the face of both these groups, Jews and Gentiles, Paul preached the simple message of Christ crucified. This was a stumbling block to Jews as we have seen. The Greek word for stumbling block is skandalon. It is the picture of a trigger mechanism found on an animal trap. [55] So the cross was a scandalous thing to Greeks and Jews. The cross was pure foolishness to the Greeks or Gentiles. Trinity Evangelical professor, Jay Smith, reports: “The Roman historian Tacitus referred to Christianity as ‘the pernicious superstition’…The Roman biographer Suetonius called it a mischievous superstition…” [56] “The Greeks and Romans looked on one crucified as the lowest of criminals, so how could such a one be considered a savior?” [57] We should note here that the word “crucified” (stauroo) is in the Greek perfect passive. Morris says, “not only was Christ once crucified, but he continues in the character of the crucified one. The crucifixion is permanent in its efficacy.” [58] To those who call upon the Lord Jesus and trust in him it is “…Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” In his later message to the Romans Paul could say: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile” (Rom. 1:16). Paul continues saying: “For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength” (1:25). Paul’s statement here is what we call anthropomorphic speech. This is a common way of describing God in scripture, as having human or personal characteristics. Of course, God cannot be foolish and it is impossible for him to actually have weakness. If God could be foolish, his foolishness would be much wiser than the best of human wisdom. If he could be weak, his weakness would be much stronger than the greatest of human strength. God, through the foolishness of preaching the gospel, is able to save to the uttermost all those who believe in his Son Jesus. Chrysostom said: “For the philosophers could not achieve what a few unlearned men accomplished, namely, the conversion of the whole world.” [59] Brothers and sisters, 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. 1 Corinthians 1:26 We are not to think that the early church was made up just of slaves and of people in the very lowest orders of society. There were some Christians who were in the upper classes. Some of these were people like Dionysius of Athens (Acts 17:34), Sergius Paulus, who was actually the proconsul of Crete (Acts 13:6-12); some noble women of Thessalonica and Berea (Acts 17:4, 12). There was Erastus, who was probably the city treasurer at Corinth (Rom. 16:23). [60] We remember that some supportive people in Jesus’ life were quite well off, like Nicodemus, Lazarus, and others. However, the early church was primarily made up of common folks, people of the lowest classes and even a considerable number of slaves. It is reported that Abraham Lincoln once said, “God must love the common man, he made so many of them.” Around the year AD 178, Celsius made a bitter attack upon Christians. He ridiculed them because they were just common folks. He said, “We see them in their own houses, wool dressers, cobblers and fullers, the most uneducated and vulgar persons.” [61] When we think about it, the common folks of the world have made quite an incredible contribution to the welfare of humanity. Stedman tells the story of Dr. George Washington Carver, who became an outstanding African American scientist. Even in the days of segregation, he somehow managed to become educated. One day he prayed, “Lord, teach me the secrets of the universe.” Carver reported that God said to him, “George, that is too big a subject for you. I want you to take a peanut, that is more your size, and work on that.” Carver began to work on the peanut and he subsequently found over 325 different uses for it. His discoveries revolutionized southern technology. [62] God has not called many mighty people but he has made a lot of his called ones mighty. We think of David the shepherd boy who was overlooked by the father, but chosen to be king of Israel instead of all his brothers. We think of the little slave girl who helped bring healing to Naaman, the leprous commander of the Syrian army (2 Ki. 5:1ff.). Morris says of these and other miraculous works of God, “It came about because God chose to work his marvels through people who were, from the human point of view, the most unpromising…” [63] The early Anglican commentator, John Trapp adds, “The eagle and lion were not offered in sacrifice, as the lamb and the dove were.” [64] “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” (1:27). Clark in quoting Shemoth Rabba says: “There are certain matters which appear little to men, yet by them God points out important precepts. Thus hyssop in the sight of man is worth nothing, but in the sight of God its power is great; sometimes he equals it to the cedar, particularly in the ordinance concerning the lepers, and in the burning of the red heifer.” [65] Ambrosiaster (fourth century) once wrote: “The two most ‘foolish things of the world’ are in particular the virgin birth of Christ and his resurrection from the dead.” [66] “God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things— and the things that are not— to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him” (1:28-29). Early 20th century Wesleyan-holiness preacher, William Godbey, tells of an evangelist by the name of Merrit who once met up with a beggar in New York City. The beggar had just been released from eleven years in the penitentiary and was without friends or help. Merrit told the man how fortunate he was being a nobody, because that was exactly the kind of person the Lord wanted to save. As Merrit witnessed to him, the beggar was brought to tears and then finally to a full salvation. Armed with his new faith the poor beggar went out looking for a job. When one employer asked of his recommendation he was forced to say that he had none. Attempting to explain, the beggar said, “I was eleven years…” But before he could get the sentence out, the prospective employer interrupted saying, “If you have followed any business eleven years, I will take you in.” So the poor beggar had his job and discovered to his glee that his employer was also a Christian. Sometime later, when the beggar tried to explain his boss said, “the Holy Ghost moved me that moment to stop you so that you could get a job; for if I had known that you were just out of eleven years in the penitentiary, I would not have touched you with a forty-foot pole; but now I want you to stay with me eleven years.” [67] God not only has a simple gospel but he so often uses simple people to proclaim it. In doing so he confounds the wisdom of the wise. The Lord once said to the proud leaders of Israel, “…What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight” (Lk. 16:15). Conversely, some things people detest are highly valuable to God. 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. 1 Corinthians 1:30 The wisdom of God that he freely gives us is not just some secret knowledge but it is a person, Jesus Christ. We see wisdom personified in Proverbs 8:22-31, and we see it more clearly in Colossians 2. Paul speaks of Christ, “in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col 2:3). [68] Jesus is many other things to the believer. He is our righteousness. Jeremiah speaks of Jesus saying: “In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. And this is the name by which he will be called: ‘The LORD is our righteousness’” (Jer. 23:6 NRS). When we put on the breastplate of righteousness, we are really putting on Jesus (Eph. 6:14). The truth is that we have no righteousness of our own. It is all in him. Chrysostom once said: “He gave us Christ so that we should never need anything else for our salvation.” [69] The Lord is also our holiness or our sanctification. We have that sanctification instantly when we are born again into the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:11). This is known as positional sanctification. However, there is a progressive sanctification that should be an ongoing thing in the life of the believer (cf. Jn. 17:17; Eph. 5:26; 2 Cor. 7:1). At last, there is a prospective sanctification, that will only be complete when the Lord returns and changes our mortal bodies to the immortal ones (cf. 1 Thess. 5:23; 1 Cor. 15:52). [70] At last, the Lord Jesus is our redemption. This Greek word, apolutrōsis, is taken from the slave markets of old. It has the meaning of being bought with a price or released. In a real sense we were bought from the slavery of sin and released into the freedom of God’s children. [71] “Therefore, as it is written: ‘Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord’” (1:31). Here, Paul quotes from Jeremiah 9:23-24. People today are boasting in a lot of things, like their education, their experience, their wealth, and their jobs. As Christians we dare not boast in any of these things because they are all passing away. If we are to boast we must boast in the Lord Jesus. He will abide with us when all else has turned to dust and ashes. He will abide with us forever. Introduction 1. Kenneth L. Barker &John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994), p. 606. “Paul probably came…in the fall of AD 50, after preaching the Gospel to the highly intellectual Athenians. He ministered there a year and a half (Acts 18:11)…Paul’s stay at the city is established by comparing the reference to Gallio with a Gallio, proconsul of Achaia, mentioned on an inscription of the Emperor Claudius at Delphi, dated between January and August, AD 52. This Gallio took office on July 1 AD 51, and Paul had arrived in Corinth about a year earlier. Shortly after this court appearance, Paul left Corinth for Syria (v. 18).” 2. Gerald Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1999), p. 1. 3. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 606. 4. Warren W. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook, 2007), p. 452. 5. David Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 1997-2003, v. 1:1. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/guz/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. Chapter 1 1. Jay E. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, Acts – Ephesians (Colorado Springs: Cook Communications Ministries, 2006), p. 205. Note: In the Hebrew language sh‘leach means a delegate, envoy, messenger or agent. In the US for instance there will be an Israeli Schleich in several of the larger cities. 2. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 609. 3. Frederick Brotherton Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, 1914, vs. 1:1-11. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/fbm/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 4. Albert Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 1870, v. 1:1. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. “He was accustomed to employ an amanuensis (scribe) in writing his epistles, and the copyist frequently expressed his concurrence or approbation in what the apostle had indicted; see the note at Romans 16:22; compare Colossians 4:18. …It is possible that Sosthenes might have been employed by Paul for this purpose…. Sosthenes was well known at Corinth. He had been the chief ruler of the synagogue there.” 5. A.T. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, Broadman Press, 1932-33, v. 1:1. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rwp/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 6. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 206. 7. William Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 1956-1959, vs. 1:1-3. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/dsb/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 8. Dr. Bob Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 1:2 9. James Burton Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament (Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University Press,1983-1999), v. 1:2. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bcc/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 10. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 454. 11. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, Barker &Kohlenberger add: “Corinth…probably had a free population of 200,000, plus half a million slaves in its navy and in its many colonies…It became the capital of the Roman province of Achaia.” (Barker &Kohlenberger, p. 606). 12. Ibid. Barker &Kohlenberger also add: “Ships often docked at the Isthmus and transported their cargoes by land vehicles from one sea to another; or if the ships were small, they were dragged the five miles across the isthmus. Today there is a canal…” (Barker &Kohlenberger), p. 606. 13. Ibid. 14. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 1:3. 15. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 6. 16. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 454. 17. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, vs. 1:4-9. 18. Charles F. Pfeiffer &Everett F. Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1962), p. 1230. 19. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 1:9. 20. William Barclay, A New Testament Word Book (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1955), p. 72. 21. Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fausset, &David Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, 1871-78, v. 1:9. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfb/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 22. Ray C. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 2010, v. 1:1-9. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rsc/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 23. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 1:10. 24. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, Pfeiffer &Harrison add: “After this initial visit Paul wrote the church a letter which has been lost (cf. 5:9)…Apparently the problems in the church were not solved by the epistle, for the apostle was forced to pay the church a hurried, painful visit (cf. 2 Cor 2:1; 12:14; 13:1-2)….From Macedonia Paul wrote the canonical 2 Corinthians (cf. 2 Cor. 2:13; 7:6-16)…He then followed up this last letter with his final recorded visit to the church (cf. Acts 20:1-4).” (Pfeiffer &Harrison, p. 1228). 25. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 1:10. 26. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 27. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 1:11. 28. Adam Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, 1832, v. 1:12. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 29. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 30. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 31. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1231. 32. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 1:12. 33. Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1993), p. 455. 34. Ibid. 35. Peter Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 2013, v. 1:13. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pet/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 37. Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, vs. 1:12-25. 38. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 39. Cited in Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 40. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 41. Ibid. 42. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 455. 43. Leon Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7 (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1985), p. 49. 44. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 1:18. 45. Carl Olson &Sandra Miesel, The Da Vinci Hoax (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2004), p. 92. 46. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 47. Scott Cleland with Ira Brodsky, Search &Destroy, Why You Can’t Trust Google Inc. (St Louis MO: 2011), p. 148. 48. Paul Johnson, Intellectuals (New York: Harper &Row, 1988), p. 27. 49. Ibid., pp. 79-80. 50. Ibid., pp. 225-246. 51. Paul E. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 1921-23, vs. 1:20-25. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/kpc/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 52. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 14. 53. Quoted in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 1:22. 54. William Godbey, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament, v. 1:22. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ges/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. Morris adds: “The matter of fact Jews showed little interest in speculative thought. Their demand was for evidence and their interest was in the practical…The Greeks were absorbed in speculative philosophy. No names were more honored among them than the names of their outstanding thinkers.” (Morrris, p. 51). 55. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 1:23. 56. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 212. 57. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 612. 58. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 51. 59. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 16. 60. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 61. Ibid. 62. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 63. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 53. 64. John Trapp, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete Commentary, 1865-68, v. 1:26. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=1. 65. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 1:27. 66. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 17. 67. Godbey, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament, v. 1:28. 68. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 1:30. 69. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 18. 70. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1230. 71. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. 1 Corinthians 2:1 Paul lived in a time when a great deal of emphasis was placed both upon eloquence and human wisdom or knowledge. The Greeks greatly prided themselves in their rhetoric or grandiloquence in speech-making. Of course, they were also well known for the wisdom of their famous philosophers, like Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. When Paul first came to Corinth he was fresh from his visit and ministry in Athens. He had even preached to some of the Greek philosophers (Acts 17:16-34). Some commentators feel that Paul was a little depressed about his teaching at Athens. Some feel that he had tried to use the philosophic method of teaching and failed, but there is really not much proof of this. [1] Clearly, Paul did not preach a philosophical sermon at Athens and his ministry there was not unfruitful. Luke says of it, “Some of the people became followers of Paul and believed. Among them was Dionysius, a member of the Areopagus, also a woman named Damaris, and a number of others” (Acts 17:34). DeWelt relates to us that the church at Athens became one of the strongest congregations in the empire during the second and third centuries. [2] The famous Bible scholar, F. F. Bruce says concerning Paul’s decision to preach only the cross of Christ, as seen in the next verse: “This was no new policy on Paul’s part, adopted (as some have thought) because of the ill success of another approach at Athens (Ac 17:22-31); it was his regular practice (cf. Gal 3:1).” [3] While Paul may not have preached directly on the crucifixion, he did speak of the resurrection and of the importance of Christ. His sermon, since it was to Gentiles, was based on God’s general revelation and the folly of worshipping idols. In these respects, it was a masterful sermon. We should note that the word “testimony” or “witness” in this first verse has presented a problem for translators. Smith says, “A number of ancient manuscripts read ‘testimony’ and a number read ‘mystery…’ The evidence for these two variations is rather evenly split…” [4] Obviously, the message of the cross that he will deal with next is a deep heavenly mystery which is now made plain to all. “For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (2:2). Still, Paul may have decided to emphasize the cross more in his preaching. Barclay in citing Stewart relates this story: “The Christian missionaries had come to the court of Clovis, the king of the Franks. They told the story of the cross, and, as they did, the hand of the old king stole to his sword hilt. ‘If I and my Franks had been there,’ he said, ‘we would have stormed Calvary and rescued him from his enemies.’” [5] Clearly, it has been the cross of Christ that has moved people and nations to repentance. It was Isaac Watts who penned the old hymn, When I Survey The Wondrous Cross (1707). Charles Wesley reportedly said that he would have given up all his other hymns to have written that one. The last stanza goes like this: Were the whole realm of nature mine, That were a present far too small; Love so amazing, so divine, Demands my soul, my life, my all. [6] Paul may have studied rhetoric at the famous school of Tarsus in Cilicia. Perhaps he was too young to do that when he left for Jerusalem. At Athens he quoted Aratus (Acts 17:28), and in other instances, Epimenides (Tit. 1:12), and Menander (1 Cor. 15:33). [7] He was obviously well educated and had studied under a foremost Hebrew scholar, Gamalial, in Israel (Acts 5:34; 22:3). Yet, he knew such wisdom could not save a soul. Only the cross of Christ could do that. Really, the cross of Christ is the heart of the gospel. The popular Christian writer, Max Lucado, tries to describe the great mystery of the cross that draws so many to the Master. He says, “Never were those arms opened so wide as they were on the Roman cross. One arm extending back into history and the other reaching into the future.” [8] The word “crucified” (estaurōmenon) is a Greek perfect passive participle. The Baptist professor, Bob Utley, says of it, “… the perfect tense reveals that Jesus remains the crucified one. When we see him, he will still have the scars. They have become his badge of glory…” [9] I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling” 1 Corinthians 2:3. Paul’s initial stay in Corinth was obviously difficult for the apostle. He was alone and was probably sorely missing Timothy and Silas. He had been ill-treated and imprisoned at Philippi, chased out of Thessalonica and Berea. He had fled alone to Athens and had heard the ridicule of the philosophers there. He was no doubt concerned about his personal safety. [10] Scholars feel that there were other matters of concern for him. Paul was often weak and infirm in body (Gal. 4:13-14). His weakness (Gk. astheneia), could also have represented a flare-up of his thorn in the flesh, as seen in 2 Corinthians 12:7-9. While “fear and trembling” sometimes expresses deep concern (2 Cor. 7:15; Phil. 2:12), it is not unlikely that Paul was experiencing some real fear about his own safety as well as about the welfare of the new churches he had just established. At some low point, the Lord had come to encourage Paul in a vision. He said to him, “Do not be afraid; keep on speaking, do not be silent. For I am with you, and no one is going to attack and harm you, because I have many people in this city” (Acts 18:9-10). Paul took courage and stayed on in Corinth for a year and a half. “My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power” (2:4-5). Paul would not rely upon philosophy and fancy rhetoric to present the gospel. Rather, he presented it with a demonstration of changed lives, brought about by God’s Spirit. Barclay says, “The result of Paul’s preaching was that things happened…The word he uses is the word for the most stringent possible proof, the kind against which there can be no argument. What was it? It was the proof of changed lives. Something re-creating had entered into the polluted society of Corinth.” [11] Barclay also relates a touching story that a certain John Hutton used to tell with gusto. “A man who had been a reprobate and a drunkard was captured by Christ. His workmates used to try to shake him and say, ‘Surely a sensible man like you cannot believe in the miracles that the Bible tells about. You cannot, for instance, believe that this Jesus of yours turned water into wine.’ ‘Whether he turned water into wine or not,’ said the man, ‘I do not know; but in my own house I have seen him turn beer into furniture.’” [12] It is interesting that the word Paul uses for “demonstration” is the Greek apodeixei. Its meaning was once explained by the ancient Roman orator Quintillian as “clear proof.” In a similar way, another Roman orator, Cicero, called it a “logical proof.” [13] The Greek word also can refer to producing proofs in a court argument. [14] Paul refused to gain converts by great speaking and clever reasoning. Guzik adds: “what you draw them with is what you draw them to… if someone can be persuaded into the kingdom by human wisdom, they can also be persuaded out of the kingdom by human wisdom.” [15] In his second book of Corinthians, we see some criticism of Paul: “…His letters are weighty and forceful, but in person he is unimpressive and his speaking amounts to nothing” (2 Cor. 10:10). In one second-century document Paul was said to be, “a man small of stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in a good state of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked.” [16] He was probably not much to look at, physically speaking, but he made up for it with spiritual power. We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. 1 Corinthians 2:6 God has no argument against real wisdom. God made the world by his wisdom (Jer. 10:12). The Bible says, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding” (Pro. 9:10). The Bible also says, “…Get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding” (Pro. 4:7). So, there is a godly wisdom that is greatly prized in scripture. There is a spiritual wisdom that Paul speaks of here. “Yes, the message of the gospel is simple enough for an illiterate pagan to understand, believe, and be saved. But it is also so profound that the most brilliant theologian cannot fathom its depths. There is a ‘wisdom of God’ in the gospel that challenges the keenest intellect.” [17] This message of wisdom is given to the mature. The Greek word here is the common teleiois. Sometimes this is translated “perfect,” but the general sense of the word is “full-grown” or “mature.” [18] The wisdom that Paul speaks of has no relation to the so-called wisdom of this age. Today, many take pride in the wisdom or philosophy of this present evil age. The Christian philosopher Nancy Pearcey sighs, saying, “Plato said philosophers should rule the world, and they do – hundreds of years after they die.” [19] Francis Bacon once observed that a little philosophy “inclineth man’s mind to atheism.” [20] The “wise” rulers of this age are coming to nothing and such was the case so long ago when the rulers of the age withstood Jesus and crucified him. Can we just imagine, the Son of God, God incarnate, crucified by the rulers of this age? Can we imagine God being crucified by his creation, by mortal men? “No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began” (2:7). The scripture is clear that God chose us believers before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4). God’s mysterious work was finished before the world began (Heb. 4:3). Even the Lamb of God was foreordained and slain before the world began (1 Pet. 1:20; Rev. 13:8). It was said by Jesus in his ministry, as he spoke in parables: “So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet: ‘I will open my mouth in parables, I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world’” (Matt. 13:35). The word “mystery” has little connection with the modern word. It is not just something mysterious. Rather it is a divine secret that cannot be discovered apart from divine revelation. [21] It is “a ‘sacred secret,’ a truth hidden in past ages but now revealed to the people of God.” [22] “None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (2:8). There has been a lively discussion over the centuries as to whether these rulers in the Lord’s time were simply men, or whether they were demonic spiritual rulers of the dark world system. [23] We may not solve this problem. However, in the New Testament, “rulers” can be used to speak of human leaders (Jn. 7:26, 48; Rom. 13:3) and also for the devil and his satanic forces (Matt. 9:34:12:24; Mk. 3:22: Lk. 11:15; Eph. 2:2). [24] Obviously, both the natural rulers and the spiritual rulers did not understand what would happen when Jesus was crucified and resurrected. The natural rulers were dismayed at these things and the spiritual rulers were disarmed by them (Col. 2:15). The early writer Ambrosiaster (between 366 and 384), says of this: “The rulers of this age are not only those who were great among the Jews and the Romans but also every spiritual power which sets itself up against God. The Jewish rulers cannot be called rulers of this age, because they were subject to the Romans. …The rulers who crucified him were the demons.” [25] The church father Augustine (354-430) sums up the victory of the crucifixion saying, “By seducing the first man, he killed him. By killing the last man, he lost the first from his snare.” [26] However, as it is written: “What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived”— the things God has prepared for those who love him— 1 Corinthians 2:9. This is a majestic passage, however, scholars have labored through the centuries to try to find this original quotation. It is very close to Isaiah 64:4, and some feel that it might also be a reference to Isaiah 65:17. Morris says, “On the whole, it seems best to think of this as a rather free citation of Isaiah 64:4, with reminiscences of other scriptural passages.” [27] From this passage we can know for certain that God has many wonderful surprises for us in this world and in the world to come. Unfortunately, we are asleep to these unseen realities. God has some things to share with us that no one has ever seen, heard or thought about. Just think of some of the wonderful revealed mysteries of this earth. For instance, from mere grains of sand (silicon) our whole cyber age has come into being. This does not compare with the vast mysteries the Lord is anxious to reveal to us in the new heaven and the new earth. The writer Randy Alcorn has tried to probe into the mysteries of the new heaven and the new earth. He says, “The power of Christ’s resurrection is enough not only to remake us, but also to remake every inch of the universe – mountains, rivers, plants, animals, stars nebulae, quasars, and galaxies.” [28] “We will glorify God and find joy in him as we do what he has made us to do: serve him as resurrected beings and carry out his plan for developing a Christ-centered, resurrected culture in a resurrected universe.” [29]“The gospel is far greater than most of us imagine. It isn’t just good news for us – it’s good news for animals, plants, stars and planets. It’s good news for the sky above and the earth below.” [30] We can see by these things that we need to get over the idea that Heaven only involves our sitting forever on some distant cloud strumming a harp. Alcorn says, “If God were to end history and reign forever in a distant Heaven, Earth would be remembered as a graveyard of sin and failure. Instead, Earth will be redeemed and resurrected.” [31] Paul adds, “these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God” (2:10). We can see here how the persons of the godhead work together. The Holy Spirit searches all things that are in the Father and reveals them to us. It is through the new birth of the Spirit that we know God in the first place (cf. Joh. 3:5, 8; Rom. 8:26-27). Barnes says, “the Spirit is omniscient. He searches or clearly understands ‘all things’— the very definition of omniscience. He understands all the profound plans and counsels of God. And how can there be a higher demonstration of omniscience than to ‘know God?’” [32] Keener adds, “This was a radical statement for most of ancient Judaism, because most Jewish teachers did not believe that the Spirit was active in their day.” [33] The Spirit searches through the unfathomable depths of God. The Greek word for depths is bathē, and this word is used for the ocean depths as well as the depths of divine knowledge. [34] Godbey remarks here: “These ‘deep things of God’ in beauty, sweetness, spiritual fascination and delectation have captured and enraptured the saints of all ages. For them the martyr has gladly hugged the burning stake and sung his death song amid devouring flames.” [35] For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 1 Corinthians 2:11 Who can really tell what a person is thinking, but the person himself or herself? We cannot even tell what our dog is thinking. Psychologists have tried to devise many ways of getting into the minds of people and finding out what they are really thinking, but this has been largely futile. Thus, we certainly cannot know what God is thinking. The scripture exclaims, “How great are your works, LORD, how profound your thoughts!” (Psa. 92:5). Barnes says of verse 11, “The passage proves, therefore, that there is a knowledge which the Spirit has of God, which no man, no angel can obtain, just as every man‘s spirit has a knowledge of his own plans which no other man can obtain.” [36] When we come to Jesus and are saved we receive the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:9). That Holy Spirit will teach us (Jn. 14:26) and guide us into all truth (Jn. 16:13). “The Spirit knows God from the inside,” [37] and he who knows God from the inside will reveal God to each of us. This does not mean that we will have perfect knowledge of God. Coffman citing Farrar says, “All that is meant is that our knowledge of God must always be relative, not absolute. It is not possible to measure the arm of God with the finger of man.” [38] “What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us” (2:12). We have not received the spirit of this world. Smith says of this expression, that “‘spirit of the world’ appears to be, for all practical purposes, synonymous with the ‘wisdom of this age.’” [39] Coffman adds: “What Paul had in view here was the secular, materialistic thinking of un-regenerated people. The Germans had a word for it, the Zeitgeist, which means ‘the spirit of the times,’ or ‘the intellectual and moral tendencies of an age or epoch.’” [40] Rather, we have received the Spirit from God. Guzik citing Clarke says, “every believer has the access to this spiritual wisdom…This does not mean every believer has equal spiritual wisdom. And it does not mean we will understand all spiritual mysteries.” [41] “This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words” (2:13). Wiersbe compares this to an engineering student who must grasp the technical terms of his trade: “The successful Christian learns the vocabulary of the Spirit and makes use of it. He knows the meaning of justification, sanctification, adoption, propitiation, election, inspiration, and so forth…” [42] The expression “explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words” is translated in other versions to read: “combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words” (NASB); “comparing spiritual things with spiritual” (NKJV); “interpreting spiritual things to those who are spiritual” (NRS); “fitting spiritual language to spiritual things” (NJB). Chrysostom comments: “Some spiritual truths are unclear and need to be interpreted, but this can be done only by comparing them with other spiritual things. For example, when I say that Christ rose again, I compare this to the deliverance of Jonah form the belly of the whale.” [43] Bruce says of this: “the Spirit supplies the language as well as the substance of revelation.” [44] One blessed way of comparing spiritual things with spiritual is through Christian meditation. This method of Christian growth has become contaminated by transcendental meditation. We need to rescue biblical meditation and we need to begin practicing it immediately. As we turn over passages in our minds it is much like a cow chewing her cud. We end up getting flashes of insight and brand new meaning to old passages. The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. 1 Corinthians 2:14 In verses 14 and 15, Paul contrasts the unspiritual person (Gk. psuchikos) with the spiritual person (Gk. pneumatikos). The psuchikos is the animal person, who belongs to the heritage of the first Adam, the father of our mortal humanity. The pneumatikos is the spiritual person who is joined with the exalted Christ, head of the new creation. [45] The person without the Spirit is fleshly, seeking fleshly wisdom and pursuing fleshly goals. There is an old rhyme that expresses this lifestyle: Into this world to eat and to sleep, And to know no reason why he was born, Save to consume the corn, Devour the cattle, flock and fish, And leave behind an empty dish. [46] Pfeiffer and Harrison comment how the Greek word rendered “natural” means “dominated by the soul.” They remark,”…Human ears cannot hear high-frequency radio waves…the unsaved are incompetent to judge spiritual things, a most important practical truth.” [47] The reformer, John Calvin, likened the natural man to a blind man trying to distinguish colors. [48] Thus the brilliant philosophers at Athens scoffed at the godly wisdom of Paul. Today we seem to have a whole society scoffing at the gospel and the truths of the Bible. Unlike the natural or unspiritual person, the spiritual person receives revelation from God through the Holy Spirit on a daily basis. This one can understand and accept the wisdom of the Creator and has an opportunity to fashion his or her life in accordance with this divine wisdom. Obviously, there is a vast chasm between these two lifestyles. “The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, for, ‘Who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?’ But we have the mind of Christ” (2:15-16). The last part of the statement here contains a quote from Isaiah 40:13 in the Septuagint, or the Greek version of the Old Testament. The spiritual person continually makes judgments that are not understood and not appreciated by the unspiritual. Obviously, these judgments cannot be understood or judged by the unspiritual (Rom. 11:34). Chrysostom says, “This does not mean that we know everything which Christ knows but rather that everything which we know comes from him and is spiritual.” [49] The statement “we have the mind of Christ” simply means that in a spiritual sense, we Christians are in the process of receiving a mind transplant. 1. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 2:2. 2. Cited in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 2:2. 3. F. F. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1971), p. 37. 4. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 214. 5. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, vs. 2:1-5. 6. http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/w/h/e/whenisur.htm 7. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 2:1. “Paul might, had he pleased, have used an ornate style, having studied secular learning at Tarsus of Cilicia, which Strabo preferred as a school of learning to Athens or Alexandria; here, doubtless, he read the Cilician Aratus‘ poems (which he quotes, Acts 17:28), and Epimenides (Titus 1:12), and Menander (1 Corinthians 15:33). Grecian intellectual development was an important element in preparing the way for the gospel, but it failed to regenerate the world, showing that for this a superhuman power is needed.” 8. Max Lucado, No Wonder They Call Him The Savior (Multnomah Press, 1986), p. 120. 9. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 2:2. 10. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 215. “Trembling…Acts 18:9-10 suggests that Paul feared for his personal safety in Corinth (cf. Acts16:19-24; 17:5-9, 13-14; 1 Thess. 3:4)…his recent experiences in Athens (Acts 17:16-34), his loneliness and a sense of isolation (cf. Acts 17:15; 18:5).” 11. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible 2:1-5. 12. Ibid. 13. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 215. 14. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1233. 15. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 16. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 56. 17. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 459. 18. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 216. 19. Nancy Pearcey, Saving Leonardo, A Call to Resist the Secular Assault on Mind, Morals, &Meaning (Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2010), p. 25. 20. David Berlinski, The Devil’s Delusion (New York: Crown Forum, 2008), p. 2. 21. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1233. 22. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 459. 23. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 58. “In antiquity Origen took this to refer to the demonic powers behind world rulers, an interpretation which Chrysostom rejected, and this difference of opinion has persisted through the centuries…” 24. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 217. 25. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 22. 26. Ibid., p. 23. 27. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 60. 28. Randy Alcorn, Heaven (Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2004), p. 120. 29. Ibid., p. 92. 30. Ibid., p. 119. 31. Ibid., p. 137. 32. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 2:10. Coffman quoting Guthrie adds: “The Spirit searcheth all things … This is true, ‘not in the sense of `needing information,’ but in the sense of penetrating all things.” (Coffman v. 2:10). 33. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 458. 34. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, v. 35. Godbey, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament, v. 2:10. 36. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 2:11. 37. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 62. 38. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 2:11. 39. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 220. 40. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 2:12. 41. Cited in Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 42. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 460. 43. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 25. 44. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 40. 45. Ibid., pp. 40-41. Morris adds here: “Psychikos, ‘natural;, refers to the animal life. There is nothing inherently evil about it; it does not mean ‘sinful’, But it does point to an absence of spiritual discernment…purely material plane.” (Morris p. 63). 46. Quoted in Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, v. 2:14-16. 47. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1233. 48. Cited in Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 222. 49. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 26. Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly— mere infants in Christ. 1 Corinthians 3:1 The Corinthians may have felt themselves to be quite spiritual because of their abundance of spiritual gifts, as seen in chapter 14. [1] However, Paul quickly brought them down to reality. They were not spiritual, because they were not acting in a spiritual manner. The apostle therefore could not address them in the Greek as pneumatikos, or as spiritual persons, but as sarkinos, people who lived in the flesh. Obviously, there is nothing wrong with being in the flesh physically, but there is something wrong with living according to the flesh (Gal. 2:20; Rom. 8:12-13). [2] Paul refers to the Corinthians as mere infants in Christ (Gk. nēpiois). Again, there is nothing wrong with being an infant in Christ when one is born anew from above, but a person certainly should not wish to remain as an infant. That is why we find infants guzzling milk, so that they may grow naturally. As was probably true at Corinth, the recent Charismatic Movement, although doing many good things, produced multitudes of babes in Christ and spiritually immature folks. Many of these were gifted with astounding spiritual gifts, but a good number continued on as immature. Wiersbe says of this situation, “A mature Christian uses his gifts as tools to build with, while an immature believer uses gifts as toys to play with or trophies to boast about.” [3] Some churches today make an effort to preach only evangelistic sermons. It is good to do this at certain times but it should not be the regular church diet. When my wife and I visit some of the churches in the Bible Belt where we grew up, we are amazed that they are still preaching evangelistic sermons, but the members seem not to have grown and developed. It seems like a team and wagon religion trying to compete in the space age. “I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready” (3:2). Milk represents the basic and elementary truths of the Christian faith. The church fathers Tertullian and Hippolytus (third century) inform us of the custom of giving a glass of milk to new converts before their first communion to symbolize this. [4] Of course solid food or meat is the more advanced teaching in the faith (cf. Heb. 5:11-14; 1 Pet. 2:2). Guzik says, “Paul kept his teaching on the basics, even though they had an inflated view of their spirituality. They believed they were ready for the ‘deeper things,’ but were not progressing any deeper in the basic things he already preached to them…” [5] “You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans?” (3:3). When people begin to grow spiritually they produce spiritual fruit. Some of this fruit is listed for us in Galatians 5:22-23: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.” In the previous verses, 19-21, he lists some of the fruit of the flesh: “The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like…” Already, the sorry fruits of jealousy (Gk. zēlos) and quarreling or discord (Gk. eris), were springing up in Corinth. Paul will go on to point out dissensions, factions and envy. While the Corinthians thought they were spiritual, they had the ugly fruit of the flesh hanging from their trees. We might ask ourselves exactly what is hanging on our trees and vines today. Are we producing only crabapples on our trees and sour grapes on our vines? Perhaps we are producing some dried-up prunes of self-pity. Meyer says, “A man may be in Christ, truly regenerate and forgiven for his past sins, and yet be carnal; that is, according to Romans 7:18, he may be ruled by ‘me,’ ‘I’, ‘self.’” [6] So, there is such a thing as a carnal Christian after all. Trapp comments, “It is a shame for Christians to be like other men, as Samson was after he had lost his hair.” [7] “For when one says, ‘I follow Paul,’ and another, ‘I follow Apollos,’ are you not mere human beings?” (3:4). It seems that the Corinthians had gotten themselves into quite a preacher contest. Eloquent Apollos certainly had an edge over Paul, whose speaking apparently was not much (2 Cor. 10:10). Apollos carried on ministry in Corinth after Paul’s work there (Acts 18:1-28). Interestingly, there never seemed to be the slightest dissension between Apollos and Paul. Lipscomb says, “Paul always spoke of Apollos with the highest esteem and affection.” [8] Perhaps the Corinthians were doing the thing that came naturally for the Greeks. Keener reminds us that, “Greek culture sometimes divinized heroes into gods…” [9] What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe— as the Lord has assigned to each his task. 1 Corinthians 3:5 Paul points out that ministers are only servants (Gk. diakonoi) or mere table waiters. They are but workers in God’s cultivated field. Maclaren comments, “So what was the use of fighting about which of two nothings was the greater?” [10] We know from 1:12 that Peter or Cephas also had his admirers in Corinth. Much fragmentation has resulted in the church because of powerful leaders who have drawn people after themselves. No doubt many denominations have resulted because of the same reason. We must understand that whoever our leaders are, we all are still part of the Body of Christ and he is the one who is important. When we served in Israel those many years we seldom heard anyone saying “I am a Baptist,” “I am a Methodist,” or “I am a Pentecostal.” When Christians make up less than 2 percent of the population they just hang together and worship together as one. Regardless of differences, they are happy to be together. So, what are the differences in ministries anyway? They all are workers in God’s field. Stedman says, “…It is like asking which blade of a pair of scissors is more important, the upper or the lower.” [11] “I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow. So neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow” (3:6-7). Paul was a church planter par excellence. Apollos came along afterward and watered what Paul had planted (Acts 18:1; Acts 19:1). This is especially important in the arid Middle East. The little nation of Israel has blossomed and flourished because she early invented a drip irrigation system, which now has been marketed all over the world. After all, it is God who makes the seed grow. There is no farmer, regardless of how successful or how wise, who can describe exactly how a seed germinates and grows into a plant. The wise farmer is content to wait and let God produce the crop. “The one who plants and the one who waters have one purpose, and they will each be rewarded according to their own labor” (3:8). Obviously, there are a lot of other ministries in God’s field. Some must fertilize, cultivate, prune and pull weeds. Others must fight off pests of all kinds. There are many jobs in farming. One big problem has always been jealousy among ministries. Guzik says, “Some people are frustrated because they want to water when God has called them to plant, or they want to plant when God has called them to water. Others are frustrated because they want to make the increase happen, when only God can do that. Real fruitfulness in ministry happens when we are peacefully content with what God has called us to do.” [12] Wiersbe adds: “The sower and the reaper not only work together, but one day they shall rejoice together and receive their own rewards.” [13] What grace has been poured out upon us that we are allowed to labor together (Gk. sun-ergos) with God himself! [14] We must not take this honor lightly but we must work with all our hearts. “Young preachers used to ask G. Campbell Morgan the secret to his preaching success. He would answer: ‘I always say to them the same thing: work; hard work; and again, work!’” [15] Utley points out how the New Testament tells us that there are different rewards and punishments for God’s servants (cf. Matt. 10:15; 11:22,24; 18:6; 25:21, 23; Mk. 12:40; Lk. 12:47-48; 20:47; Jam. 3:1). [16] Christians need to remember that they will stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ (2 Cor. 5:10). This judgment seems to have nothing to do with whether or not eternal life is granted, but rather it is a judgment related to the faithfulness and rewards of each of his servants. This judgment appears to happen after the First Resurrection. If so, Christ’s followers will have already received their glorious, resurrected bodies and will have already been made like Christ (1 Jn. 3:2). “For we are co-workers in God’s service; you are God’s field, God’s building” (3:9). Here the apostle reemphasizes the metaphor of the field and makes a transition to the next picture, the building of Christ. Before we leave the metaphor of the field there are a couple more things we can say about it. The word for field is the Greek geōrgion, and it means “husbandry,” “tillage,” or “cultivated field.” [17] It has been suggested that this word might have been the reason the name “George” became popular in Christianity. God has assigned each of us a job to do in his field or his vineyard. We should work in that spot without complaint so that our Master can finally say “Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!” (Matt. 25:21). Stedman quotes this poem: Father, Where shall I work today? And my love flowed warm and free. Then he pointed me out a tiny spot and said, “Tend that for me.” I answered quickly, “Oh, no, not that. Why, no one would ever see No matter how well my work was done. Not that little place for me.” And the word he spoke, it was not stern. He answered me tenderly, “Ah, little one, search that heart of thine. Art thou working for them or me? Nazareth was a little place, and so was Galilee.” [18] By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as a wise builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should build with care. 1 Corinthians 3:10 Paul and the other apostles laid the foundations of Christianity. They left us their letters and these have become our Holy Scriptures. Thus, the church is built on the word of God. Ephesians 2:20 tells us that the church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.” Barclay says of Paul, “He was of necessity a foundation layer and was forever on the move…It was only when he was in prison that his restless spirit could stay in the one place…” [19] The apostle was a “wise builder” (Gk. architekton). Many other translations have “master-builder” here (NKJ, NRS, NET, NAB, NAS, NJB). Although we have gotten our term “architect” from this word, it more fittingly describes one who superintends the work of building. [20] It probably has more in common with our general contractor today. Paul as a master-builder did not like to build on other people’s work (Rom. 15:20). That would probably be true of most modern master-builders. Ambrosiaster says, “The wise master-builder is one who preaches the same gospel as that which was preached by the Savior.” [21] Morris adds concerning the building, “…Incidentally, the metaphor of building is a favorite one with Paul, but it is not often found in the New Testament outside his writings.” [22] “For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ” (3:11). It is clear in the Bible that Jesus is the only foundation (cf. Matt. 21:42; 14:6; Acts 4:11-12; Eph. 2:20; 2 Tim. 2:19; 1 Pet. 2:6.). Chrysostom has written:” The foundation is already in place, and no one can change it.” [23] All other attempts to build Christianity without Christ as the sole foundation are doomed to failure and judgment. If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 1 Corinthians 3:12. It is obvious here that we are contrasting permanent and passing things. When we think of permanent things we think of Jesus Christ who, “…is the same yesterday and today and forever” (Heb. 13:8). We also think of the word of God which endures forever (1 Pet. 1:25). The gold and silver are certainly things that abide, even in the midst of earth’s refining fires. One of the world’s largest depositories of gold and silver was stored underneath the US World Trade Center. It was owned by a group of commercial banks. Several days after the 9/11 destruction, $230 million in precious metals was removed from basement vaults of the center. [24] These treasures had all come through the awful fire in very good shape. We should note here that costly stones are listed along with the gold and silver. Although some ancient buildings and temples were adorned with gemstones, this is probably not what Paul has in mind here. Several commentators see these stones as the polished marble and valuable granite stones often used in building. [25] When we think of passing things, we would include things like wood, hay and straw. Wiersbe says, “You can find wood, hay, and stubble in your backyard, and it will not take too much effort to pick it up. But if you want gold, silver, and jewels, you have to dig for them.” [26] Smith points out that Paul seems to be listing things in two halves. These halves would include materials that can withstand the fire and materials that are flammable and cannot withstand fire. [27] Paul says, “their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work” (3:13). The apostle is obviously speaking about the Day of the Lord here (1 Cor. 5:5; 2 Thess. 2:2; 2 Pet. 3:10). This was a very common expression in the Old Testament and in the New Testament as well. There are many other expressions that speak of this time. There seems to be no good reason for us to separate the concepts of “the Day of the Lord,” “the Day of Christ,” “the Day,” and “that Day” as they are used in scripture. All these speak of the same event. The entire book of Revelation likewise speaks in detail of this day. The Bible tells us that the Day of the Lord will burn as an oven (Mal. 4:1), and that Jesus will come with flaming fire (2 Thess. 1:7). Peter tells us that our many trials are preparing us for this day. He says, “These have come so that the proven genuineness of your faith—of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire— may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1 Pet. 1:7). The wicked, who are like wood, hay and stubble, will be burned out of the earth on that day. Also, the works of Christians that resemble wood, hay and straw will go up in flames. It is clear in the Bible that God is in the process of making us fireproof for that day. After all, our God is a consuming fire (Deut. 4:24). Isaiah once asked, “…Who of us can dwell with the consuming fire? Who of us can dwell with everlasting burning?” (Isa. 33:14). The apostle continues on with two very important verses. He says, “If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved— even though only as one escaping through the flames” (3:14-15). We come here to the very significant subject of rewards and punishments. Comfort says, “These builders will be saved, but only as through fire, as if they jumped out of a burning building and lost everything but their lives. They will enter heaven but will not receive the same reward as those who built well.” [28] It is almost like they escaped from the burning building with their shirttails on fire. These verses tell us something very significant about the coming judgment and end of the age. No doubt what is pictured here is the judgment seat of Christ spoken of later in 2 Corinthians 5:10: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.” For Christians, the judgment seat of Christ seems more like a debriefing for our own information and benefit. It is not a matter of who will or will not go to heaven. That is already settled. It is all about rewards. The Bible seems very clear that there will be different rewards for different people. Jesus himself speaks of this in Luke 19:13-19. Again, there are obviously thirty, sixty and hundredfold Christians (Matt. 13:23). We are not all the same and we will not get the same rewards. This is not Bible, but a few of the church fathers reported on something that seemed to be an early church tradition. This was apparently from the mouth of Papias, a very early writer (c. 120): As the presbyters say, those who are deemed worthy of a habitation in heaven will go there, others will enjoy the delights of Paradise, and others will possess the splendor of the city. For everywhere the Savior will be seen according to the worthiness of those who see him… [29] So, we need to take stock of our building. Are we building on Christ the sure foundation and are we building with precious things or with wood, hay and stubble? When we first moved to Israel in 1982, we gathered one morning at the burned-out hull of what had been the Baptist church in Jerusalem. Some Orthodox troublemakers had burned the old wooden building down. The church met in a tent for several years afterward, but in time they built a new structure with stone and concrete, like most other buildings in the city. Since that rebuilding, the agitators have tried twice to burn it down again but they have failed both times. About the only damage they caused was a little scorched paint. Today, some Christians seem to not be building at all. It has become very customary for Christians in the West to even avoid coming together as the church. A mid 90s study in the US found that 54 percent of evangelicals thought it was better to be alone and meditate than to worship with others. [30] Such as these, if they are truly believers, may enter heaven with their shirt-tails on fire. Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in your midst? 1 Corinthians 3:16 It is interesting that in Ephesians chapter 2 we see the picture of God’s house or household (made up of redeemed people) transformed into God’s Holy Temple (Eph. 2:20-21). We see similar pictures in several other places (cf. 2 Cor. 6:16; Heb. 3:6; 1 Pet. 2:5). This is a great mystery as we see in Ephesians 3:6. Actually, Jesus once revealed this mystery to the woman of Samaria. This woman wanted to know if she should worship in Samaria or in Jerusalem. He said to her, “Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth” (Jn. 4:23-24). Jesus once said, “For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.” (Matt. 18:20). This once again stresses the importance of Christians being together. Today the concept of “temple of God” is greatly abused. Many Christians think that they individually are God’s temple. Therefore, they can stay home and meditate rather than be with the Lord’s flock, as we have seen. This is a grave error. The devil, being the lion and wolf that he is, must always be looking for a sheep that has gotten itself separated from the flock. We see in nature that this is disastrous. It is important that we get the help of others in order to be Christians. We must have all the eyes and ears of the flock to alert us to the lion’s presence. The Greek word used here for temple is not the temple compound in general (hieron) but (naos), the inner shrine or sanctuary where God dwells. [31] It is as if the Shechinah of God hovers over us as we come together in the Jesus’ name. Once again, we individually are not the temple of God but we “plural” make up that temple. Smith says, “The ‘you’ does not refer to the individual but to the community as a whole.” [32] The concept of the people of God as the temple of God was also seen in the Dead Sea community, even before the time of Jesus’ ministry. No doubt Paul’s readers could have already had some understanding of this important picture. [33] There are many other supporting pictures of this spiritual temple in scripture. Peter talks about it in 1 Peter 2:5. He says, “you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” He tells us that we together form not only a holy temple but a holy priesthood, and that we are offering up acceptable sacrifices to God. What happens if we do not come together with others in worship? We see here that we are designed to be temple stones. If we are not fitting in with other stones we are hindering the building and functioning of God’s holy temple. We must make a choice. We can either be temple stones or stumbling blocks! If we withdraw from fellowship we damage the building of God. Barclay says, “No building can stand firm and four-square if sections of it are removed.” [34] The metaphor of the temple, made up of those like living stones, is a beautiful and important one. Coffman says: “Of all the beautiful metaphors of God’s church such as the bride of Christ, the vineyard of the Lord, the household of God, the pillar and ground of the truth, the spiritual body of Christ, and the flock of Christ, none is more beautiful or intriguing than ‘The Temple of God.’” [35] “If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for God’s temple is sacred, and you together are that temple” (3:17). Again, we must understand that we together make up the temple of God. It is something we can never accomplish alone. Because God himself comes to dwell in this spiritual temple it becomes holy and must not be violated. The Greek word for destroy or violate is phtheirō. This can have several meanings in scripture. It can mean to corrupt physically or morally. It also speak of destruction, either physically or spiritually. [36] In the Old Testament, the tabernacle and temple were special and highly restricted places. If an unqualified person entered these compounds or otherwise defiled them, that person suffered the death penalty (Lev. 15:31). Even if the Aaronic priesthood violated the temple they too were likewise punished (Exo. 28:43; Lev. 16:2). [37] Clarke says: “If any man injure, corrupt, or destroy the Church of God by false doctrine, God will destroy him – will take away his part out of the book of life. This refers to him who willfully opposes the truth; the erring, mistaken man shall barely escape; but the obstinate opposer shall be destroyed. The former shall be treated leniently; the latter shall have judgment without mercy.” [38] Long ago my wife, our little firstborn son, and myself, made the journey from our pastorate in Kentucky to the western mountains in the US. We traveled there to pastor a small mission church. When we arrived, we discovered that the previous pastor had seduced several women in the church and there was talk that he had even murdered his wife. I don’t know if this man is still alive, but I rather doubt it. My feeling is that God probably destroyed him for almost destroying the Lord’s church. Such a person is to be greatly pitied. This was a tragic situation, but we must wonder how many more like him are trying to destroy the church today with their gossip, sectarian spirits, adulteries, fornications, heresies, pride and other things. God help us and correct us from such disastrous courses. Do not deceive yourselves. If any of you think you are wise by the standards of this age, you should become “fools” so that you may become wise. 1 Corinthians 3:18 The Greeks were really “hung up” on their own wisdom. No doubt, the Corinthians were having some problem with this as well. Perhaps they had forgotten what their own philosopher Plato had once said: “He is the wisest man who knows himself to be very ill-equipped for the study of wisdom.” [39] When we think of a “wise man” we probably think of someone who has excelled in academics. While it is true that the wise do increase in learning (Pro. 1:5), this is only a part of being wise in the biblical sense. There are many other things in the Bible that characterize a wise man. We are told that a wise man fears God (Pro. 9:10), that he listens to advice (Pro. 12:15), and is industrious (Pro. 6:6). He has a healthy tongue (Pro. 12:18) and has learned to guard his lips (Pro. 10:19). He wins souls (Pro. 11:30), honors his parents (Pro. 13:1), and receives God’s commands and keeps his laws (Pro. 10:8 &28:7). Unfortunately, these things do not amount to wisdom in our present evil age. Wisdom is book learning, college and university degrees, success in business or on the job, and a host of other things. Such wisdom puffs people up and makes them feel more important than they really are. Paul’s advice for these persons is that they become fools. “The world depends on promotion, prestige, and the influence of money and important people. The church depends on prayer, the power of the Spirit, humility, sacrifice, and service.” [40] Such things as these amount to foolishness in the eyes of the world. The message of the cross itself is foolishness to the world (1 Cor. 1:18). We will no doubt notice that Paul contrasts wisdom and foolishness often through much of First Corinthians. When we humble ourselves and become fools in the world’s sight, then we are able to become wise in God’s sight. Morris says, “True wisdom is found in renouncing ‘the wisdom of this world’ (cf. 2:14-15).” [41] “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight. As it is written: ‘He catches the wise in their craftiness’; and again, ‘The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile’” (3:19-20). Godbey has a good characterization of the worldly-wise person. He says, “The wise people of this world wear out their eyes, craze their brains and paralyze their nerves to accumulate the wisdom of the world, which is all empty bosh when they get it, wearing them out, making them prematurely old, bringing down their gray hairs with sorrow to the grave for naught.” [42] We would be appalled if we knew the kind of subjects that are being studied today in our most prestigious colleges and universities. Ben Shapiro in his book Brainwashed, How Universities Indoctrinate America’s Youth, details some of the utterly disgusting and foolish subjects now offered. California State University at Northridge offers: “Erotic Literature, Male Sexuality, Gay Literature, and Lesbian Literature and Poetry.” [43] The University of Colorado: “Introduction to Lesbian, Bisexual, and Gay Literature: Queer Theory; Studies in Lesbian, Gay; Bisexual, and Transgender Literature.” [44] The University of Michigan: “How to be Gay; Male Homosexuality and Initiation.” [45] Then there are openly gay courses. “Almost all major universities have Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transsexual (LGBT) Departments that offer majors or minors to students.” [46] Shapiro says, “Many professors excuse and even encourage pedophilia – sex between adults and children.” [47] He quotes Prof. Peter Singer of Princeton, who says, “Sex with animals does not always involve cruelty….” [48] He tells of a class assignment, where “students went to a gay strip club, where they watched one of the instructors have sex on the stage.” [49] He notes how Prof. Dennis Dailey of Kansas University has a class entitled “Human Sexuality in Everyday Life,” which “shows students three hours of ‘explicit’ videos; most of the videos graphically depict heterosexuals, gays, and lesbians in the act of sex.” [50] My, how we have degenerated into such gross foolishness in such a short amount of time! In spite of all the foolishness of this age, the wisdom of God stands firm for all who wish to see. The esteemed physicist, Gerald Schroeder, remarks with scripture: “‘How manifold are your works, Eternal, You made them all with wisdom’” (Ps. 104:24). He adds, “Wisdom is the fundamental building block of the universe, and it is inherent in all parts. In the processes of life it finds its most complex revelation. Wisdom, information, and idea, is the link between the metaphysical Creator and the physical creation. It is the hidden face of God.” [51]. Schroeder says, “A single consciousness, an all-encompassing wisdom, pervades the universe.” [52] He adds, “The universe is truly a uni-verse. All existence is joined through the expression of information, an idea, wisdom. Our mind is the emergent link that occasionally taps into that unity. You know when it happens as the surge of exhilarating emotion envelopes your entire body.” [53] The highly honored physicist, John Wheeler, has confirmed all this saying, “the universe and all existence may be founded on an expression of information, and expression of an idea or of wisdom.” [54] In the above passage Paul cites Job 5:13 and Psalm 94:11. God trips up the “wise” in their wisdom. He also knows all human plans at wisdom are futile. In view of such worldly wisdom the wise men of Israel once said, “Cursed be the man who rears a pig and cursed be those who instruct their sons in Greek wisdom.” [55] So then, no more boasting about human leaders! All things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future— all are yours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God. 1 Corinthians 3:21-23 Occasionally, Paul in his writing simply takes wings and flies. [56] This is one of those occasions. The great apostle tries to lead the flock away from the mundane thoughts of pride and personalities to the heavenly thoughts of the heritage reserved for us all in the spiritual realm. Paul, Apollos and Cephas all belong to the church, to all believers equally. They are a part of our heritage, for much of our heritage is in God’s people (Eph. 1:18). The world and the world to come are ours. Resurrection from the dead and the future are ours. Jesus is ours and God is ours. In Christ we are heirs of all things. What else could we want? 1. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, v. 3:1-3. 2. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 3:1. 3. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 462. 4. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 3:2. 5. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, v. 3:2. 6. Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, vs. 3:1-9. 7. Trapp, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete Commentary, v. 3:3. 8. Quoted in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 3:4. 9. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 458. 10. Quoted in Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, vs. 3:5-7. 11. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, vs. 3:1-9. 12. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, vs. 3:5-7. 13. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 463. 14. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 3:9. “We are God‘s co-workers. A similar expression occurs in 2 Corinthians 6:1, ‘We then as workers together with him,’ etc. …there is no expression that is parallel to this. There is none that speaks of God’s operating jointly with his creatures in producing the same result.” Coffman adds: “Despite the fact of there being a sense in which Christians are God’s partners at the present time, and that this partnership shall be expanded at the judgment (Matthew 25:23)…” (Coffman, v. 3:9) 15. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, vs. 3:8-9. 16. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 3:8. 17. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 3:9. 18. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, vs. 3:1-9. 19. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, Smith comments here on Master Builder (architekton) “…Its English transliteration and derivatives suggest the meaning “architect.” However, the term “is hardly to be defined in terms of our contemporary architects…The word is wider than our architect…and was used to represent an “engineer, foreman, builder, master builder, craftsman, or architect…the term ‘general contractor’ probably comes closest to the role that Paul describes.” (Smith p. 227). 20. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 69. 21. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 31. 22. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 68. 23. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 32. 24. http://americanfreepress.net/?p=298 August 27, 2011. 25. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 3:12. For confirmation see also Stedman, vs. 3:10-17; Guzik 3:10-15 and Morris p. 70. 26. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 464. 27. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 227. 28. Philip W. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians (Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1999), p.54. 29. Alexander Roberts &James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1 (Grand Rapid: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Compahy, 1956), p. 154. 30. Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity (Wheaton IL: Crossway Books, 2004), p. 293. 31. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 71. 32. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 229. 33. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 459. 34. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 35. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 3:16. 36. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 3:17. 37. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 3:17. 38. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 3:17. 39. Quoted in Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, vs. 3:16-22. 40. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 464. 41. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 72. 42. Godbey, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament, v. 3:20. 43. Ben Shapiro, Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America’s Youth (Nashville: WND Books, 2004), p. 55. 44. Ibid, p. 56. 45. Ibid. 46. Ibid., p. 60. 47. Ibid., p. 62. 48. Ibid., p. 64. 49. Ibid., p. 65. 50. Ibid., p. 66. 51. Gerald Schroeder, The Hidden Face of God, How Science Reveals the Ultimate Truth (New York: The Free Press, 2001), p. 49. 52. Ibid., p. xi. 53. Ibid., p. 159. 54. Dean L. Overman, A Case For The Existence of God (New York: Rowman &Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2009), p. 85. 55. Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (NY: Harper &Roe, 1987), p. 101. 56. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, This, then, is how you ought to regard us: as servants of Christ and as those entrusted with the mysteries God has revealed. 1 Corinthians 4:1 Paul, Apollos and the other leaders were just servants of Christ. The apostle does not use the normal Greek word of diakonos for “servant” but rather, the word hupēretēs. This has the meaning of “under-rower.” [1] Quite a number of commentators feel this is a reference to those who rowed the large Roman galleys. [2] There are probably some pastors and Christian leaders today who feel that they have been pressed into the role of galley slaves. The apostles, servants or stewards of the church are also entrusted with God’s mysteries. The word used here for steward is the Greek oikonomous. In the ancient world it was customary for wealthy families to have such a steward, who was responsible for everything pertaining to the management of the estate. Often this person was a slave, but a very gifted and responsible slave to be sure. Barclay says of him, “…He was in charge of the whole administration of the house or the estate; he controlled the staff; he issued the supplies; but, however much he controlled the household staff, he himself was still a slave where the master was concerned.” [3] As we remember, Joseph, in Genesis 39:2-19, was in such a position to Potiphar down in Egypt. Paul speaks of stewards as being entrusted with God’s mysteries. Certainly, Paul shared many deep mysteries with the early church. Perhaps the deepest was the mystery of the church found in Ephesians 3:6. The church father, Origen, says: “There is a big difference between being a servant of Christ and a steward of the mysteries of God. Anyone who has read the Bible can be a servant of Christ, but to be a steward of the mysteries one must plumb their depths.” [4] “Now it is required that those who have been given a trust must prove faithful” (4:2). Keener says about this: “Because stewards were trusted to handle their master’s finances, purchasing slaves and goods and making wise investments, it was most important that they be ‘trustworthy’ or ‘faithful.’” [5] There were always opportunities for stewards to take advantage of their masters for their own personal gain, as in the case of the unfaithful steward or manager in Luke 16:1-9. If it is important for stewards to be faithful in the natural things of this world, then how much more is it important for God’s stewards to be faithful in the things of the gospel (Lk.12:42-44). “I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself” (4:3). It was precisely because Paul was a steward of God that he cared so little about the judgment of himself by others. After all, a steward only had to please one person, his master. So it is today. If our Master is happy with us it really does not matter what anyone else thinks. Someone has said, “Jesus is a lot easier to please than his disciples.” This is probably the case. We should therefore find out what pleases the Lord and concentrate on doing that thing with all our heart and might (Eph. 5:10). People do not have much business judging others anyway. We have not walked in their shoes and we know so little about their individual situations that it is folly for us to judge. Pfeiffer and Harrison make this very plain saying, “There was to be no pre-judgment seat judgment!” [6] We have all got enough things that could bring judgment upon us that we hardly need to be concerned about judging others. It should also be noted that the voice of the people is quite often wrong. The people of Israel once cried out for Aaron to make them gods to worship (Acts. 7:40). On another occasion we see that the people were quite prepared to offer sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:11-13). [7] Often what is highly esteemed by people is an abomination in the sight of God (Lk. 16:15). The apostle adds that he does not even dare to judge himself. Calvin says that the meaning of this is: “I do not venture to judge myself, though I know myself best; how then will you judge me, to whom I am less intimately known?” [8] “My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me” (4:4). God has given each of us a conscience to guide us on this earth. This is true for the righteous and the unrighteous as well. C. S. Lewis once wrote, “Human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it.” [9] Our conscience is much like a compass that always points north. However, it is possible for one to mess with his or her conscience. We may have a very accurate compass but if there is a magnetic interference, that compass will likely give us an erroneous reading. Paul felt he was right but he desired to give God the judgment of his life. Trapp comments: “Paul a chosen vessel, but yet an earthen vessel, knew well that he had his cracks and his flaws, which God could easily find out.” [10] The Bible says in Proverbs 21:2, “A person may think their own ways are right, but the LORD weighs the heart.” The apostle advises: “Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait until the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of the heart. At that time each will receive their praise from God” (4:5). Long ago Ambrosiaster said: “God will judge in his own good time. A judge is insulted if a servant presumes to pronounce a verdict before the judge makes the decision known.” [11] Clearly, the appointed time is the Day of Judgment, which is still future and will come at the end of this age. On that day all secrets will be made known, even the deepest secrets of the heart. Until that time comes we must not be in the judging business (Lk. 6:37). We can however pray that God will even now reveal the hidden things of darkness. My wife prays this way all the time and she seems to be getting results as scandal after scandal is coming to light, especially in the US. I kid her a little and say that some of those newly accused people should want to pay her off just to quit praying. Now, brothers and sisters, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not be puffed up in being a follower of one of us over against the other. 1 Corinthians 4:6 Paul is including himself and Apollos as he gently instructs the Corinthians. Barclay comments concerning this: “Paul had a wonderfully courteous way of including himself in his own warnings and his own condemnations. The true preacher seldom uses the word you and always uses the word we; he does not speak down to men; he speaks as one who sits where they sit and who is a man of like passions with them…” [12] The word for “applied” in the Greek is meteschēmatisa, and it has provoked a good deal of discussion among commentators. The Greek scholar Marvin Vincent notes how this is made up of two words, meta (exchange) and schema (outward fashion). [13] Utley says “The basic idea is to transfer a set of circumstances from one group to another group. Paul is using himself and Apollos as examples for all leaders.” [14] We are immediately presented with another brain twister in the expression, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Grosheide feels that this was a well-known proverb among the Corinthians. [15] Smith thinks that this difficult Greek expression, huper ha gegraptai, should read, “not beyond what is written,” [16] an obvious reference to scripture. Simply, we should not go beyond what is written in the Bible. The overall message is that the Corinthians should not be puffed up, boast, or take pride one over the other. Glynn says: “…after philosophy, or intelligence, pride was the core virtue of the classical philosophical outlook, the ‘crown of the virtues.’…In the classical understanding, the strong, the beautiful, the intelligent, the rich were not just better off, but morally better than the weak, the poor, the meek, the downtrodden.” [17] Paul wishes to make clear that such an outlook will not work in Christianity. It is an upside-down religion. To live, one must die, to be honored, one must be abased. “For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?” (4:7). Wiersbe remarks that the best commentary on this verse is the witness of John the Baptist, found in John 3:27, 30. He said, “…A person can receive only what is given them from heaven… He [Jesus] must become greater; I must become less.” [18] Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! You have begun to reign—and that without us! How I wish that you really had begun to reign so that we also might reign with you! 1 Corinthians 4:8 Here Paul cannot resist using a little satire, sarcasm and irony. The Corinthians were puffed up with pride and the apostle was determined to let some of the hot air out of their balloons. Guzik says, “…they were proud of their own spirituality, and they were somewhat embarrassed of Paul because of his ‘weakness’ and humble state.” [19] They thought they were rich but Paul knew they were poor, perhaps even like the poor church in Revelation 3:17. They thought they were reigning in life with Christ (Rom. 5:17), but Paul knew that there were many things ruling over them, perhaps chiefly their pride. Had they been really rich in spiritual treasures; had they really begun to reign with Christ, Paul and the other leaders would have gladly joined with them. In recent decades, theologians have spoken a great deal about “realized eschatology,” which means that we can enjoy some eternal things while we live on this earth. Smith comments here that the Corinthians were suffering from what might be called “over realized eschatology,” an idea that all the end-time blessings are being fully experienced while on this earth. [20] It appears that the apostle is trying to instill a more realistic theology, or what some today might call “the already but not yet” approach. Because of the Holy Spirit within us we already have many benefits of the age to come, but we do not yet have them all. For instance, we do not yet have the resurrection of the dead. [21] “For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like those condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to human beings” (4:9). When the Lord called Paul he made it clear that he would have to endure much suffering for the sake of the name (Acts 9:16). Indeed, it came to pass and Paul suffered horribly for Jesus sake. Perhaps few men on earth ever suffered the repeated indignities that Paul suffered. The apostle uses a very common Roman symbol in describing his position of suffering. That symbol is perhaps made up of two things. First, it is undoubtedly a picture of the Roman triumphal march into the city. When Rome’s victorious armies returned to the capital they brought with them certain treasures of their triumph. But at the end of their marching column, there were the condemned prisoners over whom they had triumphed. [22] This was Rome’s way of assuring that victories were really legitimate. Paul pictures himself and the other apostles as the condemned captives at the end of the march. Such folks were doomed to death. They were usually taken to the coliseum where they became gladiators or else were fed to the lions to satiate the lusts of the crowds. On their way to certain death they were to salute the Emperor and cry out, “Morituri te salutamus,” (“We who are about to die salute you”). [23] Paul was picturing himself and the other apostles as participants in this dreadful scene. Paul claims that he and the other apostles have become a spectacle to both angels and men. The word for spectacle is the Greek theatron, from which we get our word “theater.” We can understand how they would become a spectacle to men, but how can they become a spectacle to angels? We see in 1 Peter 1:12, that even angels long to look into the things of our salvation. Indeed, they are created to be ministering spirits in regard to this salvation (Heb. 1:14). Paul speaks of the angels watching the activities of the assemblies (1 Cor. 11:10). They are watching and perhaps learning of God’s great grace to humankind. Perhaps they are marveling as they watch humans participate in sufferings like those of Christ. Ambrose (fourth century) once remarked:” Paul was worthy to be watched by angels as he strove to win the prize of Christ…” [24] “We are fools for Christ, but you are so wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored!” (4:10). Coffman sums up the absurdity of the Corinthians’ position saying: He had rescued them from the temples of vice and debauchery, preached to them the unsearchable riches of Christ, nurtured them in their weakness and immaturity as Christians, and suffered and toiled among them, even working in order to eat bread; and now, at the first visible signs of material prosperity among them, they openly despised their teacher, heaped unto themselves popular, shallow leaders after their own lusts, and were indulging the most amazing boastfulness and conceit. It was truly a disgusting development; and Paul’s words here exposed the moral ugliness of their behavior. [25] Paul was a fool for Christ’s sake. He was weak and dishonored for Christ. The Corinthians were supposedly wise and strong. Obviously, there were some valuable but painful lessons still for them to learn. They would have to learn to take up the cross of Christ and suffer for him as the apostles had done. They would have to learn to be nothing that Christ could be everything in their lives. We almost feel sorry for the Corinthians at this point. Clarke hastens to clarify the apostle’s real condition. He comments: “Surely all these expressions are meant ironically; the apostles were neither fools, nor weak, nor contemptible; nor were the Corinthians, morally speaking, wise, and strong, and honorable.” [26] To this very hour we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are brutally treated, we are homeless. 1 Corinthians 4:11 This section must be a difficult one for those Christians who hold to the Prosperity Doctrine. These believe that every Christian has the right to be healthy and prosperous. If they are not so, it is their own fault, and they simply do not have a strong enough faith. Paul’s faith was pretty strong, yet by his own admission he went around hungry, thirsty, in rags, treated poorly and homeless. This reminds us a lot of Jesus who lived from a common purse with his disciples. To make matters worse one disciple even stole from that purse (Jn. 12:6). Jesus also did not have a place to call home (Matt. 8:20; Lk. 9:58). Comfort says of them: “Far from being honored for their preaching and fawned over as kings, they faced severe suffering.” [27] The apostle speaks of his many troubles in other passages (cf. 2 Cor. 4:7-12; 6:3-10; 11:23-30). All these things sound very similar to what saints of old have always endured for the sake of the faith (e.g. Heb. 11:34-38). Paul recounts many things in these Corinthian passages. He had been hard pressed, persecuted, beaten, imprisoned, shipwrecked, endured sleepless nights, lashed five times, beaten with rods, and stoned. He had suffered danger from rivers, bandits, fellow Jews, from Gentiles and from false believers. “We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it; when we are slandered, we answer kindly. We have become the scum of the earth, the garbage of the world— right up to this moment” (4:12-13). Clearly Paul and others worked with their hands in manual labor. Paul was a tentmaker (Acts 18:1-3), and the Greeks looked down on this and all other manual labor. They considered such things to be the work of slaves. [28] Keener says, “well-to-do people in the church would be embarrassed to invite friends of their own social circle to hear the teachings of Paul, who worked as an artisan (skilled laborer).” [29] It is interesting that the apostle did not get a bad attitude regarding his work or regarding all the trials and tribulations which he had suffered. Rather, he reflected the attitude and teachings of Jesus (Matt. 5:10-12; 1 Pet. 2:23). When cursed, he blessed; when persecuted he endured it; when slandered he gave a kind answer. By living in such a way he took the wind out of Satan’s sails. Instead of multiplying evil on earth, he absorbed it and caused it to decrease. The world was not worthy of Paul, yet it considered Paul not worthy of it. There are two repulsive Greek words used here in verse 13 by the apostle. The first is perikatharma, and according to Barnes it means, “…filth, or that which is collected by sweeping a house, or that which is collected and cast away by purifying or cleansing anything; hence, any vile, worthless, and contemptible object.” [30] The other word is very similar. It is peripsēma, and it means the offscouring of a vessel being cleaned. [31] Godbey sums up the apostles’ situation saying: “We see here Paul and his comrades ranked in popular estimation at the very bottom of society, without money, reputation, social standing, influence or friends. Jesus came down to the bottom that he might put his shoulder under the lowest and lift them up. The apostles were like him. This was necessary to affect an eternal divorce from the world, with its power. ‘That the excellency may be of God and not of man.’” [32] I am writing this not to shame you but to warn you as my dear children. Even if you had ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate me. 1 Corinthians 4:14-16 Meyer says here, “The relationship between the apostle and his converts was very tender. They were his children.” [33] The Corinthians only had one father in the faith and that was Paul. They may have had innumerable guardians (Gk. paidagōgous) however. In the Greek, the word paidagogous usually spoke of a slave or “slave tutor” (cf. Gal. 3:24). Utley says: “These slaves were responsible for accompanying the older male children to school, teaching them at home, and guarding them from danger.” [34] Because Paul was their spiritual father he begs them to imitate him. The Greek word here is mimētai, a word from which we get our English word “mimic.” [35] Probably very few leaders in the church today would be able to advise others to mimic them. The apostle was careful to add that they should follow him as he followed Christ (1 Cor. 11:1). We see Paul making this charge in several places (cf. Eph. 5:1; Phil. 3:17; 1 Thess. 1:6). “For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church” (4:17). Here we sense a definite shift in the letter. Paul has spent a good amount of time addressing the problems of strife and divisions in the church, but at this point he begins to answer some very practical questions that the church had asked him. [36] In order to accomplish this effectively he sends Timothy, his beloved assistant. It is thought by many that Timothy did not actually carry this letter, but that he was sent on ahead to prepare the people for it. [37] The letter itself was probably carried by Stephanus, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, who are indicated as being from Corinth and who are said to be visiting with Paul (16:17). What can we say about Timothy? He joined with Paul on his second missionary journey through the Galatian area (Acts 16:1ff.). He was quite young and yet he had a good reputation in the church. Timothy was half Jewish, so Paul had him circumcised, no doubt so that he could better minister among the Jewish people. He quickly became the apostle’s faithful co-worker and apostolic representative. Paul would later say, “I have no one else like him…” (Phi. 2:20). Paul could trust Timothy to teach the people because Paul and Timothy were of the same mind. Some of you have become arrogant, as if I were not coming to you. 1 Corinthians 4:18 It seems that the Corinthians were easily puffed up with pride about a number of things. They were even puffed up about Paul’s proposed coming, thinking that he would not really come to them. Obviously, some in Corinth were using the absence of Paul as a means to attack him. [38] We remember from the first chapter that the Corinthians were divided into factions, with some supporting Cephas, some Apollos and some Paul. We know from 2 Corinthians 2:1 that Paul did make his visit, but it was a painful one. “But I will come to you very soon, if the Lord is willing, and then I will find out not only how these arrogant people are talking, but what power they have” (4:19). Paul may have been weak in appearance but he was mighty in the Spirit. God had invested him with great authority to establish the Gentile church. No wise person would want to come up against that apostolic power. We remember how Elymas was stricken blind when he opposed Paul’s teaching on Paphos (Acts 13:11). Many other powerful miracles also had been wrought by Paul. [39] “For the kingdom of God is not a matter of talk but of power” (4:20). Talk is cheap as they say. The thing that gets people’s attention is the message that has power behind it, where people get saved, healed, and delivered of their afflictions. Today on many foreign fields there are “power encounters,” where demonic spirits are bound and where many astounding healing miracles happen. In these cases, churches are quickly formed and the gospel goes forward mightily. “What do you prefer? Shall I come to you with a rod of discipline, or shall I come in love and with a gentle spirit?” (4:21). The rod mentioned here probably refers to the tutor’s stick. [40] Just as children needed discipline with the rod (Pro. 13:24; 23:13-14), Christians sometimes need discipline. Paul will deal with this much in the next chapter and later in the epistle. Conntinue to chapter 5 1. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 4:1. 2. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 465. 3. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, vs. 4:1-5. Utley adds: “stewards’ This is a compound Greek term from ‘house’ and ‘law.’ It was the servant who managed the house/estate and gave an account to the owner (i.e., term in Matt. 25:14-46…” (Utley, v. 4:1) Smith says: “The chief of staff at the White House might be a fitting contemporary analogy for the first-century oikonomos.” (Smith, p. 231). 4. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 37. 5. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 459. 6. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1235. 7. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 4:3. 8. John Calvin, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Calvin’s Commentary on the Bible, 1840-57, v. 4:3. http:// www.studylight.org/commentaries/cal/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=4. 9. Quoted in Norman L. Geisler &Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2004), p. 192. 10. Trapp, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete Commentary, 11. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 39. 12. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 13. Marvin Vincent, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1887), v. 4-6. http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/vnt/view.cgi?bk=45&ch=4. 14. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 4:6. 15. Cited in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 4:6. 16. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 232. Pett adds: “The Greek is probably colloquial but the idea would seem to be that Paul wants them to make sure that they remain Scripturally based.” (Pett, vs. 4:6-7) 17. Patrick Glynn, God, The Evidence: The Reconciliation of Faith and Reason in a Postsecular World (Rocklin CA: Prima Publishing, 1997), p. 155. 18. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 466. 19. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 20. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 233. 21. Ibid. 22. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 23. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 24. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 40. 25. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 4:10. 26. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 4:10. 27. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 63. 28. Ibid. 29. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 461. 30. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 4:13. 31. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 4:13. 32. Godbey, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament, v. 4:13. 33. Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, vs. 4:17-21. 34. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, vs. 4:14-15. Morris adds: “It is not easy to translate paidagogous…for in our community we do not have the equivalent.” (Morris, p. 83) 35. Ibid., v. 4:16. 36. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 37. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 467. 38. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, vs. 4:18-21. 39. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 4:19. 40. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, vs. 4:21. It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife. 1 Corinthians 5:1 We note that Paul comes on rather abruptly here. He was obviously shocked, and he makes no bones about it. The problem was open and flagrant sexual sin right in the middle of God’s congregation. It was public knowledge. The Greek word here is porneia. In Old Testament times this word was confined to things like prostitution, but in the New Testament the term was broadened out to include all types of sexual misconduct. [1] In this case, the problem was incest. A man had taken his father’s wife and was having sex with her. Scholars are pretty well agreed that the woman was not this man’s actual mother but was likely his stepmother. The woman was probably much younger than the father. There is no agreement among scholars as to whether or not the father was still alive. There is also no agreement as to whether or not the woman was divorced. Paul gives little attention to the wife and quite a number of commentators feel this is because she was a pagan and not a believer. [2] We have spoken before of how Corinth was a sexual sinkhole in the ancient world. Much of this was due to the temple of Aphrodite (goddess of love, beauty, pleasure) in their midst. The worship in this, and in most pagan temples, promoted all types of sexual degradation. Yet, even in the pagan world incest was generally not accepted. Bruce sums up the Greek and Roman feelings toward this sin saying: “The traditional Greek reprobation of this particular kind of union finds expression in Euripides’ Hippolytus: for the conventional Roman attitude to a similar relationship, cf. Cicero’s Pro Cluentio 14, where a marriage between son-in-law and mother-in-law is denounced as ‘incredible and, apart from this one instance, un-heard of.’” [3] Roman society particularly had high regard for the father’s position and valued the stability of the family. Keener says, “parent-child incest was universally abhorred throughout the Roman world…” [4] Of course, this particular sin was treated very seriously in the Old Testament and among the Jewish people. Incest was strictly forbidden by Jewish law (Lev. 18:8; Deut. 22:27-30; 27:20). There was the tragic story of Reuben (Gen 35:22), who had an incestuous relationship with his father’s concubine. Incest was a sin that carried a curse (Deut. 27:20), as was clearly seen in the life of Reuben (Gen. 49:3-4). We really cannot imagine the task Paul and others had as they ministered in the pagan world. They no doubt did a wonderful job for the time allotted and the people they had to work with. In Judaism most people knew what could and could not be done. In the Gentile world all that had to be taught. More than likely most Gentile Christians had little access to the Old Testament. We remember that it was these Gentile Christians at Corinth who were getting drunk at the Lord’s supper (11:20-22). No doubt some of their spiritual understanding was much like a block of Swiss cheese, all full of holes. “And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning and have put out of your fellowship the man who has been doing this?” (5:2). We have already seen that the Corinthians had a pride problem (cf. 4:10, 18). Now we see how that pride problem has worked itself out in the acceptance of serious sexual sin in their midst. We must leave it to our imagination as to how the Corinthian pride sought to justify this evil situation. Perhaps they were proud of their great tolerance in accepting it. Today in our postmodern society there is what is being called “the new tolerance.” The new tolerance accepts everything and passes judgment on nothing. Dr. James Kennedy says of it: “Tolerance is the last virtue of a depraved society.” G. K. Chesterton adds that “Tolerance is a virtue of a man without convictions.” Josh McDowell &Bob Hostetler say of it, “Those who have been deceived by the new tolerance naturally view a person of conviction with suspicion or contempt.” [5] McDowell and Hoestler add: “Tolerance seeks to be inoffensive; love takes risks. Tolerance is indifferent; love is active. Tolerance costs nothing; love costs everything.” [6] Sometimes tolerance can be a good thing, but often in our society it is not. Someone once remarked concerning open-mindedness, that we can be so open minded that our brains will fall out. Perhaps the Corinthians had found themselves in just this fix. Also, according to much Greek thinking, reality was only in the spiritual world and the flesh amounted to nothing. It is possible that these ideas influenced the Corinthians to lightly regard what they were doing in the flesh, even when it was outrageously bad. The Corinthians may have justified this great sin because of the freedom and liberty they had in Christ. Like some Christians today, they may have fancied themselves as free from the restraints of the law, and they may have felt that now, love was the only thing that mattered. Whatever their thinking was, it had clearly gotten them into serious trouble. Guzik comments: “As bad as the sin itself was, Paul was more concerned that the Corinthian Christians seemed to take the sin lightly.” [7] Paul was shocked and he demanded that the Corinthians also be shocked, even to the point that they go into mourning over this affair. The word for mourning here is the Greek word pentheō, a word used of those who mourned for the dead. [8] The apostle, being a Jew and being familiar with Jewish practices, immediately demanded that the offender be put out of the church. Of course, in Hebrew times sexual offenders were often stoned to death. In New Testament times the punishment was to be excommunication from the church. [9] “For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this” (5:3). Some today might look at this passage and think that Paul was involved in some sort of astral projection. However, Keener points out that letter writers in this era were known to express their intimate concern for their readers by saying things like although “they were absent in body,” they were nevertheless “present in spirit or mind” with their readers. He therefore sees this as a statement of intimacy rather than a statement of some metaphysical presence. [10] To Paul, the situation was crystal clear and he was able to pass immediate judgment upon it. We see his apostolic authority being expressed here as he strongly insists that the church do something about the problem. “So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord” (5:4-5). We see once again confirmed here that when Christians assemble, the power of the Lord Jesus is present as he promised (Mt. 18:18-20). Paul is also with them in spirit. We probably cannot rule out the possibility that Paul is using the spiritual gift of discernment of spirits here, which he will speak of later (12:10). The apostles may have possessed such gifts in an extraordinary measure. [11] Paul now advises that this man be turned over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh so that he ultimately can be saved. This statement has provoked much commentary among scholars. We wonder exactly what Paul meant by saying this. It certainly did not mean that the man was to be turned over to death, because they fully expected his repentance. We do see some instances in the Bible where similar things were mentioned and happened. Job was in a sense turned over to Satan to be tested in the flesh, but God would not allow his life to be taken (Job 1:6 – 2:10). Elymas was struck with blindness because he resisted the ministry of Paul (Acts 13:8-11). On a later occasion, we see Paul saying similar things about Hymenaeus and Alexander, who were also handed to Satan until they learned not to blaspheme (1Tim. 1:20). The Greek word paradidōmi is used here and in the Gospels for turning a person over to the authorities for proper punishment (cf. Matt. 4:12; 5:25; 10:4,17; 18:34; 20:19; 26:15; 27:2). It is used in Romans for turning a person over to spiritual powers (cf. Rom. 1:24, 26, 28). Utley thinks this idea fits the context best. [12] Paul was in a sense lending his apostolic authority to the church so that they could deal with the problem. We must remember though that average Christians have been given the power to bind and loose as we see in Matthew 18:18. There are probably two ideas present here. One is the idea of excommunication or casting out of the assembly. However, in this early age this word did not bear the significance that it would later have. [13] The second idea seems to be that the person should be turned loose to be chastised by Satan so that he could come to repentance. [14] We should understand that believers in the First Century had a unique view of the world and the heavens. They believed that to be outside the church was to be in the sphere of Satan (Col. 1:13; 1 Jn. 5:19; Eph. 2:12). A person placed outside the realm of the church would lose his or her Christian privileges. [15] As was true of Job, this man’s flesh could be attacked mercilessly but his life would be spared. We cannot dismiss the spiritual binding authority of Paul and also of the church here. This cannot be seen as merely turning the person back over to a sinful life. That usually has an adverse effect, rather than bringing a person to repentance. In the first century people had a much greater investment in the church than many do today. To be a Christian and a member of the local church was to make an abrupt turn away from the pagan world with all its interests and relationships. It was extremely costly in many ways. Therefore, if a person was cast back into the world and was removed from all church relationships, their situation could be dire. Today the church situation, particularly in the West, is much different. People have little investment in the church. They can quickly leave one church and join another assembly. They can play the blame game, pretending to be a victim, and their story likely will be accepted by the new church and pastor. [16] Obviously, church discipline, First Century style, will have to be administered judiciously in such an environment as this. We can see from this episode that public sins must be judged and condemned publicly. [17] Other sins can be dealt with in the Matthew 18 style where we first go to the person and bring up the offending matter. If they hear us we have won that person. However, if they do not we can take with us other brothers or sisters in hopes the matter can be reconciled. If there is no progress, we can then take the matter before the whole church. The hope in all these cases is that the person can be corrected and restored to the full fellowship of the church. Some commentators feel that this erring man was finally restored and they take this information from 2 Corinthians 2:6-7 and 7:9-12. Others disagree and feel that there is no certainty that the man eventually repented. [18] Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? 1 Corinthians 5:6 Paul now takes his picture from the baking of bread and the use of yeast for leavening. In Bible times yeast was not something bought at the store. Bread was leavened by keeping back a portion of the previous leavened batch and mixing it with the new batch. Occasionally, my wife makes a batch of sourdough bread and she keeps on hand the old mixture, taking portions as needed for her baking. It is amazing how the yeast works through the whole batch to make it rise. With few exceptions yeast in the Bible refers to some principle of evil. [19] The point Paul is making is that sin is like leaven. It works through the whole batch or through the whole church (Gal. 5:9). Calvin remarks “that a whole multitude is infected by the contagion of a single individual.” [20] It is much like the old adage that one rotten apple can spoil the whole barrel. We are careful with our fruit to quickly remove the rotten apple or the rotten grape or any other piece of contaminated fruit. We note that the Corinthians were puffed up about their sin. That is exactly what most sin does. It puffs us up in some way. When we think of pride, we think of how it puffs people up to think they are more important than they are. When we are angry we get puffed up. In the Hebrew language the word for anger is af. Interestingly, the word for nose is also af. When we get angry our nostrils puff up by flaring out. Perhaps the Corinthians were glorying in their great tolerance, but their glorying was having a detrimental effect. Chrysostom remarks, “…by taking pride in this man they have hindered him from repenting.” [21] “Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch— as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed” (5:7). Apparently there is a problem in keeping yeast too long. Pett says, “There would indeed come a time when the leaven had become too acidic and was unhealthy, thus the wise necessity for getting rid of all leaven once a year and starting again.” [22] Without the old leavening agent the bread would be a new unleavened batch. The picture here is that of the Jewish Passover celebration (Exod. 12:8-20). In preparation for their deliverance from Egypt the Hebrew slaves were commanded to slay the Passover lamb, to place the blood on the doorposts of their houses and to remain inside, eating their roasted lambs, while God passed over Egypt in judgment. Also for this sacred time they were to get rid of all leavened items in their houses and eat only unleavened bread. In Exodus 12:17, we learn that this is a lasting ordinance that is to be celebrated through all the centuries. Today, Jewish people still celebrate the Passover on the 14th day of the Hebrew month of Nisan. Over the last few decades many Christians have joined them in celebrating the Passover. For us, it is really a celebration of our salvation in Jesus the Messiah. We remember how John the Baptist spoke when he saw Jesus approaching. He said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn. 1:29). By the gospel we know today that through the blood of Jesus, our Passover Lamb, our many sins are forgiven. The persistent message of Passover and the following Feast of Unleavened Bread, is that we must get sin (the old leaven) out of our lives. All the Hebrews were commanded to cleanse their houses of all leaven as the celebration approached. Still today Jewish people do the same thing. The night before the Passover the father makes a last search for leaven (bedikat hametz). This search is traditionally done with a candle and the last bit of leaven is removed with a feather. It is placed in a bag and then burned outside the house on the following morning. [23] Of course, the removal of leavened items is a huge problem for bakeries and food stores. In Israel the bakeries generally close for a week-long holiday and the grocery stores rope off all the sections where leavened items are displayed. Only unleavened bread or matzah is offered for sale. Cafes and Restaurants for the whole week of Unleavened Bread following Passover offer such strange delicacies as matzah pizza. Many visiting Americans nearly go crazy trying to find a slice of bread or a yeast roll in Israel at this time. The Passover seder has a very strong emphasis on the matzah or unleavened bread. It is a picture of the unleavened life of Christ and the unleavened life that he wishes to bring forth in each of us. The clear message is that we have to get the sin out of our lives and keep it out. Now through Jesus we have become an unleavened loaf. The other great emphasis of Passover is on the lamb and we know today that Jesus is the Lamb of God (Isa. 53:7; Jn. 1:29; 1 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 5:6, 12). From the Fourth Gospel we know that Jesus died at the exact time that the Passover lambs were being offered (Jn. 18:28; 19:14, 31). [24] “Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth” (5:8). Here we are all challenged to keep the feast. The Greek is hōste heortazōmen, and it is present active subjunctive with the meaning of keeping on keeping the feast, or as Lightfoot says we are to keep it as a perpetual feast. [25] How are we to keep it? We are to keep it without malice and wickedness. The Greek word for wickedness (ponērias) is so close to the word “fornication” in the Greek that some ancient manuscripts actually have this translation. [26] This is to be the Christian life. It is to be a perpetual unleavened celebration where sin is swept out and righteousness through Christ prevails. We are to be unleavened bread full of sincerity and truth. As J. Vernon McGee, the old radio preacher had it: “Sincerity never saved anyone. But if you are a child of God, you will be sincere.” [27] I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 1 Corinthians 5:9-10 Obviously, Paul had written the Corinthians an earlier letter which is now lost to us. Quite simply, the Holy Spirit did not see fit to use this earlier letter as a guide for the church through the ages. [28] Perhaps the letter was a little confusing, as we can see from the remarks here. The Corinthians had concluded from it that they were not to associate with unsaved people. Such an understanding would have been tragic. How in the world could we ever win any of the people of this world if we did not associate with them? The early medieval church chose such a course as this. That was partly what the monastic movement was all about. [29] Many of the church’s leaders and educated folk tried to shut themselves off from the world. The so-called Dark Ages of the church and of civilization ensued. The apostle knew if the Corinthians separated themselves from sinners they would have to find themselves a new planet to live on. Jesus says of believers that they are the salt of the earth (Matt. 5:13). The saints of God are here on earth to help heal the sick, to help purify the polluted, to add a pleasant flavor to the otherwise bland fare of earth. “But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people” (5:11). Macknight has put it well saying: “It is an everlasting rule that a conscientious Christian should choose, as far as he can, the company, intercourse, and familiarity of good men, and such as fear God; and avoid, as far as his necessary affairs will permit, the conversation and fellowship of such as Paul here describes.” [30] The apostle is particularly concerned that we do not associate with such people if they still insist on calling themselves “Christians.” Back in the 60s and 70s the liberal media shamed the church for saying that there was such a thing as “guilt by association.” Now we can see a little better through the fog that they cast upon us. Common sense and experience tell us that there is such a thing as guilt by association. If an otherwise innocent person happens to be in the car with thieves or drug dealers, that person will likely be arrested and sentenced right along with them. Paul wants our associations to be holy and pure. He tells us that we should not even eat with a so-called Christian if that person persists in being “sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler.” Guzik says here: “… In the culture of that day (and in many cultures today), eating with someone is an expression of friendship and partnership. In some cultures, if a man eats at your table, you are bound to regard him as a friend and a partner.” [31] Bruce says: “you should accord no man the status or privileges of a brother in Christ if he is guilty of fornication, or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard or robber.” [32] “What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?” (5:12). In the early years of the church it was considered as a branch of Judaism. Keener says, “Rome allowed local Jewish communities to judge Jewish offenders of Jewish laws….Paul expects the Christians of his day to follow the same model, correcting the behavior of erring fellow Christians.” [33] It was the duty of Christians to purge their own ranks and to cast out the obvious offenders. Morris says, “Paul’s main point is that the church must not tolerate the presence of evil in its midst, and this is clearly of permanent relevance.” [34] “God will judge those outside. ‘Expel the wicked person from among you’” (5:13). Bruce sees this as an almost exact quotation from the Septuagint version of Deuteronomy 17:7b; 22:24; cf. 13:5. In these instances both idolatry and adultery were purged from the Israelite community by very drastic means. [35] Chrysostom remarks here that Moses would have likely had the man stoned to death, but Paul is thinking only of trying to lead him back to repentance. [36] 1. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, vs. 5:1. Utley adds: “This term refers to any sexual impropriety (i.e., adultery, fornication, homosexuality, even bestiality). (Utley, v. 5:1). 2. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, vs. 5:1-8. 3. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 53. 4. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, pp. 461-462. 5. Josh McDowell &Bob Hostetler, The New Tolerance: How A Cultural Movement Threatens To Destroy You, Your Faith, And Your Children (Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1998) p. 75. 6. Ibid., p. 95. 7. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, vs. 5:2. 8. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 5:3. 9. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 5:2. “The Christian Church was at this time too young to have those forms of excommunication which were practiced in succeeding centuries. Probably no more is meant than a simple disowning of the person, accompanied with the refusal to admit him to the sacred ordinances, or to have any intercourse or connection with him.” 10. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 462. 11. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 5:3. 12. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, vs. 5:5. 13. See Clarke’s good explanation in footnote no. 9. 14. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 621. Barnes adds here: “It is very evident from the Scriptures that the apostles were imbued with the power of inflicting diseases or bodily calamities for crimes. See Acts 13:11; 1 Corinthians 11:30.” (Barnes v. 5:5). Smith also adds: “Commentators suggest that excommunication coupled with some form of physical affliction is probably in view.” (Smith p. 239) 15. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 89. 16. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 17. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 469. 18. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 5:5. “…The opinion that this offender repented and came back into the congregation is founded upon 2 Corinthians 7:12; but there is little certainty that this application is correct.” (Coffman v. 5:5). Bruce adds: “If, of course, the offender is the an referred to in 1 Cor. 2:5ff., then he recovered both health and church membership, but the identification, as has been indicated above, is doubtful.” (Bruce p. 55). 19. Ibid., v. 5:6. 20. Calvin, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Calvin’s Commentary on the Bible, v. 5:6. 21. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 47. 22. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, vs. 5:6-7). 23. Rabbi Israel Meir Lau, Practical Judaism (Tel Aviv: Modan Publishing House, Ltd., 1997), pp. 296-297. 24. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 57. 25. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 5:8. 26. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 5:8. 27. J. Vernon McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1991), p. 63. 28. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 5:9. 29. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 30. Quoted in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 5:9. 31. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 32. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 58. 33. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 463. 34. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 93. 35. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 59. 36. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 49. If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 1 Corinthians 6:1 In the last chapter we saw Paul absolutely shocked that there was open and flagrant immorality in the Corinthian church. Now he is shocked again that Christians are taking their brothers and sisters before civil law courts to settle disputes. It would help us to understand a little about the Greek people in this regard. Barclay, who was quite knowledgeable about the Greek culture, enlightens us. He says of it, “the Greeks…were characteristically a litigious people. The law courts were one of their chief entertainments.” [1] In the Greek system, serious matters were settled by large juries, consisting of anywhere between 201 to 6,000 of its citizens. Barclay says, “It is plain to see that in a Greek city every man was more or less a lawyer and spent a very great part of his time either deciding or listening to law cases. The Greeks were in fact famous, or notorious, for their love of going to law.” [2] Obviously, the Greek legal understandings had crept into the church. We may well wonder if a similar thing is not currently happening in the US, as lawsuits are now springing up everywhere like poisonous weeds (Hos. 10:4). Our country has become litigious to the extreme in the course of my lifetime. I can remember as a young person how it was not socially acceptable for lawyers even to advertise. Now the airwaves are crammed with lawyers who are advertising large and excessive settlements for their clients. Many companies have been bankrupted by class action suits as lawyers and clients have pocketed their vast winnings. Such money does little good for anyone. The Bible says, “Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle” (Prov. 23:5). Also, Proverbs 13:11 tells us, “Dishonest money dwindles away, but whoever gathers money little by little makes it grow. Paul, being Jewish, must have had the Jewish system of justice in mind here. The Romans allowed the Jews to administer civil justice among themselves. No doubt, at this early stage, the Christian church would have been considered merely a sect of Judaism and would have come under this same provision. Bruce says, “Every Jewish community throughout the Roman Empire and beyond its frontiers had its own bet-din, its own competent machinery for the administration of civil justice within its own membership; the least that could be expected of a Christian church was that it should make similar arrangements if necessary, and not wash its dirty linen in public.” [3] Kretzmann says, “One can well imagine the self-sufficient, triumphant smile which appeared on the faces of the judges when quarreling Christians laid their case before them! What a disgrace to the Christian confession and to the name of Christ to be found haggling and wrangling before a Gentile court while confessing to be followers of the Prince of Peace!” [4] Keener adds: “Bringing internal disputes of the Jewish or Christian communities before secular magistrates was a luxury these minority religions could ill afford; there was already too much slander against them in the broader society.” [5] No doubt, Paul was greatly distressed that these Christians were not following the teachings of the Master in this regard. The Lord had told us that when we are assaulted we should turn the other cheek (Matt. 5:39). The Bible advises us everywhere to love one another (Jn. 13:34; 15:12, 17; Rom. 13:8; 1 Thess. 4:9; 1 Pet. 1:22; 1 Jn. 3:23; 4:11-12). Stedman tells about ministering with the great Dr. H. A. Ironside and hearing him tell a story that happened when he was but eight years old. He had listened in as a church discussed some difficult matter of business. Finally one member shook his fist and said, “I don’t care what the rest of you do. I want my rights! That’s all! I just want my rights.” A half-deaf Scottish brother on the front row asked, “Aye, brother, what’s that ye say?” The agitated member repeated the demands for his rights. The Scotsman replied: “Your rights, brother, is that what you want, your rights? Why the Lord Jesus didn’t come to get his rights. He came to get his wrongs, and he got them.” The agitated member stood transfixed for a while and then replied with lowered head: “’You’re right, brother, you’re right. Settle it any way you like.” Ironside said in just a few minutes the whole matter was settled. [6] “Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases?” (6:2). Occasionally, Paul surprises us by sharing a bit of revelation otherwise unknown to us. We must remember that Paul had the unusual experience of visiting in the heavenly places and hearing all kinds of secrets and mysteries. Some were so profound that he didn’t dare repeat them, but others he was able to share (2 Cor. 12:2-4). This is probably one of those revelations, although we see hints of it several places in the scripture (cf. Dan. 7:22, 27 LXX; Matt. 19:28; 2 Tim. 2:12; Rev. 2:26-27; 3:21; 20:4-6). McGee sums it up succinctly, in a way that is often lacking in modern and postmodern preaching: “My friend, if you are a believer in Christ, you will have a part with the Lord Jesus in ruling the earth someday.” [7] In today’s church, this sounds astounding and unbelievable. Yet, it is true. If we are going to judge the world, we need to start judging ourselves and rendering stern judgment on the many questionable things that confront us each day of our lives (1 Cor. 11:31). It is important that we get into practice of judging for Christ. We must not judge others but ourselves, and the various temptations the devil presents to us on a daily basis. We must learn to rule in life through Christ (Rom. 5:17). Johnson better explains this by commenting, “The saints shall judge the world, because of their union with the Messiah, to whom all judgment is committed.” [8] “Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life!” (6:3). Paul uses the expression “Do you not know?” six times in this chapter. He sounds a little like a frustrated teacher who has pounded a certain fact into his student’s heads and then realizes that they still do not understand. No doubt, the apostle had shared this information several times with these new saints at Corinth. So here is another deep mystery that is seldom understood in today’s church. The saints will not only judge the world but they will judge angels. Because we are in Christ and co-heirs with him (Rom. 8:17), we will participate in the final judgment of fallen angels. They left heavenly realms and plagued fallen humanity. They mixed with the humans and brought them even lower. In Christ, restored humanity will judge them as we gain the heavenly realms by faith. Morgan exclaims: “Is there any statement in the apostolic writings…which has more definite and tremendous implication of the union of the saints with their Lord?” [9] Although this is another great mystery, it also is hinted at several places in the scriptures (cf. Dan. 7:22, 27; 10:13, 20; Jn. 5:22; Gal. 1:8; 2 Pet. 2:4-9; Heb. 2:5; Jude 1:6; Rev. 20:10). Utley does much to clear up this strange passage. He says: “Believers are a higher spiritual order than the angels. It is hard for believers, trapped in this fallen world, to realize our true spiritual standing (cf. 1 Cor. 13:12). Angels were created as servants of God and of redeemed humanity (cf. Heb. 1:14). It is humanity that is created in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gen. 1:26-27), not the angels…Believers will one day judge the angels…” [10] We must not forget that amazing passage in Hebrews 2:5 which assures us: “It is not to angels that he has subjected the world to come, about which we are speaking.” Since we are dealing with a couple of great mysteries here, perhaps we should try to summarize and restate them as best we can. God created human beings originally a little lower than the angels (Psa. 8:5). He chose man to be a vice-regent on earth and to have dominion over the earth (Gen. 1:26-28). That dominion was lost through the fall, as mentioned in Genesis chapter 3. In Genesis 3:15, God made the first promise of a deliverer who would restore man’s rule over the earth. Angels were assigned as ministers and helpers of humanity in this process (Heb. 1:14). However, many of the angels fell from high their position by lusting after women (Gen. 6:1-4). It is clear that through grace and faith we humans are now lifted higher than the angels (Rom. 8:38-39). Because of Christ, we are destined to regain the authority over the earth as we reign with Christ (Psa. 115:16; Mt. 5:5; Rev. 22:5). The new earth will not be ruled by angels (Heb. 2:5), but by the co-heirs with Christ. In the deuterocanonical book, Wisdom of Solomon (found in the Catholic Bible), we read these words concerning God’s saints: “They shall judge the nations and have dominion over the people.” [11] We must ask why we never hear about these things in church? I have been in the ministry over 50 years and have never heard a sermon or teaching about these mysteries. We hear much about Christians escaping the earth and dwelling forever in some far-off heaven, but we never hear about saints in Christ ruling the new earth. Amazing! It does make sense that God would repair that which happened in the Garden and restore humanity. Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 1 Corinthians 6:4-5 There are various opinions as to how verse 4 should be translated. The NAS version reads: “…do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church?” The NET, NAB, NJB, NKJ, &NRS have very similar translations. Smith points out how the early Greek manuscripts had no punctuation and that it was added later. Because of this, it is difficult to determine if this verse is read as a command or a question. [12] Quite a number of commentators feel that Paul is using some more irony here. They feel that he is saying that they should take the least important member of the church and have that person be the judge, rather than going before a pagan court. [13] The Corinthian church members thought themselves so wise, and now they seem to have no one wise enough to judge the simplest matters. Christians today find themselves in this same quandary when they charge each other before secular courts. Philip Comfort, Tyndale editor and author, sees some ray of hope in the fact that many Christian organizations are now requiring third-party arbitration clauses to be inserted in their employment contracts. These at least ensure that there will be peaceful settlements to some disputes. [14] “But instead, one brother takes another to court— and this in front of unbelievers!” (6:6). Godbey says, “He again withers them with sarcasm.” [15] How ridiculous the church can look at times! We lower ourselves to appear before courts and judges who have no appreciation for the deep spiritual truths we embrace. They hinder us from allowing those deep truths to operate in our lives and to bring spiritual settlements to our problems. The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 1 Corinthians 6:7 Lawsuits among Christians were a sure sign that they had already suffered defeat. They had already transgressed the simple teaching of the Lord Jesus. The Lord says in Matthew “But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles” (Matt. 5:39-41). In other words, go ahead and give the person the shirt off your back (and your coat too). We are commanded not just to resist evil but to overcome it (Rom. 12:21). The Corinthians failed at this. The Greek word used here is hēttēma and it means defeat, loss, and moral failure. [16] Their case was already lost. The reformer Calvin says: “I acknowledge, then, that a Christian man is altogether prohibited from revenge, so that he must not exercise it, either by himself, or by means of the magistrate, nor even desire it…it is rare to find a single instance of an upright litigant.” [17] In the days of the early church fathers, they seemed to have taken seriously Jesus’ commands concerning this. Tertullian (c. 200) said: “Men of old were used to requiring ‘eye for eye, and tooth for tooth’ and to repay evil for evil…But after Christ has supervened and has united the grace of faith with patience, now it is no longer lawful to attack others even with words, nor to merely say ‘fool,’ without danger of the judgment…Christ says, ‘Love your enemies and bless your cursers, and pray for your persecutors.’” [18] “Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers and sisters” (6:8). Utley comments: “The western church, with its emphasis on the individual, has skewed the gospel. We have missed its continual emphasis on the whole, the corporate, the body! We see Christianity as something for us individually instead of something for the gospel.” [19] Thus, we do wrong and hurt those whom we should love the most, our dear brothers and sisters in Christ. Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men. 1 Corinthians 6:9 Now that we no longer have a firm biblical basis for our system of law in the US, we are forced to base our laws upon the principle of “majority rule.” When 51 percent of the people think something is right, it then becomes “right” and the laws are changed to reflect it. This system didn’t work too well in Nazi Germany but many seem to think it will somehow work today. The Bible is plain in saying that wrongdoers will not inherit God’s kingdom. This is not speaking of someone who happens to commit a single sin, but it is speaking of someone who is sinning habitually or who has sin as a lifestyle. Today we are instructed to have tolerance for all wrongdoers and not to judge in any way. This is how far political correctness has taken us. It almost astounds people today in our western societies to suggest that their sin will keep them out of the kingdom of God. It has become unthinkable to say such a thing. Yet, God says it, and he says it plainly so that it cannot be misunderstood. The Bible here tells us to not be deceived. The expression, “Do not be deceived,” in the Greek (mē planāsthe) is present passive imperative. With the negative particle in front, it means to stop an act that is already in progress. [20] Millions of people are already deceived today and they need to stop being deceived. Paul lists several categories of sinning here. Let us look at them. The first is the Greek pornoi which is translated “sexual immorality.” This word can describe many different types of sexual sins. The word immediately reminds us of porn and pornography. This problem has run wild in our internet age. By 2005, there were already 4.2 million pornographic web sites. That would amount to 12 percent of all the world’s websites, and total some 372 million porn pages. The search engines report that there are some 68 million porn requests each day. [21] Sexual immorality is especially seen in the pervasive hookup culture on today’s college campuses. Donna Freitas, in her book The End of Sex, describes a hookup: “A hookup includes some form of sexual intimacy, anything from kissing to oral, vaginal, or anal sex and everything in between…A hookup is intended to be purely physical in nature and involves both parties shutting down any communication or connection that might lead to emotional attachment.” [22] Frietas asks “What could be better than sex without strings?” but she notes that neither the men nor the women are enjoying it. She says, “Many students today are graduating college either unhappy or ambivalent about their sex lives, and unable to imagine a more fulfilling alternative.” [23] Obviously, a hookup is totally unnatural. The world’s people imagine that there is such a thing as casual sex, but the truth is that the sexual relationship is anything but casual. It involves the whole person in the deepest emotional, physical and spiritual bonds known to humanity. The Bible says that when two people have sex they become one (Gen. 2:24). Paul’s next word is “idolaters.” Perhaps it is appropriately placed with all the sexual sins, because in ancient societies people worshipped their idols by indulging in illicit sex and homosexuality. That was the very manner in which the Corinthians worshipped just before Paul came on their scene. Idolatry remakes the True God into an idol the shape of an animal, fish or bird. It also causes us to make idols in our own image. That way we are not threatened by God’s transcendence. Idolatry has a dumbing-down effect on humanity and seeks to erase the image of God in us. Yet, we are today a nation of idol worshippers. Our idols are in the form of Hollywood stars, sports heroes, and the like. We have no doubt noted that these stars make very poor role models for us to follow. Of course, money, fame, jobs and a host of other things can also become idols. Next, he deals with adulterers (Gk. moichos) or those who are unfaithful marriage partners. In the Greek culture, adultery was taken for granted as part of marriage. While the wife lived in seclusion at home, the husband was free to have as many affairs as he wished. [24] We see in scripture how sexual immorality is a valid ground for divorce (Matt. 19:9). In a real sense, it breaks the marriage bond. Still, blessed are those couples who rescue and reform their marriages even after adultery occurs. Paul continues as he lists “men who have sex with men.” In the Greek, there seems to be two words making up this category. They are malakoi and arsenokoitai. Malakoi has the meaning of “soft.” Barclay says it “literally means those who are soft and effeminate, those who have lost their manhood and live for the luxuries of recondite pleasures.” [25] The word arsenokoitai refers to the sodomites, and is a sort of generic term for all homosexual practice. [26] Bruce says that the term “homosexual” involves both these Greek words and that they denote the passive and the active roles respectively. [27] Both the Greek and Roman worlds were rife with homosexuality. Barclay points out how fourteen out of the first fifteen Roman emperors practiced homosexuality. The emperor Nero took the boy Sporus, had him castrated, and then married him in a full ceremony. [28] As we have mentioned, homosexuality was practiced commonly at pagan shrines. It was just one of the ways people worshipped their gods. There is no question that the Bible condemns homosexuality as a sin in no uncertain terms (Gen. 19:4-5, 12-13; Lev. 20:13; Rom. 1:26-27). Yet, we see this sin being revived today on a massive scale. Because of political correctness and the LGBT lobbies, we have seen homosexuality gain immense political power. “For instance, while the majority of Americans reject same-sex marriage, and while they have repeatedly defeated the issue in elections, it continues to grow. No matter that a comprehensive review of nine different studies of same-sex couples shows that children raised by homosexuals are ‘seven times more likely to develop homosexual or bisexual preferences than children raised by heterosexuals.’ The gay rights juggernaut, aided by a sympathetic government and compliant press, rolls on.” [29] The homosexual movements are built upon a string of lies. Homosexuals have claimed that their problem is in their genes. Paul Copan replies: “Homosexuality is not the result of genetic necessity but results largely from dysfunctional same-sex relationships in one’s youth (or, in the case of lesbianism, bad experiences with males who were abusive or violent).” [30] Gay participants would claim that homosexuality is a wonderful and content way of life. However, a study in the later part of last century, conducted by Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Wineburg, showed that 43 percent of homosexuals were involved with more than five hundred sex partners in their lifetime. [31] Regarding these loose sexual standards, the eugenicist Margaret Sanger once said: “Through sex, mankind will attain the great spiritual illumination which will transform the world, and light up the only path to an earthly paradise.” [32] Quite in contrast to this is the word of J. D. Unwin who studied eighty-six different societies. His findings startled the scholars as well as himself. He found in all these societies there was “a direct tie between absolute monogamy and the ‘expansive energy’ of civilization. In other words, sexual fidelity was the single most important predictor of a society’s ascendancy.” [33] Paul continues with his rogue’s list, “nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (6:10). The ancient world was cursed by thieves and robbers, who would even steal clothes and other valuables as people enjoyed the public baths and gymnasiums. Certain kinds of thefts could bring a death sentence, other thefts could bring hefty fines. [34] In addition to thievery, the ancient world had its greedy or covetous people. I remember hearing the story about a farmer who said he would be happy if he only had all the land that joined his farm. Hmmm! The ancient world was also cursed by drunkards. This is the Greek word methos and it has to do with drinking alcohol in an uncontrolled manner. Even small children drank in ancient Greece. They drank for breakfast because that meal often consisted of bread dipped in wine. On the positive side, the Greek people diluted their wine with three parts wine mixed with two parts water. [35] Paul winds up by mentioning two more classes of folks who will not inherit God’s kingdom. They are slanderers (revilers) and swindlers. These two sins seem closely connected, for both involve poor speech in some respect. Slander is a quick and effective way to destroy the Lord’s church. We must learn to be careful with our words. The American poet Will Carleton said it well: Boys flying kites haul in their white winged birds; You can’t do that way when you’re flying words. Careful with fire, is good advice we know Careful with words, is ten times doubly so. Thoughts unexpressed may sometimes fall back dead; But God Himself can’t kill them when they’re said. [36] Swindlers were a common sight along the main roads of the ancient world. No doubt snake oil peddlers were everywhere as people tried to make a fast buck. We have it nice today. If something we purchase doesn’t work, or is unsatisfactory, we can simply return it to the store. In our society, the customer is always right (at least most of the time). I can remember a day when large tracts of land were sold with a handshake. Now it takes a battery of lawyers to keep persons true to their agreements. “And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (6:11). No doubt some of the Corinthians had plumbed the depths of all the sins we have mentioned. But after Paul came with the gospel, everything changed. They were cleansed from their many sins. The picture here is one of washing (Gk. apolouō). Titus 3:5 tells us, “…He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit….” Just as water was present in our birth, it is also present in our rebirth. Some connect this spiritual washing to the act of baptism (cf. Acts 22:16). However, several commentators make clear that this is not the case. Morris calls it a “metaphorical washing.” [37] Pett says, “…Baptism is rarely, if ever, likened to ‘washing’, as though sins could be washed off (Jer. 2:22), and the verb here is never used of ritual washing…apolouō is never used of such washings, in the Old Testament, ceremonial washing in itself never ‘cleanses’, and we are specifically told in every case that the Old Testament washings left the person ‘unclean until the evening.”’ [38] Clearly, the only true washing from sin is the blood of Jesus (Rev. 7:14). Paul mentions, that along with washing, we were also sanctified (Gk. hēgiasthēte) and justified (Gk. edikaiōthēte). These are two very important terms that many in the postmodern church have almost forgotten about. The word sanctified is that process of holiness that should be going on in our lives. Scholars feel there is a positional sanctification that we have immediately on our salvation, and then there is a progressive sanctification that grows within us as we live for Jesus (cf. my comment on 1 Cor. 1:30). Justification, on the other hand, is a one-time decree of God at our new birth. God declares that through Christ and his blood we have become righteous, forgiven and acquitted of all our sins (past, present &future). “I have the right to do anything,” you say— but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”— but I will not be mastered by anything. 1 Corinthians 6:12 Quite a number of commentators feel that Paul is repeating a catch-phrase that was being mouthed by the Corinthians. [39] No doubt the apostle had thoroughly instructed the Corinthians on the blessings of Christian liberty. Now they were using their liberty as a cover-up for evildoing (cf. 1 Pet. 2:16). C. S. Lewis once said, “Satan always sends error into the world in pairs that are opposites. His great hope is that you will get so upset about one of his errors, that you’ll react into the opposite one, and he’s got you.” [40] Paul would not deny that we Christians have great rights and freedoms. Yet, he also knows that we must be careful with these freedoms. As he says, “everything is not beneficial.” While we have rights and freedoms we do not want these to lead us into bondage. It seemed that Paul always had to battle on two fronts, with overboard ascetics or overboard libertines. [41] Much of this struggle was due to the Greek thinking that considered the body of no importance, but only the spiritual realm as significant. Some became ascetics and tried to whip the body into shape while others felt that it did not matter what they did in the body, since it was of no importance anyway. Paul is saying something that was later reflected by Chrysostom, “All things are in my power, but I shall not be overpowered by anything.” [42] We no doubt remember the story of Samson, who was deceived by Delilah. Through that deception, the great and powerful Samson was weakened, captured, and later brought to his death (Judg. 16:4-21). In the Christian faith, we must be free from sin, but not free to sin. We must always be on our guard lest sin deceive us and overpower us. “You say, ‘Food for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will destroy them both.’ The body, however, is not meant for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body” (6:13). What we have here is probably another catchphrase that was being used by the Corinthians. With it, they were comparing the need for food with the need for sex. Again, they were using the same logic as before. They were saying that sex, even illicit sex with shrine prostitutes was no more important than eating. Since the body is nothing and would be eventually destroyed, it should not matter what one does with the body. They were probably saying something like this: “My body wants food, so I eat. My body wants sex, so I hire a prostitute. What’s the problem?” [43] A large number of interpreters see the Greek word for “body” (soma) in a holistic sense, representing the whole person or the personality (cf. Rom. 12:1; Phil. 1:20; Eph. 5:28). [44] There certainly is a sense in which the things we do with our body touches our spirit and affects our relationship with God. Paul will say in verse 15 that our bodies are members of Christ himself. So, there is a sacredness and holiness about our bodies. As Christians, our bodies will not be destroyed as the Greeks thought, but they will be redeemed and resurrected (cf. 15:44, 51-52; Matt. 22:30; Phil. 3:21). “By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also” (6:14). As we have seen, the Greeks did not feel that the body was too important. They believed that death brought the end of the body and there would be no more use for it. When Paul preached to the philosophers at Athens and mentioned the resurrection of the dead, he immediately began to be heckled (Acts 17:32). Jesus was and is the firstfruits from the dead (15:20). He was and is the first person ever to come out of the grave with a perfectly resurrected body. Morris says of this: “The resurrection forbids us to take the body lightly.” [45] Because of this, we believers can be confident that we will also be resurrected with a perfect spiritual and immortal body. This was one of the great hopes of early Christianity. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 1 Corinthians 6:15 Paul makes it very clear that the believer is a member of Christ’s body (cf. 1 Cor. 12:20, 27; Rom. 12:5; Eph. 4:12, 16, 25). For us to be involved with illicit sex, whether in fornication, adultery, homosexuality, or whatever, it is a great sin against Christ. The Corinthians were actually involved in a greater sin. It was customary in Corinth for people to go to the temple of the love-goddess Aphrodite, which was in their city, and have sex with prostitutes, both male and female. Prostitute is again the Greek word porne. This was the normal manner of worship, the normal way of going to church in ancient times. Apparently some of the new Christians were still doing this, and the apostle is aghast. He makes clear the drastic implications of such an act. To join bodies with a temple prostitute was not only to defile the body (which is Christ’s) but they would spiritually join themselves with that vile goddess. As Kretzmann says, “Sexual union constitutes a permanent bond between the guilty parties…” [46] We must not miss the great significance of the sexual act. Again, today people are certain that they can have casual sex and treat it almost like a social sport. How tragic this misunderstanding is! Wiersbe comments: “Sex outside of marriage is like a man robbing a bank: he gets something, but it is not his and he will one day pay for it. Sex within marriage can be like a person putting money into a bank: there is safety, security, and he will collect dividends …Sex outside of marriage is destructive, while sex in marriage can be creative and beautiful.” [47] Today we live in a sex-crazed society. Comfort says, “…The Corinthians faced pagan religions that used sex in worship. Modern culture has made a religion out of worshiping sex…” [48] Their idolatry took an awful toll on the Corinthians, and our modern idolatry is taking a terrible toll on our society today. Kupelian reports: “…A ghoulish smorgasbord of sexually transmitted diseases – many incurable, such as AIDS, herpes, and human papilloma virus (thought to be one of the main causes of cervical cancer), as well as hepatitis, syphilis, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and a host of others – is pretty powerful indicator that we weren’t meant to have wanton, rampant sex.” [49] This is only one area where illicit sex is devastating our society. To make matters worse for the Corinthians and even for people today, the ranks of prostitutes in ancient times were stocked with slave girls. These were raised for the profession and chosen from the vast number of abandoned babies in the ancient world. [50] Even when one visits a prostitute today that person may be unknowingly contributing to the sex-slave rackets. Sex slavery in the US is now becoming a noticeable problem, but for some eastern nations it has already reached plague proportions. “Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, ‘The two will become one flesh’” (6:16). This teaching goes all the way back to Genesis 2:24, where God speaks of marriage saying: “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” Wiersbe says, “When a man and woman join their bodies, the entire personality is involved. There is a much deeper experience, a ‘one-ness’ that brings with it deep and lasting consequences. Paul warned that sexual sin is the most serious sin a person can commit against his body, for it involves the whole person (6:18).” [51] Ambrosiaster of old said, “Sexual immorality makes them both one, in nature as well as in sin.” [52] Guzik comments: “In sex outside of marriage, the partners become ‘one flesh’ in a way that is under God’s curse…” To those not married he says, “…Part of their self is given to that person, and it means there is less to give to the Lord and to the partner God intends for them…” [53] What a contrast this is to the holy matrimony that God has designed. Pett comments: “Between a man and a woman who are united in marriage it is a holy thing. Two persons, who are both members of Christ’s body, are themselves by it united as one within that body.” [54] Thus, our physical bodies must be used for the Lord and for his glory as many scriptures attest (cf. 12:27; Eph. 4:12, 15, 16; 5:30). “But whoever is united with the Lord is one with him in spirit” (6:17). Even in the Old Testament people were said to be “joined” to God (Jer. 50:5; Zech. 2:11). In the New Testament this is true in a greater and deeper sense. The Greek word for “joined” (kollao) used here means to be glued together. [55] What a great picture this is! Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. 1 Corinthians 6:18 The word for “flee” is pheugete in the Greek. It is present imperative, and conveys the meaning that we should make a habit of fleeing from sexual immorality. [56] This would mean that we should flee from all forms of porn. We should run away quickly without looking back. This verse reminds us very much of young Joseph down in Egypt, when he was tempted sexually by his master’s wife. The Bible says, “She caught him by his cloak and said, ‘Come to bed with me!’ But he left his cloak in her hand and ran out of the house” (Gen. 39:12). What a sterling example for all of us today! Sometimes people talk as if sexual sins were the worst kinds of sins. They may be right. Paul says here that all other sins are committed outside the body but this one is a sin against the body in some special way. It seems at first that there are several sins which affect the body, sins like gluttony, drunkenness, and drug abuse. However, people can stop these sins and recover their health. Calvin says, “…fornication leaves a stain impressed upon the body, such as is not impressed upon it from other sins.” [57] Fornication makes an indelible mark upon a person’s soul. It deeply affects the personality. Also, this sin can indirectly make a person guilty of bloodshed (Isa. 1:15), as a resulting baby is aborted, or as a party dies from sexually transmitted disease. We must also consider the guilt and emotional turmoil that such sexual encounters often bring on. People have probably taken their own lives due to the awful psychological burden of sinful sexual encounters. Chrysostom says, “It is a sin against one’s own self in a way that the others are not.” [58] Pfeiffer and Harrison say in addition that it, “involves a monstrous denial of union with Christ by union with a harlot.” [59] “Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies” (6:19-20). The NIV takes the liberty to make body and temple plural here, but in the Greek they are both singular. [60] Most other translations read to the effect that our body is a temple of God. Interestingly, in the other places that speak of redeemed people being God’s temple, the people are plural and the temple is singular (cf. 1 Cor. 3:16; Eph. 2:21; 1 Pet. 2:5). In a real sense God’s people (plural) make up his temple (singular) and we are not the temple of God all by ourselves. This is important in our day of what we might call “Lone Ranger Christianity.” Many folks today firmly believe that their bodies are their own, and that they can do whatever they wish with them. This is a dreadful misunderstanding of the human body. The Bible says that our bodies are not our own but they belong to God. We have been bought with a price (Rom. 6:17-18; 1 Cor. 7:23). The picture here is one of the slave markets of old. Often slaves were redeemed and sometimes by their own kin. In our case, Christ has bought each of us out of the devil’s slavery and he has paid for our release with his precious blood on Calvary. This is what the gospel is all about. We cannot call our bodies our own anymore. Comfort says, “…If you live in a building owned by someone else, you try not to violate the building’s rules.” [61] We are now owned by a new Master and we must serve him body and soul. As we have said, we were bought with a price (Acts 20:28; Rom. 3:24; Gal. 3:13; 4:5). We are servants of the new and wonderful Master, the Lord Jesus Christ. The earliest Christians persisted in calling themselves “slaves” of Christ. What a blissful slavery it is! Our desire now is to please him only and to fully serve him with our lives. Again, “Harry Ironside was right when he made another statement, ‘Glorify God in your body and the spiritual side will take care of itself.’” [62] 1. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, vs. 6:1-20. 2. Ibid. 3. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 59. 4. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 5. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 463. 6. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, vs. 6:1-11. 7. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 69. 8. Quoted in Coffman, Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 6:3. 9. Quoted in Guzik, Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, vs. 6:2-6. 10. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 6:3. Barker and Kohlenberger add: “He probably means that Christians, when ruling in the future with Christ, will have a part in judging the devil and the fallen angels at the Second Coming (cf. Rev. 19:19-20; 20:10).” (Barker &Kohlenberger, p. 623). 11. Quoted in Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, vs. 6:11-20. 12. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 244. 13. Calvin, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Calvin’s Commentary on the Bible, v. 6:3. 14. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 79. 15. Godbey, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament, v. 6:6. 16. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 245. 17. Calvin, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Calvin’s Commentary on the Bible, v. 6:7. 18. Alexander Donaldson, et. al., Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 3 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark; Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1889), p. 711. 19. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 6:8. 20. Ibid., vs. 6:9-11. 21. David Kupelian, The Marketing of Evil, (Nashville, WND Books, 2005), p. 129. 22. Donna Freitas, The End of Sex: How Hookup Culture Is Leaving a Generation Unhappy, Sexually Unfulfilled, and Confused About Intimacy (New York: Basic Books, 2013), p. 25. 23. Ibid., pp. 2, 4. 24. William Barclay, The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians, Revised Edition (Louisville: The Westminster Press, 1975), p. 161. 25. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 26. Guzik, Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, vs. 6:8-11. 27. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 61. 28. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 29. David Kupelian, How Evil Works: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces That Are Transforming America (New York: Threshold Editions, 2010), p. 176. 30. Paul Copan, When God Goes To Starbucks (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2008), 31. Kupelian, The Marketing of Evil, p. 21. 32. Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity (Wheaton IL: Crossway Books, 2004), p. 143. 33. Philip Yancey, Finding God in Unexpected Places (Nashville: Moorings, 1995), 34. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 35. Ibid. 36. http://izquotes.com/quote/377399 37. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 97. 38. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 39. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 6:12. “The phrase ‘everything is permissible for me’ appears to have been a catchphrase, as it appears twice in this verse and twice again in 10:23. Apparently the Christians in Corinth had been using this phrase as a license to live any way they pleased.” (Comfort, p. 83). 40. http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/168668-satan-always-sends-error-into-the-world-in-pairs-that 41. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 62. 42. Quoted in Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, 43. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, v. 6:13. 44. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 250. 45. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 99. 46. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 47. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 470. 48. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 87. 49. David Kupelian, How Evil Works: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces That Are Transforming America, p. 44. 50. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 465. 51. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 471. 52. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 57. 53. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 54. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 55. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, 56. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 6:18. 57. Calvin, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Calvin’s Commentary on the Bible, v. 6:18. 58. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 57. 59. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1239. 60. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, 61. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 89. 62. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 1 Corinthians 7:1 With this chapter, Paul begins to answer a series of several questions that were addressed to him from Corinth. If this request was in the form of a letter, it is now lost to us. However, we can pretty much piece together its basic contents by taking note of the questions Paul is answering here. The apostle’s introduction is rather blunt and somewhat troubling. In the Greek, it reads that it is good for a man not to “touch” (hapto) a woman. Donald Guthrie, of London Bible College, sees this as a euphemism for sexual relations. [1] Quite a number of translations continue to use the word “touch” (NKJ, NRS, NAS, etc.), but a few translations such as the NIV here render it as sexual relations in marriage. Paul’s statement strikes us on the surface as a very low view of marriage, since one marries only to avoid fornication (v.2). Rather than being a low view of marriage though, it may be a way of honestly facing the awful threat of fornication that was an everyday thing in the city of Corinth. [2] When we look at Paul’s other teachings we realize that he had quite a high and noble view of marriage. We see this reflected in Ephesians 5:21-33 and Colossians 3:18-19. Of course, such a high view of marriage is seen in Genesis 2:18, Psalms 127:1-5; 128:1-6, Proverbs 18:22, 19:14; 31:10 ff., and through much of the Song of Solomon. In their first question, the Corinthians must have asked if married couples should continue on with normal sexual relations after becoming Christians. Paul answers this question in verses 1-7. [3] The answer is “yes.” Not only should they continue, but it is their duty to each other (blessed duty). In order to understand something about the background of this question, we need to refresh ourselves on the normal Greek philosophical idea that the earth, the flesh, the body and all that pertains to earth is evil, and that only the spiritual realm is good. The Greeks felt that abstinence from marriage was actually one of the “counsels of perfection.” [4] In ancient Greece, some philosophers went into retreat to escape the defilement of the world. Those philosophers who retired from the world were called solitaries (Gk. monachoi). The habitation of their retirement was called a place of solitude (Gk. monsasterion). [5] It certainly does not take much imagination to see where this kind of thinking influenced the church in later years. Edwin Hatch says, “…To Greece, more than to any other factor, was due the place and earliest conception of that sublime individualism which centered all a man’s efforts on the development of his spiritual life, and withdrew him from his fellow-men in order to bring him near to God.” [6] The retreat to monasteries and nunneries, as well as a celibate priesthood in later years, would spell the end of marriage for millions of Christians. It is no doubt from the Greeks that we got the idea that sex was something dirty, something that we should hardly talk about. In his teaching here, Paul absolutely destroys this idea as we shall see. The apostle was steeped in the teaching of Judaism, which saw all of God’s creation as good (Gen. 1:31). That included the body, marriage and the sexual relationship in marriage. The Bible teaches that it is not good for man to be alone (Gen. 2:18). It teaches that to deny marriage is apostasy (1 Tim. 4:1-3). How greatly we have all been affected by the Greek ideas which looked on these things as dirty, depraved and ugly. “But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband” (7:2). Today we cannot even imagine how sexually polluted the city of Corinth was. As we mentioned earlier, the temple of the love goddess Aphrodite was there, and historians report that at times as many as one thousand “holy” prostitutes were at that temple and were wandering through the city plying their wares. It was literally a cesspool of iniquity. Standing against all this evil was the sacred institution of marriage. Many ancient societies were horrible so far as their morals were concerned. Yet, today we have a large segment of our US population that seems to desire a return to this ancient immorality. Perhaps we have even exceeded Corinth with our push for homosexuality, LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual &Transsexual) rights, homosexual marriages and the like. At this writing, the highest court in the US has just approved homosexual marriage. This return to ancient paganism is nowhere better reflected than in America’s higher institutions of learning. Ben Shapiro, in his book, Brainwashed, How Universities Indoctrinate America’s Youth, says: “Sex is promoted non-stop in the classroom. All types of sex are deemed natural and fulfilling. Homosexuality is perfectly normal. Pedophilia is acceptable, if a bit weird. Statutory rape is laughed off. Bestiality is fine.” [7] Nathan Harden became shocked at his own alma mater, Yale University. In his book, Sex and God at Yale, he details just how low this great university has stooped by introducing pure porn in massive doses to its students. He says, “I had thought of Yale as a modern-day equivalent of the Athenian agora; but all too often, I found myself sitting in the equivalent of an intellectual whorehouse.” [8] He continues, saying: “I was witnessing nothing less than a prophetic vision of America’s descent into an abyss of moral aimlessness, at the hands of those now charged with educating its future leaders.” [9] Getting back to Corinth and the dismal situation there, Morris says, “Since fornication was so common at Corinth it was hard for the unmarried to remain chaste and hard for them to persuade others that they were, in fact, chaste.” [10] Paul was certain that the only cure was Christian marriage and the pure and holy sexual relation within marriage. “The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband” (7:3). This is a remarkable statement in the male-dominated Mediterranean world of ancient times. We see here that the husband has a marital duty to his wife and not just the other way around. It is clear that the husband does not have absolute control of his own body, but the wife shares in that control. The same is true of the wife. She does not have absolute control of her body but must share that control with her husband. It is clear that marriage is to be a partnership. [11] As some of the older marriage vows express it, each one must be given “to have and to hold” the other. Morris points out how the verb used here is present imperative and suggests that the close sexual relationship is to be a habitual duty for the couple. [12] In Corinth there seemed to be a unique problem regarding sexual relations within marriage. Again, because of Greek ideas, some seemed to be avoiding normal sexual relations within marriage. Metz says here, “Among some of the Corinthians there existed an exaggerated spiritualistic tendency which threatened to injure conjugal relations. There existed a view among ascetics that sex relations were in and of themselves wicked, or evil; and the blight of this monastic error has fallen upon all succeeding generations.” [13] This may be termed “spiritual marriage” but in light of the Bible it is not spiritual at all. In fact, for a couple to refuse each other sexually was to defraud or even commit robbery against the partner (1 Thes. 4:6). [14] We cannot tell to what degree this “spiritual marriage” had become a problem at Corinth, but we can be certain it became a big problem in later times. Around AD 175, the church father Athenagoras (c. 133 – c. 190) said: “Likewise, to us the procreation of children is the limit of our indulgence in [sexual] appetite. [15] Later in 195, the popular teacher, Clement of Alexandria, taught: “To such a spiritual man, after conception, his wife is a sister and is treated as if of the same father.” [16] We can realize what a burden Greek thinking placed upon the new Christian church, and how some of those ideas have lingered on. “The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife” (7:4). In the ancient world women had very few rights. Morris remarks about this: “…Two things are noteworthy: the putting of the sexes on an absolute equality in this matter, and the indispensability of the sex act in marriage.” [17] Obviously, with Paul’s statement all ideas of a sexless marriage, or celibacy within marriage are out the window. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 1 Corinthians 7:5 Stedman says here: “…Paul puts his finger on what is one of the most frequent causes for disaster in marriage – a unilateral refusal to grant the gift of enjoyment and pleasure to one’s mate…” [18] Paul obviously regards the sexual act within marriage as extremely important. In this way, the two persons truly become one. For either party in the marriage to withhold sex from the other party is considered an act of fraud (Gk. apostereite). [19] We can understand how forced abstinence in marriage later in church history must have brought about some very tortured and unhappy Christian couples. The apostle here does allow times of abstinence with the stipulation that they be short times as couples take time off for seasons of prayer. He does not state how long these periods should be. However, in the Mishnah (Ket. v. 6), such periods could run from a week to longer, even to thirty days. [20] Clearly, the lack of sexual activity in marriage could bring either of the partners into temptation in the sexual area. “I say this as a concession, not as a command” (7:6). There is some discussion among commentators as to what this statement refers. Morris says, “It makes good sense to say that the suspension of intercourse is the concession (it is likely to refer to the resumption of sexual intercourse).” [21] This makes clear that Paul was not opposed to marriage or to sexual relationships within marriage. He realizes that the Bible has not spoken on this particular aspect of marriage but he feels he has the mind of the Lord. Barnes says, “…Paul here does not claim to be under inspiration in these directions…It shows that he was an honest man, and was disposed to state the exact truth…” [22] “I wish that all of you were as I am. But each of you has your own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that” (7:7). Obviously, Paul was living the celibate life as an unmarried person. He desired that every man did the same, and this desire was based on “the present crisis” reflected in verse 26. We have no exact idea as to what this crisis was, but we will speak more about it when we get to this verse. In order to live a celibate life Paul makes plain that a gift from God is necessary. Clearly, everyone does not have such a gift, so the apostle makes allowances for this. There is considerable discussion among commentators as to the apostle’s status. Many scholars feel that Paul was once married and that his wife had either died or else left him when he became a Christian. [23] Halley gives his opinion, saying, “This chapter seems to have been written by one who knew something of the intimacies of the married life” [24] Barclay has this to say regarding Paul: We may be fairly certain that at some time Paul had been married…He was a Rabbi and it was his own claim that he had failed in none of the duties which Jewish law and tradition laid down. Now orthodox Jewish belief laid down the obligation of marriage. If a man did not marry and have children, he was said to have “slain his posterity,” “to have lessened the image of God in the world”…God had said, “Be fruitful and multiply,” and, therefore, not to marry and not to have children was to be guilty of breaking a positive commandment of God. The age for marriage was considered to be eighteen; and therefore it is in the highest degree unlikely that so devout and orthodox a Jew as Paul once was would have remained unmarried…He must have been a member of the Sanhedrin for he says that he gave his vote against the Christians (Acts 26:10). It was a regulation that members of the Sanhedrin must be married men, because it was held that married men were more merciful. [25] In many respects though, it was a great blessing that Paul was not married. Can we imagine the danger, stress and discomfort of him dragging a wife and family along on his long mission trips? Can we imagine the emotional suffering of watching Paul be whipped, stoned, cast into prison, or shipwrecked? Indeed, it was no job for a family man. Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. 1 Corinthians 7:8 Here Paul deals with the second question asked by the Corinthian church: Should single persons get married? The answer is given with caution. If they can control themselves they should remain unmarried like Paul, at least for the present situation. If they cannot, they should get married. He gives this answer in verses 8-9. The term “unmarried” (Gk. agamois) is a very broad one. It includes all those who are not bound in the married state. [26] This would include widows and widowers. We need to remember that this advice is based on the contingency we read about in verse 26. We should understand that some people have a calling and gifting to live a single life. Paul had such a gift. However, it cannot be done successfully without such a calling and gifting. In more normal situations Paul is very pro-marriage and even commands widows to marry (1 Tim. 5:14). “But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion” (7:9). The Greek word for burn, puroo, can simply mean to burn, or even to burn in Gehenna. [27] However, many scholars see it as burning with sexual passion. In essence, this is the translations of the NET, NKJ, NRS, NASB, RSV, as well as here in the NIV. Smith feels that the burning with sexual desire is to be preferred. [28] Paul is not putting down marriage but again is giving advice in light of the “present crisis.” “Marriage is the normal way to fulfill a strong and recurrent, God-given desire.” [29] Wiersbe warns us in our thinking, “…please keep in mind that Paul is replying to definite questions. He is not spelling out a complete “theology of marriage.” [30] To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife. 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 Here Paul deals with the third question asked by the Corinthians. They had asked whether or not divorce was permitted for Christians. His answer in verses 10-11 is a resounding “No!” This answer is not based upon the apostle’s spiritual leading but upon the plain commands of the Lord God. Both Jesus and the Bible speak plainly about divorce – too plain for our age I fear. Paul speaks clearly in this verse and also in verse 39. Jesus speaks clearly about divorce in Matthew 5:31-32; 19:3-12; Mark. 10:2-12 and Luke 16:18. He says that if someone divorces his or her mate and marries another, that person is guilty of adultery. Of course all this was made clear in the Old Testament, especially in the book of Malachi. That prophet assures us that God hates divorce (Mal. 2:16 NRS). In Paul’s day, divorce in the Greco-Roman world had already reached plague proportions. While in Israel, the woman could not obtain a divorce, in the Roman world the woman could do so. Barclay remarks that “Roman women of the aristocracy dated the years by the names of their husbands and not by the names of the consuls.” [31] Today it appears that we are doing like the Romans did regarding marriage. Sadly, the Christian divorce rate in the US remains very similar to the pagan rate. To make matters worse, the divorce rate among the clergy is rising faster than any other profession. [32] So something just does not add up. Today western Christians seem far removed from the simple teaching on divorce found in the Bible. This was not the case with the early Christian fathers. They continued on with Paul’s teaching. The early writer Justin Martyr said around 160: “All who have been twice married by human law, are sinners in the eye of our Master.” [33] Tertullian around 207 said, “Christ plainly forbids divorce.” [34] Cyprian around 250 reflects the words of the Bible saying, “A wife must not depart from her husband. Or, if she should depart, she must remain unmarried.” [35] What a mess we have in today’s western Christian world! When I was a child growing up in the rural Bible Belt, divorce was almost unheard of. There were one or two divorced women in our small town and frankly, they were almost shunned. It was unthinkable for a deacon or pastor to be divorced. Now, divorce is everywhere. There is hardly a church family that has not been touched in some way by divorce. There are multitudes of divorced deacons and pastors in our churches. God help us! As we lose the mystery and holiness of marriage, we are almost destined to lose the mystery and holiness of the church. To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 1 Corinthians 7:12-13 The apostle now deals with the fourth question raised by the Corinthians (vs.12-16). The question was: Are marriages between pagans and Christians binding? He answers yes, with one stipulation. When a Christian is married to a pagan, that relationship is still binding. However, if the pagan desires to leave, the Christian partner is freed from the bond. Paul acknowledges here that he does not have the Lord’s direct word on this. He cannot quote scriptures about it. However, he feels that he is speaking with spiritual authority and that he is being guided by the Spirit of God. [36] Obviously, God is pro-marriage. He wants relationships to remain intact, even when one member is not a Christian. We should make plain here that a Christian should not willingly marry a pagan. “It is an act of disobedience for a Christian knowingly to marry an unsaved person (1 Cor. 7:39, 2 Cor. 6:14).” [37] Still, when one becomes a Christian and their spouse is still a pagan, Kretzmann says, “the brother or the sister in the congregation is not kept in bondage under such circumstances; they are not to be told that they are still bound, but may consider themselves free, just as though the other party had died.” [38] Of course, this applies only when the pagan member is unwilling to remain in the marriage. Love does strange things to our thinking, even to the thinking of devout Christians. Many times persons will enter the marriage relationship with unbelievers, with the pretext that they will bring that other person to the Lord. Most of these situations work only temporarily, long enough to get the marriage ceremony done. Afterward, the unsaved person will likely relapse and remain in an unsaved condition. Also, it is never a good policy to enter into marriage with the idea that we will change the other partner. If the pagan member decides to leave the marriage, that party is free to go, and the Christian is no longer bound. Bruce notes, “in contrast to Jewish law, Greek and Roman law permitted a wife to divorce her husband.” [39] Comfort reminds us “that the divorce laws should not be used to dispose of one partner in order to get another one….” [40] Barclay says of the mixed marriage: “…in such a case it is not the taint of heathenism but the grace of Christianity which wins the victory…In a partnership between a believer and an unbeliever, it is not so much that the believer is brought into contact with the realm of sin, as that the unbeliever is brought into contact with the realm of grace…For Paul evangelization began at home.” [41] “For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy” (7:14). Commentators have written reams trying to explain this verse. How can an unbelieving partner be sanctified through the believing one? Commentators do not see this as actual salvation, but more like being brought under the saving influence. “The word ‘sanctified’…does not refer to moral purity – Paul is certainly not teaching that the unbelieving partner is made morally pure through a believing spouse. What the word emphasizes is a relationship to God, a claim of God on the person and family to be set apart for him (cf. Ac 20:32; 26:18).” [42] Perhaps Bruce makes the right sense of this when he compares this verse to the Old Testament idea of holiness by association. Whatever touches the altar becomes holy as we see in Leviticus 6:18. [43] Commentators generally feel that this describes a coming under the favorable influence of God; gaining the protection of God; coming into a special relationship with God. It is very similar to those Gentiles in the past that came under the influence of Israel. The children, like the unsaved partner, also come under the influence and protection of God. The church father Tertullian comments: “The children of believers were in some sense destined for holiness and salvation…” [44] Morris adds: “Until he is old enough to take the responsibility upon himself, the child of a believing parent is to be regarded as Christian.” [45] All this assumes that the child will make his or her decision to follow Christ upon coming to the age of accountability. But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or the sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. 1 Corinthians 7:15 A Christian is not called to live his or her life in dissention and warfare at home. If the unbelieving partner departs, then that partner should be allowed to divorce. The Christian partner is then free to remarry. This is commonly known as the “Pauline Privilege.” [46] It is not clearly spelled out in scripture, but Paul claims direction by the Spirit of God. The early writer, Theodoret of Cyr, says: “The believing partner is not to be the cause of the divorce. But if the unbelieving partner wants to separate, the believing partner is innocent and free from any accusation.” [47] Utley comments: “Marriage is not primarily for evangelism; it is for companionship and fellowship, therefore, a believing partner should not stay with the unbelieving partner in a situation of abuse and unlove, simply for the hope of evangelism.” [48] “How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?” (7:16). As we have said, marriage is not to be seen merely as a means of evangelism. Of course, one person cannot save another person. However, they can lead that other person to a saving experience with Jesus. Sometimes the other party is strongly resistant. It is possible on occasions that this is a part of the cross that the believing party is to bear. Clarke says, “Bear your cross, and look up to God, and he may give your unbelieving husband or wife to your prayers.” [49] Too often in these situations the Christian wife particularly is prone to nag her husband about becoming a believer, not realizing that lifestyle is more important than words. Peter gives advice here: “Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives” (1 Pet. 3:1-2). Nevertheless, each person should live as a believer in whatever situation the Lord has assigned to them, just as God has called them. This is the rule I lay down in all the churches. 1 Corinthians 7:17 Paul is laying down a rule of Christian living that should apply in many situations. When a person becomes a Christian that person should not feel obligated to make a lot of changes in life-calling and work. Of course, the person should change professions if the one he or she has is immoral. This is an important principle and is seen here as well as in verses 20 and 24. Morris says, “Paul’s point is that one can serve God in a variety of places and it is not necessary to leave one’s station in life simply because one is converted.” [50] Sometimes Christians are prone to make such rash and wholesale changes without thinking through the consequences. I remember, as a church leader in Israel, that we once counseled with a young man and discovered he had left his wife and children in the US, while he had come to Israel to “serve the Lord.” All of our leaders were unanimous in advising him to return to his family and serve the Lord with them. There is a saying of Mary Engelbreit that pretty well sums all this up: “bloom where you are planted.” It should be said that God has a right to move a person if he so wishes. Such a decision should be approached with much prayer, and it is best that confirmation be had from leaders or others in the church. It should certainly be confirmed by scripture. The Gadarene demoniac wanted to follow Jesus in the boat but Jesus sent him back home, so that he could tell family and friends all the wonderful things the Lord had done for him (Mk. 5:18-20). “Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised” (7:18). Circumcision was a huge thing for the Jewish people. It was the unmistakable mark of the covenant. For a Jewish male not to be circumcised was to cut himself off from the congregation of Israel. On occasions in the Greek world, certain Jews tried to undo the mark of circumcision. They tried to do this so they could run naked in the Greek races and not be jeered. Also, they also tried to do it to escape the shame of being a Jew when they entered the public baths. They sometimes did it to avoid outright persecution. [51] “Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God’s commands is what counts” (7:19). Now that the New Covenant has come, circumcision is no longer a natural thing. Paul says it well in Romans 2:29: “No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.” He also says in Galatians 5:6: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.” We might add a note that today most Jewish believers in Christ are circumcised and they insist on circumcising their sons. This circumcision is not a matter of righteousness but is a matter of identification with the nation of Israel. In much the same way, young Timothy was circumcised by Paul, not as a matter of belief, but so that he could better work with the Jews (Acts 16:3). Truly we cannot add anything to the work Jesus has done in our lives. George Herbert once wrote these verses: This is the famous stone That turneth all to gold; For that which God doth touch and own Cannot for less be told. [52] “Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them” (7:20). Here Paul gives the rule again. The word for situation or calling is the Greek klesei. Smith sees this as one’s “station in life, position, condition.” He says this “…seems to capture this notion of one’s earthly circumstances…social, economic, geographic, or occupational at the time of his or her conversion.” [53] Paul keeps emphasizing this rule. We note that it was a practice in all the churches where he ministered. “Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you— although if you can gain your freedom, do so” (7:21). In the ancient world a high percentage of the people were slaves. Sometimes, slaves even had the upper hand so far as population was concerned. Barnes mentions that in her best days the city of Athens had 20,000 freemen and some 400,000 slaves. [54] We can understand how ancient societies were already nervous lest the slave population get out of hand. Keener points out how every attempted slave uprising was brutally crushed in the ancient world. [55] In light of this tense background, Paul had to choose his words carefully. Coffman says, “If one single word could have been quoted in Rome as tending to excite slaves to revolt, it would have quadrupled the intensity and savagery of the imperial government’s hatred and persecution of Christians, at a time when persecution was already under way.” [56] Paul thus advises slaves to be loyal. He says also in Ephesians. 6:5: “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart.” There is an interpretive problem with the latter part of the above verse and that problem has persisted through the centuries. There seems to be two possibilities, or two options of interpretation in this verse. The options revolve around the Greek words mallon chrēsai. Perhaps Smith has the best explanation: “…These two options are represented clearly by the ideas that (1) even if you have a chance of freedom, you should prefer to make full use of your condition as a slave… and (2) but if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.” He says that all considerations “…tip the balance in favor of the second view…” [57] As we see, the NIV opts for this second interpretation. “For the one who was a slave when called to faith in the Lord is the Lord’s freed person; similarly, the one who was free when called is Christ’s slave” (7:22). The kingdom of God is in one sense a crazy upside-down kingdom. The poor are rich, the giving receive, the dying live and the slaves are free. We are reminded again that the early Christians commonly referred to themselves as the Lord’s slaves (Gk. douloi). Today we have somehow lost that concept. In this day of so-called “independence” most people do not realize that there is no such thing as absolute freedom. Such a thing always ends up in deep slavery to evil. Our only true freedom is in slavery to Jesus. The Lord says in Matthew 11:29-30: “Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” Paul warns us here saying: “You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of human beings” (7:23). The church father Jerome (347-420) remarks, “What greater price is there than that the Creator shed his blood for the creature?” [58] Ambrosiaster adds, “We have been bought at so high a price that only Christ, who owns everything, is able to pay it.” [59] The Psalmist says: “the ransom for a life is costly, no payment is ever enough— so that they should live on forever and not see decay” (Psa. 49:8-9). And Jesus asks: “What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? (Mat 16:26). While it is blessed to be a slave of Christ, we Christians must always guard against becoming slaves of men. I well remember how the Shepherding Movement of the 70s and 80s brought thousands of Christians into deep bondage. The lines of authority in this movement were so strict that the average believer had to ask permission of leadership before making the most mundane and everyday decision. The movement eventually ran itself aground leaving thousands of broken lives behind. We must not submit ourselves wholly and exclusively to anyone but Jesus. “Brothers and sisters, each person, as responsible to God, should remain in the situation they were in when God called them” (7:24). Paul seems to be a bit redundant with this instruction, but he wants us all to understand it clearly. We should not feel compelled to make drastic changes in our situation or station in life just because we have become a Christian. Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for a man to remain as he is. 1 Corinthians 7:25-26 Paul here comes to question five, as to whether Christian fathers or guardians should give their daughters in marriage. The fathers and guardians were given such permission, but certain guidelines were suggested (vs. 25-38). Again, Paul has no specific command from the Lord or from the scriptures. Yet, he feels that his direction is Spirit-led and correct for the specific time. The word for “virgins” (Gk. parthenos) has aroused considerable discussion from commentators. Quite a number of them feel that Paul is speaking about both sexes, however, the Greek scholar Vincent feels that he is speaking only about women. He says, “The use of the word by ecclesiastical writers for an unmarried man has no warrant in classical usage, and may have arisen from the misinterpretation of Revelation 14:4, where it is employed adjectivally and metaphorically. In every other case in the New Testament the meaning is unquestionable.” [60] Morris agrees saying, “…the whole tenor of this passage shows that Paul is referring to young women only…” [61] Again, some commentators think Paul is speaking of a sort of “spiritual marriage” where a couple lives together without any sexual interaction. Barclay notes that this was a later custom. [62] Thus, it probably has little or no relevance for the discussion here. We should understand that the decision about a virgin daughter’s marriage was a parental one in much of the ancient world. Comfort remarks, “In their culture, a young woman’s parents usually would make the decision about whether or not their daughter would marry.” [63] In the Roman world particularly, all family decisions rested with the father. He literally held the power of life and death over his children. So, if a father or guardian had made a vow not to give his daughter in marriage, he has the opportunity to release her for marriage. He has the power here to make his own decision. As we come into more difficult times, this passage may have renewed significance for us all. The Islamic radical group ISIS recently rampaged throughout the Middle East. As a result millions of people became uprooted from their homes and countries. Many of these from Iraq belonged to some of the oldest churches in the world. Now, this most ancient Christian community is all but destroyed. We can imagine that in this group of refugees there is little thought about giving a daughter in marriage. Most of these people escaped with only the clothes on their backs and their main thought is simply staying alive. This situation may well express “the present crisis” that Paul deals with in the next verse. The apostle is likely saying that we should not make things worse than they are by our decisions and vows. We should not turn our religion into agony for ourselves and our families. [64] In another sense, we should not make a decision to marry in a crisis time. It is one thing for a man to endure tribulation, but it is quite another thing when his wife and children are involved. It was Francis Bacon (1561-1626) who said, “He that hath wife and children hath given hostages to fortune…” A man alone may prove strong, until his wife and children are being tortured. [65] This very thing was not far removed from the believers of the first century. “Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for a man to remain as he is” (7:26). This one statement seems to control this whole portion of scripture. Barclay says, “It is in many ways a pity that Paul did not begin the chapter with this section because it has the heart of his whole position in it.” [66] The Greek word for the present crisis is anagkē. Pett says that the meaning of this word could be distress, calamity, necessity or compulsion. [67] The real question is that to which Paul is referring here. Commentators have suggested a number of things like a period of severe persecution at that time leading up to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 (Matt. 24:8-21). Perhaps it was due to the famine(s) in the time of Emperor Claudius. Utley tells us that there were three famines during this period that were empire-wide. [68] A number of commentators have tried to tie this distress to that which would precede the coming of the Lord Jesus. Morris says regarding this opinion: “…Paul often refers to Christ’s return, but he does not associate anangke with it. When he uses this word it has meanings like ‘compulsion’ (v. 37), ‘compelled’ (9:16), ‘hardships’ (2 Cor. 6:4), etc…Some pressing constraint lay hard on the Corinthians…When high seas are raging it is no time for changing ships.” [69] “Are you pledged to a woman? Do not seek to be released. Are you free from such a commitment? Do not look for a wife” (7:27). The apostle’s rule of the previous verse still applies as we see. This verse seems like it has to do with betrothals. Smith mentions that the Greek word used here is gynaiki, meaning “woman.” Thus it is not speaking of a wife. He says, “…it seems best to understand Paul to be making a ‘specific recommendation that men not dissolve existing betrothals.’” [70] “But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this” (7:28). Paul is saying to the couple that they have not sinned if they get married. He just warns them that because of the troublesome times, it likely would have been better to have waited. McGee says here, “The sea of matrimony is rough under the most favorable circumstances. He is trying to save them from much trouble.” [71] What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not; 1 Corinthians 7:29 For all of us the time is short – threescore or fourscore years at best. Our lives are short and sometimes our opportunities are short-lived. We must make the most of them while there is time. Obviously, Paul was dealing with a compressed and troublesome time that was either there already or close at hand. Barker and Kohlenberger state, “This is not necessarily a reference to the second coming of Christ, for Paul may have been anticipating severe persecutions and a resulting curtailment of freedom to witness.” [72] So, the apostle is not in any sense describing normal times. Still, all his advice is given in reference to the trouble mentioned in verse 26. Trapp describes the word used for “short” saying, “The time is short [Gr. synestalmenos], contracted and rolled up, as sails used to be by the mariners, when the ship draws nigh to the harbour.” [73] Clearly, God is wrapping things up, and that does not just relate to difficult times but to all our times. Our salvation is nearer than when we first believed (Rom. 13:11). Paul says, “those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep;” (7:30). Our mourning and our joy must always be tempered by the times. We must not get too excited about the things we buy, realizing that they are not really ours. In a real sense we hold them in trust for the saints of God and others in need. Corrie Ten Boom once said, “The measure of a life is not its duration but its donation.” The apostle continues saying, “those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away” (7:31). I remember hearing a woman who was absolutely ecstatic and was gushing on the TV because a new store was opening in her community. How can people get so excited over another “stuff” store when our lives in the West are literally running over with stuff? We must hold the things of this world loosely and carefully. They must not distract us from our main concern, which is the kingdom of God. Paul says that “this world in its present form is passing away.” We need to notice that it is not the world itself that is passing away. The Bible makes clear in several places that the earth is established forever (Psa. 78:69; 93:1; 96:10; &104:5). What Paul is saying is that the present form of the world is passing away. The word for form is the Greek schēma, meaning figure or shape. Robertson sees the word as meaning outward shape. [74] There is a real world which will be totally remade at the coming of Christ. However, there is a world system that will be destroyed in the fires of the last days. John says, “The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever” (1 Jn. 2:17). I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs— how he can please the Lord. 1 Corinthians 7:32 While marriage is wonderful, the married life does burden us all with certain concerns. How can we provide for our wives and children? How can we protect them from the many dangers that surround us, especially in this postmodern age? While these concerns are normal and commendable, they do tend to keep us from concentrating on the Lord and his kingdom. If we are not careful, we can become divided people as we juggle these responsibilities. Susanna Wesley, mother of the famous John and Charles Wesley, was the mother of 19 children in all, nine of whom had died. When the ten remaining children saw mother Wesley throw her apron over her head, they knew that this was mother’s private prayer time and they dared not interrupt her. [75] O that we could have such commitment to the really important things in life today! We remember how Martha chose that which was really important to the seeming neglect of some earthly things (Lk. 10:38-42). “But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world— how he can please his wife— and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world— how she can please her husband” (7:33-34). Morris points out that this is not a problem of worldliness with the married man. He simply must think about the interests of his family. [76] To fail to do this would become a sin in itself (1 Tim. 5:8). In a similar manner, this situation would also apply to a woman. Once married, her devotion is divided and she must care for husband and children. This is only normal and expected, but of course, single persons could concern themselves with serving the Lord rather than all these natural things. No doubt, we can all think of some godly single women who did wonderfully well on the mission field. We are in no way talking about people sinning who are faithful in these natural things. Smith clarifies it saying: “The virgin is no more righteous than the wife, but her consecration is unmodified by family responsibilities.” [77] “I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord” (7:35). Comfort says here: “These were not regulations that the churches had to follow. Instead, this advice came from Paul’s heart, to help the struggling believers at Corinth…” [78] Paul is giving advice that we might have good form in our devotion to the Lord. If anyone is worried that he might not be acting honorably toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if his passions are too strong and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. 1 Corinthians 7:36 This verse through the centuries, has been difficult to interpret. Keener says, “Scholars debate whether this passage addresses the fathers of virgins (see NASB) or their fiancés (see NIV, NRS, TEV); evidence within the text can be read either way.” [79] He continues to say, “Full age: (7:36 – NASB) could mean mid-teens (parental arrangement of marriages allowed couples to wed at a younger age than in our culture)…There is no evidence in this period for unconsummated ‘spiritual engagements,’ which became common in later Christianity…” [80] Smith is certain that Paul is speaking of an engaged couple, and he claims that this view is the dominant one in today’s scholarship. [81] It looks like we will have to leave this question to the discretion of our readers. Should this be speaking of the parent, Morris adds: “Anyone means the parent or guardian of a girl, and acting improperly means not providing for her marriage…To withhold marriage from a girl of marriageable age and anxious to marry would have been to court disaster in first-century Corinth and bring dishonor on both father and daughter.” [82] “But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does better” (7:37-38). Paul is essentially saying that he who marries is right and he who does not marry is also right. It is a personal decision and Paul is not willing to legislate how it should be handled. “A woman is bound to her husband as long as he lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord” (7:39). With these two verses, Paul deals with the last of a series of six questions apparently asked by the Corinthians. The question was probably whether or not a Christian widow should remarry. Rather than being difficult, this question is simple, as Coffman says, “this one contains some of the most instructive teaching in the New Testament, and affords glimpses of the apostolic method which add greatly to one’s faith in the integrity of the apostles.” [83] The widow may remarry, but she must marry another Christian. Clearly, marriage is a bond that lasts until death (Rom. 7:1-3), but with death, this bond is broken. The widow is free to remarry. Comfort thinks that there may have been some teaching in the ancient world that forbade such a marriage. [84] We do know that in India there is the practice of Sati, where the widow is burned on the deceased husband’s funeral pyre. This was apparently a pagan practice even before the coming of Christ. [85] In Christianity, the widow is free to remarry but she must marry a Christian. As we have seen, this rule applies to all believers who marry. This is a serious command that is taken lightly by many Christians today. Coffman warns, “It is a rare and exceptional thing indeed that mixed marriages between Christians and unbelievers can produce anything but sorrow.” [86] Barclay adds: “The highest love comes when two people love each other and their love is sanctified by a common love of Christ. For then they not only live together but also pray together; and life and love combine to be one continual act of worship to God.” [87] “In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is— and I think that I too have the Spirit of God” (7:40). Again, Paul gives his judgment, as he considered the seriousness of the times that had come upon them. Clearly, there is nothing morally higher about celibacy, [88] but it is Paul’s advice because of the perilous times. 1. D. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1970), p. 1060. 2. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1239. 3. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 7:1. Credit goes to Coffman for numbering the various questions that were asked of Paul. 4. Edwin Hatch, The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages Upon the Christian Church (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, republished 1995), p. 165. Coffman citing Clarke adds: “… Many of the Greek philosophers, such as Menander, held marriage to be ‘an evil, but a necessary evil.’” (Coffman v. 7:1). 5. Ibid., p. 167. 6. Ibid. 7. Ben Shapiro, Brainwashed, How Universities Indoctrinate America’s Youth (Nashville: WND Books, 2004), p. 54. 8. Nathan Harden, Sex and God at Yale, Porn, Political Correctness, and a Good Education Gone Bad (NY: St. Martin’s Press, 2012), p. 286. 9. Ibid., p. 231. 10. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 105. 11. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, vs. 7:3-7. 12. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 106. 13. Cited in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 7:3. 14. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 472. 15. Roberts, et. al., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 146. 16. Ibid., p. 503. 17. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 106. 18. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, vs. 7:1-9. 19. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 106. 20. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 67. 21. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 107. Smith adds:” Paul’s teaching on abstinence from marital relations is quite similar to that of rabbinic Judaism…Shammai says… ‘for two weeks’…Hillel says, ‘For one week’…the Testament of Napthali 8:8 (second century BC): ‘There is a time for having intercourse with one’s wife, and a time to abstain for the purposes of prayer.’” (Smith, p. 254). 22. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 7:6. 23. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 68. 24. Quoted in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 7:7. 25. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 26. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 107. 27. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 68. 28. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 255. 29. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 7:9. 30. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 471. 31. William Barclay, The Letter to the Romans, The New Daily Study Bible (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1975, 2002), p. 37. 32. Charles Colson with Ellen Santilli Vaughn, The Body: being a light in the darkness (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1992), p. 304. 33. Roberts, et. al., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 167. 34. Ibid., Vol. 3, p. 443. 35. Ibid., Vol. 5, p. 553. 36. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, vs. 7:12-14. 37. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 472. 38. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, vs. 7:12-17. 39. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 69. 40. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 99. 41. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 42. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 627. Clarke adds: “Tertullian …among the Romans. ‘A child,’ says he, ‘from its very conception, was dedicated to the idols and demons they worshipped. While pregnant, the mother had her body swathed round with bandages, prepared with idolatrous rites. The embryo they conceived to be under the inspection of the goddess Alemona, who nourished it in the womb. Nona and Decima took care that it should be born in the ninth or tenth month. Partula adjusted every thing relative to the labor; and Lucina ushered it into the light. During the week preceding the birth a table was spread for Juno; and on the last day certain persons were called together to mark the moment on which the Parcae, or Fates, had fixed its destiny. The first step the child set on the earth was consecrated to the goddess Statina; and, finally, some of the hair was cut off, or the whole head shaven, and the hair offered to some god or goddess through some public or private motive of devotion.’ He adds that ‘no child among the heathens was born in a state of purity; and it is not to be wondered at,’ says he, ‘that demons possess them from their youth, seeing they were thus early dedicated to their service.’” (Clarke, v. 7:14). 43. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 69. 44. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 65. 45. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 110. 46. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 257. 47. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 65. 48. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 7:15. 49. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 7:16. 50. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 111. 51. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 258. “This verb is a medical term meaning ‘to pull the foreskin over the end of the penis’… The term seems to be used by Paul to describe the surgical procedure known as epispasm. This procedure, which reconstructed the foreskin by making a long incision, drawing the loosened skin on the penis over the glans or head of the penis…This procedure was used form the time of Antiochus (IV) Epiphanes…by Jews who wished (or who were coerced under the threat of persecution) to adopt the Greek way of life and who wanted to avoid being recognized as Jews (public baths and athletic contests performed naked were an integral part of Greek life, as was a strong disdain for circumcision, which was viewed as mutilations…2 Macc. 4:7-17 for the background.” 52. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 53. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 258. 54. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 7:21. 55. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 468. 56. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 7:21. 57. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 259. 58. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 68. 59. Ibid. 60. Vincent, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament, v. 7:25. 61. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 114. Bruce adds: “in five out of six occurrences the noun parthenos in verses 25-38 it is plainly feminine (as the form of the definite article shows)….a particular category of unmarried woman is denoted by parthenos, one (according to RSV of verses 36, 37, 38) who is betrothed but not yet married…whether a betrothed girl should proceed to marriage in the normal way or remain unmarried – in a state of permanent betrothal, so to speak.” (Bruce, p. 73). 62. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 63. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 105. 64. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 65. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, vs. 7:25-28. 66. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 67. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 68. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 7:66. 69. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 115. 70. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 261. 71. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 86. 72. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 629. 73. Trapp, John, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete 74. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 7:31. 75. Joni Eareckson Tada, v. 7:32: http://www.joniandfriends.org/blog/susanna-wesley/ 76. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 117. 77. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 263. 78. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 109. 79. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 469. 80. Ibid. 81. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 264. 82. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 118. 83. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, vs. 7:39-40. 84. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 110. 85. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice) 86. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, vs. 7:39. 87. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 88. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 121. Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that “We all possess knowledge.” But knowledge puffs up while love builds up. 1 Corinthians 8:1 The apostle will get into the subject of food sacrificed to idols in verse 4. However, as he begins this chapter, he deals first with the subject of knowledge, which we might label as “false knowledge.” The Greeks were quite proud of their knowledge, and their philosophers at Athens spent a lot of time discussing the latest ideas (Acts 17:21). The statement, “we all possess knowledge” may well have been something the Corinthians were repeating among themselves. [1] Paul is intent in letting some of the hot air out of their balloons. The apostle makes clear that knowledge alone is never a safe thing. After all, it was knowledge that Eve was seeking in the Garden, and that brought about the fall of humanity (Gen. 3:2-7). Knowledge makes people proud and condescending toward others. It makes them hard and harsh in their dealings. It puffs people up and gets them all out of shape. Paul wants to make clear that knowledge must always be tempered by love. Knowledge puffs up but love builds up. Long ago Clement of Alexandria said: Love builds up. It moves in the realm of truth, not of opinion.” [2] Comfort says it simply, “Love outranks knowledge.” [3] The Greek verb used for “builds up” is oikodomeō. The plain and simple meaning of this word is to build, or to build a house. [4] It means to edify or to build up the household of Christ. It means to strengthen one another rather than to weaken and tear down. “Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know” (8:2). The Corinthians should have known this. Their great philosopher Socrates had said it hundreds of years before, “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” [5] Our knowledge is infinitesimally small when compared to the vast knowledge of God. When we realize this, we will no longer be proud, but will be brought down to the place of deepest humility. “But whoever loves God is known by God” (8:3). The really important thing in true religion is not so much that we know God but that God knows us (Gal. 4:9; 2 Tim. 2:19). [6] This can only happen if we know Jesus on a personal basis (Matt. 11:27). It is Jesus, the Son of God, who introduces us to the Father. So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” 1 Corinthians. 8:4 As we look at this subject, we need to understand something about the background. Idols and idol temples were everywhere in the ancient world. Animal sacrifices were constantly being made to these idols. “In Corinth itself, there were no less than sixteen temples and shrines, some of which had dining rooms in them.” [7] So, we realize that there was always an abundant supply of meat available around the temples. There were public sacrifices and personal or private sacrifices. In the case of the private sacrifice, the animal was divided into three parts. A token part was burned on the altar; then the ministering priest got his share. Afterward, the worshipper received the rest of the meat. With his portion, the worshipper often gave a banquet for family and friends. These feasts could be in the temple itself or in the house of the worshipper. Barclay relates to us one of the ancient invitations to such an event. It reads: “Antonius, son of Ptolemaeus, invites you to dine with him at the table of our Lord Serapis [this was the name of the idol].” [8] Obviously, the priesthood of these idol temples received an excessive amount of quality meats, because people offered up their best animals to their gods. If the priest could not use all the meat he would send his portion to the nearby marketplace. [9] Thus, the best and probably the cheapest meats were available in the markets around the pagan temples. Among the Christians, the obvious question arose as to whether or not it was permitted for them to buy such meat and further, if it was permissible for them to join in banquets given at the idol temples or in homes of pagan worshippers. All this presented quite a social problem for the Christians. No doubt, many civic events, things like weddings, community gatherings, and banquets of all types happened at the idol temples. The pagan temples were thus like civic centers in ancient times. If Christians could not join in these events they were thereby cut off from most community activities. They might not even be able to attend some wedding receptions of family and friends. They might miss out on meetings of their trade guilds and so forth. Kretzmann sums it up saying, “the entire public and social life of the people of Corinth and of the citizens of all the large cities in those days was permeated with, and to some extent governed by, the worship of idols.” [10] To make matters worse, while the elite ate meat often, poorer people usually ate meat only when they attended a pagan festival. [11] So, how could this serious social problem be resolved? Paul says, “An idol is nothing at all.” If we are trying to attain knowledge, this is one thing we can know for sure. The Jewish people well knew this and they repeated it daily in what is called the Shema. This is the passage from Deuteronomy 6:4, and it reads in Hebrew, “Sh’mah Yisrael Adonai Elohenu Adonai echad” – “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.” The Jewish people knew that there was only one God. All other so-called gods were idols. They were simply “nothings.” There was no need whatever to fear them. “For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live” (8:5-6). We see here that there were many so-called gods. It was reckoned by the Greek poet Hesiod that there were 30,000 of them. [12] Paul concedes here that while these many idols were nothing, there was a spiritual power of evil that works in the world and in the idols (Eph. 6:12). Nevertheless, these spiritual powers are all subject and subordinate to the true God. [13] This verse makes clear that the Father and Son are intricately related and are one (cf. Rom. 9:5; Eph. 4:5; 1 Tim. 2:5; Tit. 2:13; Heb. 2:10). Jesus was also the Father’s agent in the creation of the world and universe (cf. Jn. 1:3; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:2). Morris says here, “…clearly he is including the Lord Jesus within that one Godhead…” [14] But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 1 Corinthians 8:7 It is interesting that Paul refers to those who are offended with sacrificial food as “weak.” He does the same in the similar passage of Romans 14. In this Romans chapter Paul again identifies those who are offended as “weak,” and he places himself with the “strong,” or those who can eat anything. Paul says in this chapter, “I am convinced, being fully persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for that person it is unclean” (Rom. 14:14). He also says: “For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit…” (Rom. 14:17). He adds in this chapter that just because we are strong we have no right to offend the weaker brother or sister (14:10, 19-21). This is a serious matter for Paul and he actually continues this discussion off and on through the following chapters, all the way through 1 Corinthians 11:1. He teaches us that the individual conscience is very important and we must not offend the conscience of the weaker brother or sister. Coffman says, “When a man violates his conscience, he assaults the central monitor of his spiritual life; and regardless of whether or not the conscience is properly instructed, the violation of it is a spiritual disaster.” [15] In a sense, our great freedom ends precisely at the other person’s weak conscience (cf. 8:12-13). “But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do” (8:8). Comfort says: “Food is neutral – neither good nor evil, regardless of whether or not it has been sacrificed in a pagan temple to an idol…food has nothing to do with one’s relationship with God.” [16] Of course, this is a big change from the Old Covenant, where food was extremely important. Then, food was used for symbols, but today these symbols are fulfilled and have passed away into the reality of Jesus Christ. It seems at first sight that Paul’s instructions here conflict with the decision of the Jerusalem Council, around AD 50. The instruction of this council regarding food sacrificed to idols is seen in Acts 15:29. The council had said simply, “You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols…” Guzik says: “Paul’s discussion of the issue here does not contradict what the Jerusalem Council decided in Acts 15. Instead, it shows that the Council’s decision was not intended to regulate all the church all the time; it was a temporary arrangement, meant to advance the cause of the gospel among the Jews of that day…” [17] Actually, there are many intricacies involved in the decision because of Jewish law and it is not likely that we can sort out all these today. It may be that James and the council had in mind eating only in the pagan temples. We may have to wait a while on this issue for our full understanding. Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 1 Corinthians 8:9 Paul has made it crystal clear that idol meat is a “nothing” to the strong Christian. That one can eat it or not eat it, and is none the better or worse. The problem comes when the Christian brother or sister with a weak conscience observes that one eating such meat. The weaker person is then offended in his or her conscience. Clearly, when we do such a thing we become a stumbling block (Gk. proskomma) to the other person. This word means to stumble or strike one’s foot. [18] Barclay says, “What is safe for one man may be quite unsafe for another. It has been said, and it is blessedly true, that God has his own secret stairway into every heart; but it is equally true that the devil has his own secret and subtle stairway into every heart…Therefore, in considering whether we will or will not do anything, we must think not only of its effect on us, but of its effect on others as well.” [19] Today, we no longer have the problem of whether or not to eat meat offered to idols. However, we have a lot of other problems where we can easily offend the conscience of another believer. For instance, in the southern Bible Belt of the US, most Christians do not drink alcoholic beverages. It is absolute taboo to them. This is a local problem and Christians in many other parts of the world think nothing of drinking such beverages in moderation. In Israel, the Jewish people drink wine for many of their celebrations. They even give a taste of wine to their baby boys as they are being circumcised. We know from the Bible that Jesus drank wine (Mk. 14:25) and on one occasion even miraculously produced a very large supply of wine for a wedding celebration (Jn. 2:2-10). Still, if I placed a bottle of wine on the table in the South, I would greatly offend most of those who saw it. Therefore, I will be cautious not to do such a thing. In another one of H.A. Ironside’s stories, he tells of a Christian picnic where some believer offered a Moslem convert a pork sandwich. He politely turned down the offer indicating that he could not eat pork. The believer chided the former Moslem, reminding him that he was now free in Christ from all these food restrictions. The convert assured the Christian that he was aware of his new freedom in Christ, but because of his family he did not eat pork. He knew that the first question his father would ask him was if the infidels had taught him to eat filthy hog meat. He would be able to say, “No, father, no pork has ever passed my lips.” In such a way this Moslem convert could retain admittance to his family circle and share with them the joy he had found in Christ. [20] Jesus once spoke of the seriousness of offending a little one. “Jesus said to his disciples: ‘Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble’” (Lk. 17:1-2). In Israel, there are some very large millstones. Some would weigh hundreds of pounds and would have to be turned by donkeys. We would not want to go swimming with one of those around our necks. This is how serious offences are in the eyes of God. “For if someone with a weak conscience sees you, with all your knowledge, eating in an idol’s temple, won’t that person be emboldened to eat what is sacrificed to idols?” (8:10). Paul seems to be saying that we should tread softly and carefully regarding idol temples. Although it might be permitted for us to go to these places, still it would probably not be beneficial, especially so far as our witness is concerned. Some commentators feel that Christians should not visit the idol temples at all. Clarke asks, “Is it not strange that any professing the knowledge of the true God should even enter one of those temples? And is it not more surprising that any Christian should be found to feast there?” [21] Smith citing O’Connor says, “…Trying to discern whether temple meals were social or whether they involved worship introduces a dichotomy that is likely foreign to the ancient world, where the religious and social were intertwined.” [22] Along this same line, Macknight responds “Paul could not have meant that they had a right to eat of the sacrifices in the idol’s temple.” [23] Farrar adds: “To recline at a banquet in the temple of Poseidon or Aphrodite, especially in such a place as Corinth, was certainly an extravagant assertion of their right to Christian liberty.” [24] Morris says, “…Eating means ‘reclining at table; the man is taking his ease in a place dedicated to an idol.” [25] “So this weak brother or sister, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge” (8:11). The Greek word for destroyed is apollumi. Some commentators feel that this is not speaking of total and eternal punishment. Smith says, “Here Paul does not indicate that ultimate ruin will take place.” [26] Johnson is sure that it refers “to bodily perishing, not eternal perishing.” [27] Nevertheless, perishing bodily, mentally, and even physically is a very high price to pay for our so-called “liberty.” Chrysostom comments sadly, “That whereas Christ died for him, you cannot even lift a finger to help him in the slightest.” [28] When you sin against them in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 1 Corinthians 8:12 Throughout this passage the apostle has been addressing stronger believers and urging them to be concerned about weaker believers. Coffman says, “Whatever is done to the church, even in the person of its weakest and most insignificant members (as men count insignificance), is done to Christ.” [29] After all, together we make up the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:27). We cannot injure a member of the body without injuring the Lord himself. “Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother or sister to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause them to fall” (8:13). Morris says, “The important thing is not his own rights, not his own comfort, but the well-being of the brotherhood…The principle laid down in this chapter is one of great practical importance.” [30] Paul is quite willing to go to extremes to protect others. He is willing to stop eating meat entirely if it is necessary. Paul is by no means through with this subject. After the interlude of chapter 9 he will again take it up in the latter part of chapter 10. He will deal with the problem of buying meat in the open market, meat that may have been sacrificed to idols (10:25-26). He will also deal with the problem of being invited to a friend’s house and served meat that has been sacrificed to idols (10:27-28). Paul will give good, sound, and spiritual solutions to all these problems when he returns to them. 1. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 123. 2. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, pp. 74-75. 3. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 113. 4. G. Abbott-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T. &T. Clark, 1960), p. 312. 5. http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/275648. 6. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 124. Calvin adds: “No learning is commendable that is not dipped in the love of God.” (Calvin, 8:3). 7. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 630. 8. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 9. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 112. Wiersbe adds: There were “two sources of meat in the ancient world: the regular market (where the prices were higher) and the local temples (where meat from the sacrifices was always available).” (Wiersbe, p. 475). 10. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 11. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 470. 12. Trapp, John, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete Commentary, 13. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 631. 14. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 125. 15. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 8:7. Guzik adds here: “Why is their conscience considered weak? Not because their conscience doesn’t work. Indeed, it does work – in fact, it overworks.” (Guzik, v. 8:7). 16. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 116. 17. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 18. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 8:9. 19. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, v. 8:1-13. 20. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 21. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 8:10. 22. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 267. 23. Quoted in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 8:10. 24. Ibid. 25. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 127. 26. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 267. 27. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 8:11. 28. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 78. Comfort adds: “Mature Christians shouldn’t flaunt their freedom…a young Christian addicted to gambling may be damaged by a strong Christian’s freedom to play cards.” (Comfort, p. 119). 29. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 8:12. 30. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 130. Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my work in the Lord? 1 Corinthians 9:1 This chapter seems somewhat disconnected from what has gone before. However, this is only in appearance. When we examine the chapter, we will understand that it is quite closely connected with Paul’s previous arguments. He has just asked the Corinthians to give up some of their privileges, so now he relates to them how he has given up some of his own privileges. [1] Obviously, there were some in Corinth who were sitting in judgment of Paul (9:3). No doubt, these were saying of him, that if Paul were a real apostle he would demand his rights, rather than forgoing them. [2] So, here we find Paul beginning a defense of his apostleship. Later in 2 Corinthians chapters 10-13, he will do this in much more detail. In this chapter, Comfort sees him asking at least sixteen rhetorical questions in a row concerning his apostleship. [3] He first asks, “Am I not free: am I not an apostle?” Paul was certainly one of the freest people in the Bible, and yet, he was willing to give up his freedoms for the sake of the church. He was certainly an apostle. Jesus had sent him to be an apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15). The Greek word apostle (apostolos) simply means one sent out, or a messenger. In a number of scriptures Paul defines his apostleship. In Second Corinthians 12:11, he states that he is not inferior to other apostles. In Galatians 1:15, he claims that he was called from his mother’s womb. In Galatians 1:17, he notes that he belongs to the apostolic band. In Galatians 2:7, 9, we see that the other apostles recognize and accept Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles. The matter of seeing the risen Christ was of utmost importance to an apostle (Acts 1:22; 2:32; 3:15; 4:33). Paul had fulfilled this requirement on the Damascus Road (Acts 9:17; 22:14-15; 1 Cor. 15:6-8). This interesting account is recorded for us in Acts 9:3-18. Paul was not only called to be an apostle, but he was sent out to the Gentiles (Acts 26:15-18; Gal. 1:15-16). Obviously, Paul had accomplished the work of an apostle. The Corinthians themselves were proof of this (2 Cor. 3:2-3). Also, on several occasions in his ministry, Paul had demonstrated the signs of an apostle, as he had worked miracles among the people (e.g. Acts 13:9-12; 20:9-12). “Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me” (9:2-3). The Corinthians were living proof of his apostleship. Paul claims them as a seal (Gk. sphragis) of his apostleship. Seals were often made by engraving a pattern in a stone and then setting the stone in a ring, where it became a mark of authority. The Greeks were known to excel in such crafts. [4] In order to seal an item, the ring was pressed into hot wax, leaving its impression. Barclay enlightens us regarding the purpose of ancient seals. They were used as a final marking of cargoes, such as grain or dates. The containers were closed and sealed to show that the cargo was genuine. Seals were used in many places. For instance, a will was not valid unless it was sealed with seven seals, and each of those seals had to be intact. It was a mark of genuineness. [5] So, some of the Corinthians were sitting in judgment of Paul. The Greek word here is anakrinōis. It is a forensic term and speaks of judges who sat over their courts in judgment. [6] Surely, in his eighteen months at Corinth, Paul had instructed them about Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:1, “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.” Paul continues, asking, “Don’t we have the right to food and drink?” (9:4). We see in the gospels that Jesus sent his men forth without normal provisions. He said, “…the worker is worth his keep” (Matt. 10:10). New Testament apostolic workers were also worthy of their keep. It was really unthinkable that they should not be supplied with the basics of food and drink. Jesus had also said about this: “And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones who is my disciple, truly I tell you, that person will certainly not lose their reward” (Matt. 10:42). Those whom he sent out were to live by the gospel. “Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas?” (9:5). Here, Paul in one breath destroys the papal doctrine regarding celibacy of the clergy. Quite simply, Peter, who was supposed to be the first pope, was a married man. On one occasion Jesus even healed Peter’s mother-in-law (Matt. 8:14-15; Mk. 1:30-31; Lk. 4:38-39). Several of the apostles, as well as the Lord’s brothers, were also married. We know from scripture that Philip the Evangelist had a family, even four daughters who prophesied (Acts 21:9). Early in church history there began to be an undue emphasis on the virginity of Mary. It was determined by the church that Mary had remained a perpetual virgin, and that the other children belonging to the couple were Joseph’s offspring from a former marriage, or else they were cousins. No doubt, this erroneous doctrine arose because of the Greek idea that the body and sex were dirty and unholy things. The wording of this verse has perplexed interpreters. The Greek has two words here, adelphēn and gunaika. The former means a sister and the latter means a wife. Robertson sees this as indicating a wife who is a sister or believer. [7] Thus, the ministers of God have a right to lead around a believing wife. Eusebius, the church historian, tells of Peter’s wife being led away to her execution, while Peter called to her in an encouraging voice, “Oh thou, remember the Lord.” [8] In order to uphold its erroneous doctrine, the church has tried to say that Peter traveled with unmarried women or “sisters” who served him. Obviously, this would have generated a great deal of unwholesome gossip and scandal. Besides that, such a thing was later forbidden by the third canon of the Council of Nice. [9] “Or is it only I and Barnabas who lack the right to not work for a living?” (9:6). We have mentioned before that the Greeks despised manual labor. They considered that it was wholly a thing for slaves. Still, Paul often supported himself by tent-making (Acts 18:3; 20:34; 1 Thess. 2:9). In Hebrew eyes this was a noble thing to do. In Greek eyes it was despicable. Still, the Corinthians were irresponsible, and should not have allowed the great apostle to work for his living. Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink the milk? 1 Corinthians 9:7 Paul now gives some quick examples of workers who can rightfully claim a share of the work. A soldier does not work at his own expense. His salary is provided by the government. The Roman soldier not only got his allotted pay, but the Roman government furnished a goodly supply of food items as well. [10] The next picture is that of a worker in the vineyard. The worker gets to eat some of the grapes. The picture of the vineyard is an ancient one. The prophet Isaiah once spoke of Israel as being the vineyard of the Lord (Isa. 5:1 ff.). The prophets of old were of course workers in that vineyard. This is a simple human analogy. The worker gets to share in eating the grapes. The same is true of the herdsman. He gets to drink milk from the flock. The Greek word for the one tending the flock, or the shepherd, is poimainei. It has a much broader meaning than simply to feed. It also means that the shepherd guards, protects and defends his flock as well. We are reminded of Peter, and the work assigned to him by the Lord. (Jn. 21:15-17). [11] We are also reminded of Jesus who himself is the Good Shepherd (Jn. 10:11, 14). “Do I say this merely on human authority? Doesn’t the Law say the same thing? For it is written in the Law of Moses: ‘Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.’ Is it about oxen that God is concerned?” (9:8-9). Paul is not content to merely cite human, every-day examples. He now cites the Law of God to back up his examples. To clinch his argument, the apostle quotes Deuteronomy 25:4, which commands: “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.” In those early days, oxen were hitched to a turnstile affair with an upright post and revolving arm. As the ox went around it in circles it treaded out the grain. The ox could also pull a threshing sledge, which was made of heavy boards with small stones and other items attached to its bottom. The grain was knocked out of the stalk and husks and was later winnowed in the afternoon breeze. This passage clearly shows God’s concern for animals. The ox that treaded grain was allowed to eat a bite now and then to stave off its hunger. Of course, God is concerned for all living things as he is pictured of supplying them with food in Psalm 104:27-28. The above scripture has profound implications for God’s workers. I remember that years ago in Israel we established a food bank and proceeded to give free food to the new immigrants who were arriving home. At the time we had several volunteer Christian workers manning the bank. The policy of the organization at first did not allow workers to enjoy any of the food. I thought this was unfair, based on the Deuteronomy 25 verse, so I took it up with the director. He agreed, and soon our workers were well fed. I remember how it felt so good and so biblical to do such a thing. The whole Bible expresses the Creator’s tender care for all living creatures (cf. Psa. 36:6; Matt.10:29). We are to mimic God in this regard. We read in Proverbs 12:10, “The righteous care for the needs of their animals, but the kindest acts of the wicked are cruel.” We see here in Corinthians that the righteous are to exercise a similar care for Christian workers in their midst. They thus have a biblical obligation to care for Paul. “Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he? Yes, this was written for us, because whoever plows and threshes should be able to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest” (9:10). Kretzmann, no doubt citing Luther, says that God did not write this for oxen, because they couldn’t read. [12] Thus, it was written for us. In the early First Century, Christian workers were able to eat of the offerings of the people much like the priests did in the Old Testament. We should however be aware that the salaried pastor or worker was unknown in the early church. Viola and Barna state: “As far as clergy salaries go, ministers were unsalaried for the first three centuries. But when Constantine appeared, he instituted the practice of paying a fixed salary to the clergy from church funds and municipal and imperial treasuries….” [13] “If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?” (9:11). Those who sow spiritual seed must be able to receive a natural harvest. One reason that many churches are financially weak today is because Christians are spreading their gifts among several para-church organizations as well as their church. This is not always a good thing, for often some of these organizations are quite unworthy of support. We should be careful to give to those who are feeding us spiritually. “Give where you are fed” would be a good motto for us all. Paul speaks of this principle in Romans 15:27, “For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings.” We Gentiles have a huge, unpaid debt to the Jewish people. They have handed us our Messiah, our Bible and our salvation. When we served in Israel, we helped distribute millions of dollars in supplies to new immigrants, and our work was based on this very verse. The supplies were provided by Christians around the world. So far in Christian history, the Jewish people have been poorly compensated by the church for all she has received from them. “If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more? But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ” (9:12). We remember that in the Corinthian church there was a “Peter faction” (1 Cor. 1:12). We do not know that Peter himself was ever in Corinth, but he may have been receiving offerings from the church. It is likely that Apollos, who succeeded Paul at Corinth, also received offerings. [14] Perhaps this is what Paul is referring to here. Peter was a very important foundation stone in the church, and Apollos was an important worker, but Paul had actually founded the church at Corinth. “Don’t you know that those who serve in the temple get their food from the temple, and that those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar?” (9:13). The priests had the privilege of eating from the altar (cf. Lev. 7:6; Num. 18:8-24; Deut. 18:1). Barclay enlightens us as to exactly what the priests received in biblical times. Of the meat offering (grain or dough offering), a good portion belonged to the priests. From the peace offering the priests received the breast and right shoulder. There were first-fruit offerings of all kinds, consisting of wheat, barley, figs, pomegranates, olive oil, honey, etc. Much of these went to the priests. Then there were the regular tithes and other offerings. The tithe belonged to the Levites but the priests received a tithe of the tithes. While the average Israelite seldom ate meat the priests seemed to have had their fill. [15] “In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel” (9:14). Now, Paul leaves the Corinthians to make the application to their own situation in regard to his apostleship. Some commentators feel that Paul is quoting an unpublished saying of Jesus. Others feel that he is basing this statement on Jesus’ words in Luke 10:7 which read: “…the worker deserves his wages…” [16] But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me, for I would rather die than allow anyone to deprive me of this boast. 1 Corinthians. 9:15 Barclay says, “In this passage there is a kind of outline of Paul’s whole conception of his ministry….He must regard himself as a man whose primary duty is not to help himself but whose privilege is to serve others for God’s sake.” [17] We should be clear that Paul did sometimes accept gifts from churches (e.g. Phil. 4:14-19). However, he must have felt that the Corinthians were much too immature for him to accept their gifts. Apparently, he did not wish to have them question his motives (2 Cor. 12:17-18). Paul reminds us a lot of Abraham, who was determined to receive nothing of the Gentiles, lest they might claim to have made him rich (Gen. 14:22-23). [18] “For when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, since I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me” (9:16-17). Paul was compelled by the Spirit to preach the gospel. On one occasion the Spirit changed his direction and in the night he saw a vision of a man from Macedonia begging him to come over to what is now Europe. Paul was thus compelled to take the gospel to Macedonia and on to Greece, even to Corinth (Acts 16:7, 19). Comfort says here: “Paul’s admission offers a clue to discovering our spiritual gifts. What do you find yourself doing over and over? In what very specific way do you have a habit of serving others and enjoying it?” [19] This might be a clue to our gifts and calling. “What then is my reward? Just this: that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make full use of my rights as a preacher of the gospel” (9:18). It seems that Paul took great delight in preaching the gospel without charge. What a blessed example he has set for us all! George Müller, who was born in 1805, for many years directed the Ashley Down orphanage in Bristol, England. In his career he cared for over 10,000 children. But Müller ran his orphanage solely by faith in God. He would have considered the whole enterprise a failure if the children ever lacked sufficient clothing and food. On many occasions that food was supplied miraculously, and in the nick of time. In one instance there was absolutely no food for his 300 children. Müller asked that they all sit down at their empty plates. He then prayed to the Lord for their daily food. Immediately, there was a knock on the door. It was the baker, who could not sleep the night before from thinking about the children. He had arisen early and baked three batches of bread, just enough for breakfast. Soon there was another knock at the door. It was the milkman, whose cart had broken down nearby. Knowing the milk would quickly spoil, he asked if Müller could use the ten large cans of milk. That was also just enough for his 300 thirsty children. [20] Over the years many Christian workers, even those working in foreign lands, have ministered using the principles of George Müller. In Israel, we met a number of ministers going out to foreign countries and using Müller’s principle of depending only on God. There were also several workers ministering in Israel who looked only to the Lord for their provision. They were not disappointed, and what a blessing they were! Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 1 Corinthians 9:19 The reformer, Martin Luther, summed up the Christian duty in these words: “A Christian man is a most free lord of all, subject to none. A Christian man is a most dutiful servant of all, subject to all.” [21] Of course, this concept was at the heart of Jesus’ ministry. In the Book of Isaiah he was long before prophesied to be the Servant of Israel (Isa. 49:5-6; 53:11). We read of him in Mark 10:45: “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” No doubt, we all remember how Jesus girded himself and washed the disciple’s feet just before his crucifixion (Jn. 13:5-10). Paul was intent on following the Master’s great example. “To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law” (9:20). We remember how in Acts 16:3, Paul circumcised young Timothy. He did it so that Timothy could work in the midst of Jews and not be an offense. However, Paul really believed that circumcision had become a thing of the heart, not of the flesh (Rom. 2:29). We know that Paul, at the instruction of James and the elders, went to the temple and joined in purification rites with four others who had taken vows. Paul even paid their way. He did it so that the Jews of Jerusalem would not see him as an offense (Acts 21:22-24). “To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law” (9:21). We must never think that Paul was opposed to the law or without law (Gk. anomos). We remember how Jeremiah the prophet had spoken many centuries before: “‘This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,’ declares the LORD. ‘I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people’” (Jer. 31:33). Paul had the law written on his heart by the Holy Spirit. He strictly held to the Law of Christ (Gal. 6:2). The law of the Spirit had set him free from the law of sin and death (Rom. 8:2). Most often, Paul preached in the Jewish synagogues throughout the Mediterranean world. However, occasionally he preached strictly to Gentiles. His sermon in Athens was a masterpiece of conforming himself to the Greek way of thinking in order that he could win a few. He won some indeed, as Acts 17:34 tells us. “To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings” (9:22-23). Bruce remarks about this statement saying, “…today when a religious leader is said to be all things to all men, it is more likely to be in blame than in praise.” [22] However, Paul’s purpose was pure. We see that purpose revealed in his teaching about meats in the previous chapter. Paul was willing to give up eating meat if doing so would be a stumbling block for those weak in conscience. Comfort formulates some sensible rules for not offending others. He says: Paul was willing to go to great lengths to meet people where they were…. find common ground with others; avoid a know-it-all attitude; make others feel accepted; be sensitive to others; their needs and concerns; and look for opportunities to tell about Christ.” [23] This is what the gospel is all about. This is sharing in its blessings and allowing others to do so. Some might misunderstand Paul’s desire to “save some.” Obviously, neither Paul nor anyone else could by themselves save a soul. This was merely a figure of speech. Saving is the business of God. We can help deliver a new birth but we cannot in any way cause the birth. Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. 1 Corinthians 9:24 Paul was quite fond of athletics and used the picture many times in his writing (cf. Gal. 2:2; Phil. 2:16; 3:14; Col. 4:12; 1 Tim. 6:12; 2 Tim. 2:5; 4:7). The Greek contests gave Paul plenty of opportunities to use athletic imagery to convey biblical truth. The Olympic games were held every four years and the Isthmian, or Corinthian games every two years. The Isthmian games were second only to the Olympics. All the games took much preparation. Candidates had to take an oath that they had been ten months in training; that they had violated none of the requirements; that they had denied themselves wine and pleasant foods; and that they had undergone rigorous discipline and training. [24] The contests, which consisted primarily of racing, boxing and wrestling, were attended by people from all over Greece as well as from nearby countries. Large throngs viewed the contests (cf. Heb. 12:1). For the winners, a crown of pine, parsley or wild celery was awarded. [25] Only one person could win each contest. How different is the Christian race where many people can win and where the crown is not one that fades away. “Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last, but we do it to get a crown that will last forever” (9:25). Clarke cites some lines of the Roman poet Horace (65 – 8 BC) which read: A youth who hopes the Olympic prize to gain, All arts must try, and every toil sustain; Th’ extremes of heat and cold must often prove; And shun the weakening joys of wine and love. [26] These ancient athletes trained themselves relentlessly only for the sake of a perishable crown, but we Christians pursue a crown that will last forever (2 Tim. 4:8; 1 Pet. 5:4). This is the crown of righteousness of which the Bible speaks. It is the crown of life (Rev. 2:10). “Therefore I do not run like someone running aimlessly; I do not fight like a boxer beating the air” (9:26). In Paul’s Christian life he did not run aimlessly. He ran with his eyes on the goal and that alone. He did not fight (Gk. pukteuō) like one beating the air. Some commentators see this as shadow-boxing, but more than likely it speaks of missing punches or fighting with uncertainty. [27] Keener says, “Boxing was one of the major competitions at Greek games; boxers wore leather gloves covering most of the forearm except the fingers, and boxing was a violent sport. Shadowboxing or ‘beating the air: was insufficient preparation for a boxing competition; a boxer had to discipline his body better than that to win.’” [28] “No, I strike a blow to my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize” (9:27). Paul was tough on his own body always exercising discipline. However, he knew that in the end bodily exercise only helped a little. It was spiritual exercise which was of most importance (1 Tim. 4:8). The race or contest for Paul was always a spiritual one and he was concerned that in the end he might be disqualified. The Greek word is adokimos, and it means rejected after testing or reprobate. [29] The famous preacher Chrysostom remarks: “If Paul, who had taught so many, was afraid of being rejected at the end, what can we say?” [30] 1. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 2. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 83. 3. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 121. 4. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 9:2. 5. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 6. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 9:3. 7. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 9:5. 8. Eusebius Pamphilus, The Ecclesiastical History, Popular Edition (Grand Rapids, Baker Book House, reprinted 1976), pp. 135-136. 9. Citing Farrar in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 9:4. 10. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 9:7. Bray adds, citing Chrysostom: “The apostleship was much more dangerous than being a soldier. For their warfare was not just with men but with demons as well.” (Bray, p. 82). 11. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 9:7. 12. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 13. Frank Viola &George Barna, Pagan Christianity; Exploring The Roots of Our Church Practices (Tyndale House Publishers, 2002, 2008), p. 178. 14. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 125. 15. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study “The priests were a byword. While the ordinary Jewish family ate meat at the most once a week the priests suffered from an occupational disease consequent on eating too much meat. Their privileges, the luxury of their lives, their rapacity were notorious; Paul knew all about this. He knew how they used religion as a means to grow fat; and he was determined that he would go to the other extreme and take nothing.” 16. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 9:14. 17. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 18. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 9:15. 19. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 127. 20. http://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/church-history-for-kids/george-mueller-orphanages-built-by-prayer-11634869.html 21. Quoted in Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 86. 22. Ibid., p. 88. 23. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 130. 24. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 9:24. 25. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 89. 26. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 9:25. 27. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 9:26. 28. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 472. 29. Abbot-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 10. 30. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 89. For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. 1 Corinthians 10:1 The expression “I do not want you to be ignorant,” was a favorite literary technique of Paul. He used it in several places (cf. Rom. 1:13; 11:25; 1 Cor. 10:1; 12:1; 2 Cor. 1:8; 1 Thess. 4:13). McGee says, “When Paul writes that, you can be sure that the brethren were ignorant or unaware of something he is going to explain to them…” [1] We need to realize that the apostle here is continuing right on with the subject he began in chapter 8, that is, how we should deal with idolatry and idolatrous sacrifices. He will continue on with this subject into the first verse of chapter 11. It is important here that Paul aligns us with our ancestors or fathers of the faith. Abraham was not just the father of Israel, but he is now the father of all who believe in Jesus (Rom. 4:16). Guthrie says, “The expression ‘our fathers’ points to the continuation of the church of God from its Old Testament foundations.” [2] In Romans 11:17, Paul carefully illustrates that we Christians are now a part of the ancient olive tree of Israel. In Ephesians 2:11 through 3:13, he makes the mystery known, that Gentile believers are becoming joined with Israel as the two will make up God’s new creation. [3] The teaching here is rich in its symbolism and has numerous spiritual implications for us all. Paul tells us that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. Pfeiffer and Harrison refer to this as their “prolonged supernatural guidance” (cf. Ex 13:21-22; 14:19). [4] Let us try to understand this. Every day on their forty-year journey, the people of Israel were protected and guided by a supernatural cloud, as noted in Exodus 13:21-22. Just think of it! There was never a day that the average Israelite could not look up and see the presence of God, or the Shekinah glory of God. There was never a night that he could not peek out of his tent and see the pillar of fire. In all her history, Israel never again experienced the presence of God to such an extent. Then, there was the matter of passing through the sea. We remember how the sea opened that night and Israel passed through safely. When Pharaoh and his army tried to follow, they were met with something like twin tidal waves coming from opposite directions. They were hit so hard that chariots and horses actually flew through the air and into their burial at sea (Exo. 15:1). What amazing and astounding events! How could Israel ever forget such miraculous interventions by the Almighty God? Yet, they did, and it didn’t take them long. Soon they were dancing around an idol that Aaron had made for them. Keener comments on Paul’s words saying: “He parallels the experience of salvation in the first exodus and salvation in Jesus to show that salvation does not render one invulnerable to falling.” [5] “They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea” (10:2). We see here that Israel had a baptism that was very much a pattern and type of Christian baptism to come centuries later. There are some commentators who try to make this metaphor “walk on all fours” so to speak. They try to say that the Israelites got wet in the cloud and sprinkled from the raging sea, but there is no proof of this. Bruce remarks that they did not come into contact with either of these things. [6] McGee, in his folksy down-to-earth manner, describes the scene in more detail: “Actually they did not get wet at all!…they went through the sea on dry ground….The folk who really got wet were the Egyptians…So obviously when it says they were baptized unto Moses, he is not talking about water…Well, it simply means that they were identified with Moses…” [7] “They all ate the same spiritual food” (10:3). It appears that the Israelites had an all-around spiritual experience when they journeyed from Egypt to Canaan. Even their food was provided – spiritual food at that (Exo. 16:4, 14). Psalm 78:25 calls it the “bread of angels.” Their meals were thus provided supernaturally for the next forty years. This was a clear type of the true bread from heaven, which is Jesus Christ (Jn. 6:31, 48). Again, it was a type or shadow of the sacrament of his body. The Corinthians were partaking of that sacrament (the Lord’s Supper), and no doubt were expecting that it would protect them, like some sort of talisman. Of course, that did not even happen for the Israelites, as they soon fell into idolatry. Trapp says of them, “They fed upon sacraments, and yet died in God’s displeasure.” [8] The Israelites ate spiritual food, “and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ” (10:4). Water from the rock is mentioned on two separate accounts in scripture, one at the beginning of their journey (Exo. 17:1-9) and the other near the end (Num. 20:1ff.). Several commentators tell of a Jewish legend, that the rock, or else a stream from the rock, followed Israel throughout their journey. [9] We now know that this legend was true and that the rock was Christ himself, Israel’s Messiah in his pre-incarnate form. On one occasion, the Lord instructed Moses to speak to the rock. Instead, he struck the rock and water came out. For this transgression Moses was not allowed to lead the people into the land of promise (Num. 20:7-12). We cannot miss the fact that in the Bible God is described as the rock (Gen. 49:24; Deut. 32:15; Isa. 26:4). It is clear that Paul assigns to Christ the very title used of God himself. [10] In 1 Peter 2:4, Jesus is even called “the living Stone.” Despite the fact that the rock followed them, providing spiritual drink, and despite the fact that they feasted for forty years on spiritual food, the people did not make it into the land of promise. The Corinthians were feeding on spiritual food and drink (symbolized by the Eucharist), yet, Paul paints a foreboding picture for them if they continued to hang out around idol temples. “Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered in the wilderness” (10:5). Guzik calls this verse “a hard-hitting understatement.” [11] God was not pleased with almost all of them. Only Joshua and Caleb made it to the Promised Land (Num. 14:28-30; 26:65; Deut. 1:34-39). That is not very good odds – two out of two million. They made it by faith. Forty years after the exodus began the youth of Israel also made it into the land under Joshua’s leadership. They never saw the great miracles witnessed by their fathers. Rather, they entered the land by simple faith. God was not pleased with the others. Their bodies were scattered in the desert. The Greek word is katestrōthēsan. Utley says: “‘…they were laid low in the wilderness.’ This word implies their bones were scattered along the desert route (cf. Num. 14:16).” [12] Here we almost get the picture of their bleached bones scattered along the way. They had become the castaways of God. Now, we cannot assume by these pictures that all these throngs of people missed out on the eternal kingdom of God. They missed out on his natural promises for sure. But we must remember in this crowd was the great Moses himself, as well as Aaron and Miriam. There were no doubt many others who had valiantly stood for truth, but who were not able to enter into the land for one reason or another. So, how does all this apply to the Corinthians? Morris says, “It may be that some of the Corinthians felt that their baptism and their use of Holy Communion guaranteed their final salvation, no matter what they did.” [13] Smith adds: “Such a magical view of the Christian ordinances of baptism and the Lord’s Supper plus an inadequate appreciation of idolatry’s dangers apparently led many of the ‘strong’ or ‘knowledgeable’ Corinthians (cf. 8:1-4, 7, 10-11) to flirt with idolatry.” [14] Some Christians today cling to the “once saved always saved” by-words. While this is true from God’s perspective, we can never take salvation for granted and cease our striving. Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did. 1 Corinthians 10:6 We see here how chosen people, even God’s very own folks, can sometimes get themselves in awful messes. The Israelites, miraculously delivered from Egypt and miraculously cared for by God, began to lust after evil things. They first longed for the fleshpots of Egypt (Exo. 16:3). They loathed the miraculous manna and lusted for meat (Num.11:4-6). Then they began to get tangled up with idolatry (Exo. 32:1-6; Num. 25:1-3). As a result of their idolatry, they immediately fell into adultery and lewd sexual acts (Exo. 32:6, 19). Many died as a result of God’s wrath. Meyer remarks: “The great lesson is human failure under the most promising circumstances. Here were people who had been brought out of the most terrible hardships and perils, who were under the greatest obligations to God, but who, in the hour of temptation, absolutely failed him…” [15] The Corinthians needed to take heed of their example. Likewise, we need to take heed of it, lest we presume upon the grace of God. It is important that we do not miss this message. Paul says that the Israelites were examples (Gk. tupoi) for the Corinthians and for us. This word speaks of an example we should imitate (1 Pet. 5:3; 1 Tim. 4:12) or an example to be avoided, as in this case. It can also speak of type in a doctrinal sense as well (Rom. 5:14; Heb. 9:24). [16] Coffman says: “The blunt meaning here is that Christians should not suppose that their having been baptized into Christ and having been made partakers of the Lord’s table, nor the fact of their sharing high privileges of spiritual life in God’s kingdom, could endow them with any immunity to sin, a conceit which it seems some of the Corinthians had.” [17] “Do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written: ‘The people sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry’” (10:7). We may think we are far removed from idolatry today. After all, who would bow down to a block of wood, a carved stone or a piece of metal? Our idols are just more sophisticated today. They are sometimes still made of wood, stone and metal though, as we bow down to our expensive houses, fancy automobiles and other paraphernalia. But many other things today fall into the category of idols. Tim Challies, in his book The Next Story, Life and Faith after The Digital Explosion says, “There is an unmistakable connection between technology and idolatry.” [18] Today some of the most serious idolatry is the making of God in the image of man – of ourselves. There is the sad story of one Sheila Larson. She was a young nurse who described her faith as “Sheilaism.” She said, “I believe in God. I’m not a religious fanatic. I can’t remember the last time I went to church. My faith has carried me a long way. It’s Sheilaism. Just my own little voice.” [19] We can’t ignore the idolatry of philosophy that has made such a wreck out of our society. Patrick Glynn says, “The great error of the Enlightenment – for which the worst horrors of modern history are themselves the evidence – was the idolatry of reason, the belief that reason could replace God.” [20] The children of Israel had their problem with idolatry and so did the Corinthians. The Israelites made for themselves a golden calf (Ex. 32:1-6), no doubt patterned after the popular Apis bull of Egypt. Probably, the idea was to make some image representing the true God, but that somehow never works out. Calvin says, “Dancing comes after a full diet.” He says, that the people, “having observed their sacred banquet, rose up to celebrate the games, that nothing might be wanting in honor of the idol…” [21] This was one of the sorriest affairs that ever happened to Israel. Keener reports how the later rabbis looked upon this episode as one of the most embarrassing in Israel’s history. [22] Obviously, for the Corinthians, the problem was not so simple as merely eating meat that had been offered to idols, which they later bought in the market. The real problem with the Corinthians was idolatry itself. [23] “We should not commit sexual immorality, as some of them did— and in one day twenty-three thousand of them died” (10:8). The Israelites were not done with idolatry and sexual immorality. In Numbers 25:1-9, they were lured by the Midianites and Moabites into the worship of the Baal of Peor, followed by gross immorality. As we have mentioned, ancient idolatry usually included immorality and there was no shortage of “holy” temple prostitutes to carry this out. As a result of this open and flagrant idolatry God destroyed 24,000 of the Israelites. Corinth had its share of idol temples and the accompanying sexual sin. There is an obvious discrepancy in the 23,000 Paul mentions and the 24,000 stated in the Hebrew text of Numbers 25:9. This has been explained in several ways. Paul could be referring to those slain by the plague the one day, while the Numbers 25:9 reference could be to others who died from the effects. [24] The extra thousand may have been slain by Phinehas and companions as they dealt with those who were chief in this idolatrous rampage. [25] These warnings are surely for us in our sex-crazed 21st Century. “We should not test Christ, as some of them did— and were killed by snakes” (10:9). This account is reflected in Numbers 21:4-9. The people had complained because there was no water and because they detested the heavenly food. God judged them by sending venomous snakes among them. As a result, many Israelites died. This episode had a good ending though. God allowed Moses to make a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. All those bitten were healed when they looked upon the bronze serpent. Through Christian history this has always been an image of Jesus who was also put up on a pole. All who look to him are healed of their sin and sickness. “And do not grumble, as some of them did— and were killed by the destroying angel.” (10:10). It appears that the reference here is to Numbers 16:41, where the people grumbled against Moses and Aaron, charging them with the deaths of their fellow Israelites. Their charges resulted in another great plague being sent. The Greek for grumble or murmur is gogguzete, an onomatopoetic word. [26] Such words seek to imitate the sound of that which they describe. In other places, such as Exodus 12:23 and 2 Samuel 24:16, the Bible speaks of the destroying angel. He was sent in this very situation. We might note that this was not the only time the Hebrews grumbled. It was their continual practice (cf. Exo. 15:24; 16:2ff.; 17:3; Num. 11:1; 14:2ff; 16:11, 41; Deut. 1:27). It is good when we can let the Lord control our tongues. It is blessed when we stay quiet if we cannot say something good about someone or something. I remember a story my mother-in-law told long ago. She knew a woman who always said something good about everyone. Someone asked her if she could even say something good about the devil. She replied, “Well, he’s a hard worker.” These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the culmination of the ages has come. 1 Corinthians 10:11 These Old Testament examples were for the Corinthians and they are for us, who live at the end of the age. They are for warnings, lest we fall into the same patterns as did the Israelites of long ago. The early church believed that the coming of Christ had introduced us into the last days (Acts 2:17) or the end of days (Heb. 1:2). This period is also referred to as the end of times (1 Pet. 1:20), the end of all things (1 Pet. 4:7), or the end of the ages (Heb. 9:26). [27] Utley says of this period, “Believers live in the kingdom of God, inaugurated at Jesus’ first coming, to be consummated with his Second Coming. We live in the tension of the ‘already and the not yet!’” [28] It is sobering to realize that the last day clock was already ticking for the Corinthians in the First Century. We can only imagine where we are in that end-day time scheme after two thousand years have now passed. “So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don’t fall!” (10:12). Barnes has to say of this verse: “A confidence in our own security is no evidence that we are safe. Such a confidence may be one of the strongest evidences that we are in danger. Those are most safe who feel that they are weak and feeble, and who feel their need of divine aid and strength.” [29] Guzik compares temptation to rocks in the harbor. When the tide gets low everyone can see the danger and avoid it. However, Satan likes to raise the tide and obscure the rocks so that our little boats will crash upon them. [30] He also tells of a little girl who had a sure cure for Satan’s temptations. She explained that when Satan arrived at the door of her heart, she just asked Jesus to answer the door. When Satan saw Jesus he would just say, “Oops, sorry, I must have the wrong house.” [31] “No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.” (10:13). This is surely one of the great defense verses to keep on hand. When temptation comes, we need to start looking for that way of escape that the Lord promises us here. God knows how much we can stand, and when we have had all we can take, he opens the doorway of escape for us. It is then our responsibility to flee out that door. There are several important things we are to flee from. One is fornication (1 Cor. 6:18) and another is idolatry (1 Cor. 10:14). Barclay gives us some background on the way of escape. The Greek word is ekbasis, and it pictures a mountain pass that opens up so that a surrounded army can escape to safety. [32] McGee exclaims, “Let the Devil see your heels – run as hard as you can to get away from the temptation.” [33] IDOL’S FEAST OR THE LORD’S FEAST? Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. 1 Corinthians10:14 Coffman says that it might not be wise for the Corinthians to attend feasts where meat sacrificed to idols is served, lest they be drawn back into their former sins. [34] It is a little like the recovering alcoholic going back just for a little visit at the bar. Idolatry was hard enough to deal with because the ancient society was totally absorbed with it. Stedman says, “…the whole Roman and Greek citizenry of the city regarded the temple as the most exciting place in town. There you could get the best food, served up in the open-air restaurant. There they had the wildest music and all the seductive pleasures of wine, women and song.” [35] The ancient Christian writer Tertullian comments: “When the apostle says: ‘Flee from the worship of idols,’ he means idolatry whole and entire. Look closely at the thicket and see how many thorns lie hidden beneath the leaves.” [36] Once again, we need to let the devil see our heels as we run away. “I speak to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?” (10:15-16). No doubt, we all know that the Lord’s Supper was instituted during the Jewish Passover, which was being celebrated by Jesus and his disciples. The Passover celebration was built around four cups of wine, two before the meal and two after it. The cup immediately after the meal was called “the cup of blessing.” It is generally accepted that this cup, the third cup, was the one Jesus took as he instituted the Lord’s Supper. [37] Sometimes this third cup is called the cup of redemption, for God says, “I will redeem you with outstretched arm” (Exo. 6:6). We can now understand how this promise came true when Jesus was crucified. His arms were outstretched on the cross for us. They were nailed to the cross. His precious blood was shed for all humankind, that through that blood we all might have forgiveness of sins and salvation. We read in Matthew 26:27-28, that as Jesus was eating the Passover meal with his disciples, “…he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.’” More than likely, Jesus blessed the cup with the very Hebrew blessing that is used today in the Passover, “Baruch atah Adonai Elo-he-nu Melek ha-olam, Boreh p’ree ha-gafen” (Blessed are you O Lord our God, King of the Universe, who creates the fruit of the vine). Paul is saying in these verses that when we partake of the Lord’s Supper we become participants or sharers in it. The Greek word used here for sharing in the blood and sharing in the body of Christ is the word koinonia (fellowship). This word is used again in verse 18, showing that we also become partners and participants in the altar. [38] Barnes says, “In almost all nations the act of eating together has been regarded as a symbol of unity or friendship.” [39] Jamieson, Faussett &Brown draw out the implications that Paul is making here: “…the partaking of the Lord’s Supper involves a partaking of the Lord himself, and the partaking of the Jewish sacrificial meats involved a partaking of the altar of God, and, as the heathens sacrifice to devils, to partake of an idol feast is to have fellowship with devils.” [40] “Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf” (10:17). As Paul speaks of Communion he paints a beautiful picture here. He speaks of Christians in Christ as making up a single loaf of bread. The eloquent Chrysostom describes it in this way: “The body of Christ is not many bodies but only one body. For just as the bread, which consists of many grains, is made one, to the point that the separate grains are no longer visible, even though they are still there, so we are joined to each other and to Christ.” [41] Consider the people of Israel: Do not those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar? 1 Corinthians 10:18 At the Jewish temple, the priests and Levites were always given their share of the sacrifices. They and their families were sustained by these holy offerings. Also, those who came making offerings were able to share in most of them. In some sacrifices, the one making the offering, as well as family and friends could share in eating part of the sacrifice. It was a sort of holy banquet (Deut. 12:17-18; 14:22-27). The act of eating at the temple was a way of restoring their relationship with God, and it made possible the forgiveness of their sins. [42] In a similar manner, Paul would now point out how there was also a participation with the gods or rather false gods when one would join in the pagan sacrifices. “Do I mean then that food sacrificed to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything?” (10:19). Once more, Paul wants to make perfectly clear that the idol is nothing. It is only a lifeless block of wood, stone or metal (cf. Is. 44:12-20; 45:20-25; 46:1-11). However, Paul knows that there is something lurking behind the idol, and that something is spiritual and sinister. “No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons” (10:20). Barclay shares a lot of information about how the ancient world was tormented by demons. He says, “The world was packed with demons. For the Jew there were the shedim…These were evil spirits who haunted empty houses, who lurked ‘in the crumbs on the floor, in the oil in the vessels, in the water which we would drink, in the diseases which attack us, in the air, in the room, by day and by night.’” [43] Of course, demons were especially present and powerful around the idols. We can imagine that Satan lost no opportunity to work false signs and wonders to convince the doubting. Barclay further comments: “…. it was often held that, after the meat had been sacrificed, the god himself was in it and that at the banquet he entered into the very bodies and spirits of those who ate…The person who sacrificed was in a real sense a sharer with the altar; he had a mystic communion with the god.” [44] Obviously, this was the dangerous part about idolatry that Paul was warning against. He did not want Christians to join in communion with these pagan gods and have this mystical communion with them by eating at the temple sacrifices. “…One of the great statues of Christ is that by Thorwaldsen; after he had carved it, he was offered a commission to carve a statue of Venus for the Louvre. His answer was, ‘The hand that carved the form of Christ can never carve the form of a heathen goddess.” [45] “You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord’s table and the table of demons” (10:21). Bruce remarks that the “cup of demons” could have a reference to the libation that was often poured out to the sponsoring deity at the end of the meal. [46] Barnes brings all this down to the present by adding: “The custom of drinking ‘toasts’ at feasts and celebrations arose from this practice of pouring out wine, or drinking in honor of the pagan gods; and is a practice that still partakes of the nature of paganism…Such a pouring out of a libation was usually accompanied with a prayer to the idol god, that he would accept the offering; that he would be propitious; and that he would grant the desire of the worshipper. From that custom the habit of expressing a sentiment, or proposing a toast, uttered in drinking wine, has been derived.” [47] Paul was certain that Christians could not be involved at idol temples, joining in idol feasts and idol worship. All this had nothing to do with the holy table of the Lord or the holy people of the Lord. “Are we trying to arouse the Lord’s jealousy? Are we stronger than he?” (10:22). Clearly, for Christians to visit idol temples and join in worship and festivities was to ask for trouble. Both the Corinthians and we today must keep in mind that our God is a jealous God. He says in Exodus 20:5: “You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me…” How can we dare provoke God to jealousy (Gk. parazēlouoo)? How can we become spiritual adulterers by hanging around an idol temple? “I have the right to do anything,” you say— but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”— but not everything is constructive. 1 Corinthians 10:23 Once more, we probably have reflected here something the Corinthians were mouthing. Paul cannot disagree with the basis of what they were saying. The Christian does have a great deal of freedom. For instance, Christians have the right to eat anything (cf. Mk. 7:14-23; Acts 10:9-16, 28; 1 Tim. 4:3-5). They can eat anything that is set before them without asking any questions (Lk. 10:8). [48] However, Paul knows that everything is not beneficial or constructive. Clement of Alexandria once said: “Those who take advantage of everything that is lawful rapidly deteriorate into doing what is not lawful.” [49] Christians have the responsibility to bring glory to God in all things (1 Cor. 10:31). However, it is impossible to bring glory to God if we are causing others to stumble. Wiersbe gives us several questions to ask ourselves when we are making decisions about things we will accept or do: “Will they lead to freedom or slavery? (1 Cor. 6:12). Will they make me a stumbling block or a stepping-stone? (1 Cor. 8:13). Will they build me up or tear me down? (1 Cor. 10:23). Will they only please me, or will they glorify Christ? (1 Cor. 10:31). Will they help to win the lost to Christ or turn them away? (1 Cor. 10:33).” [50] It seems that Paul is briefly returning to the subject he dealt with in 6:2, and that is how Christian freedom and responsibility can be balanced. [51] Sometimes it seems that the whole Christian life is just one delicate balancing act. “No one should seek their own good, but the good of others” (10:24). We cannot just seek our own wellbeing, but we must consider other people (cf. Phil. 2:4-5; Rom. 15:1-3; 1 Cor. 11:1). Fee says, “…Christian liberty alone, no matter how legitimate, does not regulate Christian conduct.” [52] It was evil Cain that once asked a question that we should never ask: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Gen. 4:9). For the Christian, the answer is always “Yes.” We are our brother’s keeper. We must not harm our brother or sister by our careless actions. [53] Our freedoms, in a very real sense, are not just for ourselves, but for others (cf. 1 Cor. 10:33; 12:7; 13:5; Rom. 14:7; 15:2; Phil. 2:1-5, 21). “Eat anything sold in the meat market without raising questions of conscience, for, “The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it” (10:25-26). Paul has forbidden the Christians to eat sacrificial meat in pagan temples. Now he turns to the subject of sacrificial meat that is later sold at the temple and in the surrounding markets. This meat had been sacrificed to idols. The Jewish people would have had to ask questions as to whether such meat was sacrificed or not. Perhaps Christians were wondering if they too should ask such questions. [54] In answer, Paul quotes Psalm 24:1,“The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it” (cf. Psa. 50:11; Deut. 10:14). God owns the earth, even the animals used in pagan sacrifices. At the creation, God says many times that everything he has made is “good” (Gen. 1:4-31). Stedman feels that Paul is saying here, “Do not run away from life. Live right out in the midst of it. Do not try to avoid being normal, natural people are enjoying the normal, natural things of life around you.” [55] Years ago, as I was agonizing over some particular decision, I felt the Lord saying to me, “Jim, why don’t you just join the human race?” Once Dr. John Mackie [president of the Church of Scotland] and two other clergyman were dispatched to call on an Orthodox priest in a small Greek village. The priest was overjoyed and offered them some special Havana cigars. The other two priests declined but Dr. Mackie took one, puffed it a few times and commented on how good it was. The priest then offered the group some of his choicest wine. The two other priests declined but Dr. Mackie took a glass, sniffed it, took a drink and praised its quality. Later in their jeep the two pious clergymen turned on Dr. Mackie asking him if he really smoked and drank although he was the President of the Church of Scotland and officer of the World Council of Churches. Dr. Mackie’s Scottish temper got the better of him and he replied: “No dammit, I don’t, but somebody had to be a Christian.” [56] If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. 1 Corinthians 10:27 Barnes says, “Christianity is not designed to abolish the courtesies of social life; or to break the bonds of contact; or to make people misanthropes or hermits. It allows and cultivates, under proper Christian restraints, the contact in society which will promote the comfort of people, and especially that which may extend the usefulness of Christians.” [57] If we are invited out by a pagan, we should go and enjoy ourselves. If the person feeds us we should eat what is set before us without raising a fuss. Actually, it would probably be a breach of etiquette for us to ask whether something had been sacrificed to idols anyway. [58] We should just eat it and shut up. “But if someone says to you, ‘This has been offered in sacrifice,’ then do not eat it, both for the sake of the one who told you and for the sake of conscience. I am referring to the other person’s conscience, not yours. For why is my freedom being judged by another’s conscience?” (10:28-29). It really does not matter who brings this up. It could be the host or it could be a weaker brother or sister (cf. 8:10). It could even be a Jewish believer who is present. If the matter is brought up, we should refrain from eating the meat. As Bruce says, “Christian liberty should be modified…by Christian charity.” [59] “If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for?” (10:30). As Christians, we should always give thanks to God for our food (1 Tim. 4:4). In the Gentile world we are prone to bless the food. However, in the Jewish world people do not bless the food, but they bless God who gives the food. If we are denounced for eating, we may need to check and see if we are offending the weak conscience of a brother or sister in Christ. “So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God” (10:31). Utley comments, “This is the universal principle applicable in every area of the believer’s life (cf. Eph. 6:7; Col. 3:17, 23; 1 Pet. 4:11).” [60] Kretzmann adds, “The fine, tactful decorum of Paul in every conceivable situation obliged people to respect him and in many cases opened the way for the work of the gospel.” [61] We are to do all for the glory of God. It is really that simple. This verse gets down into the cracks and crevices of our daily lives. It applies to everything. McGee cannot help but adding: “Unfortunately, there are Christians who don’t even go to church for the glory of God. They go for some other reason, or maybe just to criticize or to gossip.” [62] “Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God— even as I try to please everyone in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved” (10:32-33). Paul was extra careful not to put stumbling blocks before other people, whether they were Jews, Christians or pagans. In the next chapter, the first verse gives us his great challenge regarding what we have covered. He says, “Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.” 1. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 106. 2. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised p. 1063. 3. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 10:1. 4. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1245. 5. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 473. 6. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 90. 7. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 108. 8. Trapp, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete Commentary, v. 10:3. 9. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 10:4. [Rabbi Solomon on Numbers 20:2] “…that the rock itself, or at least the stream from it, followed the Israelites from place to place” (compare Deuteronomy 9:21). 10. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 1064. 11. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 12. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 10:5 Morris adds: “katastronnymi adds a picturesque touch; he sees the wilderness as strewn with bodies…” (Morris, p. 140). 13. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 139. 14. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 273. 15. Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, vs. 10:1-10. 16. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 10:6. 17. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 10:6. 18. Tim Challies, The Next Story, Life and Faith after The Digital Explosion, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), p. 28. 19. Donald W. McCullough, The Trivilization of God: The Dangerous Illusion of a Manageable Deity (Colo. Springs, Nav Press, 1995), p. 22. 20. Patrick Glynn, God, The Evidence: The Reconciliation of Faith and Reason in a Postsecular World (Rocklin CA: Prima Publishing, 1997), p. 167. 21. Calvin, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Calvin’s Commentary on the Bible, v. 10:7. 22. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 473. 23. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 138. 24. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1245-46. 25. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 10:8. 26. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 10:10. 27. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 28. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 10:11. 29. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 30. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 31. Ibid. 32. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 33. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 111. 34. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 143. 35. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 36. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 97. 37. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 10:16. 38. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 276. 39. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 40. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 10:15. 41. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 97. 42. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 144. 43. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 44. Ibid., vs. 10:19-22. 45. Ibid., vs. 10:14-22. 46. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 97. 47. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 48. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 477. 49. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 100. 50. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 478. 51. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 10:23. 52. Quoted in Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 277. 53. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 54. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, Chrysostom adds: “The food is not unclean in itself, only human intentions might make it unclean.” (Bray, p. 100). 55. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 56. McCullough, The Trivilization of God: The Dangerous Illusion of a manageable Deity, pp. 26-37. 57. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 58. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 148. 59. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 100. 60. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 10:31. 61. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 62. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 116. Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ. 1 Corinthians 11:1 There is a pretty unanimous decision among commentators that this verse belongs with the previous chapter. Originally, many Bible books were in scroll form and were not divided into chapters and verses as we have them today. The chapters were actually not divided until 1227, and the verses were not numbered until 1551. [1] Thus, verses do not always correspond properly with subject matter. Regarding all his previous instruction about idols, idol temples and idol foods, Paul simply says “follow me as I follow Christ.” The Greek word used is mimētai and it is the word from which we get “mimic.” Paul says they should imitate him as he imitates Christ. Today some people want us to follow them wholly, but Paul was wise enough to ask them to follow him only as he followed Christ. “I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you” (11:2). Paul was about to say some hard and difficult things, but before he did so, he gave the Corinthians a small note of praise. Pett says, “Paul was a wise man. He knew that to constantly belabor men and women without some praise could only lead to bitterness.” [2] The apostle uses the word “traditions” here. The Greek word is paradosis, which means something handed on from one to another. Traditions can be bad as we see in Matthew 15:2-3 or in Mark 7:8. [3] They can also be good as we see in this verse. For a lot of evangelicals, tradition itself is almost a bad word, as we think of abusive and erroneous traditions of the past. We must remember though that there are a lot of good and holy traditions of our faith that we need to pass on to our families and others, things like Bible reading and prayer for instance. In Paul’s day, before there was a written New Testament, many holy apostolic traditions had to be passed on by word of mouth. But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 1 Corinthians 11:3 This begins one of the most difficult sections in the whole New Testament. As we come to this section, we must be aware that sex, gender and marriage have been radically redefined in the last half-century. This is true in the West and especially in the US. These things have been redefined according to pagan and humanistic values. Many radical writers and speakers have helped bring about this dramatic change. At the heart of this social revolution was an attempt to overthrow all authority and really to bring about anarchy. Students rebelled against both governmental authority and school authority. City dwellers rebelled against police authority. Workers rebelled against employer authority. There was a widespread rebellion against church and pastoral authority as well. [4] In short, there was a rebellion against God, the Bible or most other things connected with Christianity. This great rebellion has had an immense effect upon the home, the family and particularly upon women in general. It also has had a tremendous effect upon the status of men and husbands. Women began to throw off and despise male authority in the home or anywhere else. Several radicals from the women’s liberation movements took it upon themselves to abolish marriage. Gloria Steinem said it plainly, “We have to abolish and reform the institution of marriage…” Feminist author, Vivian Gornick, tenured professor at the University of Arizona, said, “Being a housewife is an illegitimate profession…” Author, scholar, and university lecturer Germaine Greer said, “If women are to effect a significant amelioration in their condition it seems obvious that they must refuse to marry.” Radical feminist and author Andrea Dworkin even said, “Like prostitution, marriage is an institution that is extremely oppressive and dangerous for women.” [5] In 1972, Helen Reddy released her number one hit, I Am Woman, which sold over a million copies. It was a song celebrating female empowerment and went on to become an enduring anthem of the women’s liberation movement. Reddy bellowed out in the chorus, “…If I have to, I can do anything…I am strong…I am invincible…I am woman.” All this emphasis upon “liberation” and “empowerment” of women did not fare well in family relationships. No doubt, primarily because of such ideas, there is now a family meltdown in the US. Fatherhood is rapidly disappearing on the American scene. This is sometimes called “the Dad Deficit.” This is not only due to young people refusing to marry, or living together unwed, but to an extremely high rate of divorce for those who do marry. In American courts today divorce and custody battles make up over half of the civil litigation. [6] Author David Kupelian says, “Numerous studies show that adult children of divorce have more psychological problems than those raised in intact marriages.” He makes plain that “fatherlessness far surpasses both poverty and race as a predictor of social deviance.” [7] This family tragedy has hit the African-Americans much harder than whites. By 1995, it was noted that almost 70 percent of African-American children were being born out of wedlock, [8] destined to live in fatherless families and often on welfare in the US. Obviously, the feminist ideas were not working out too well in everyday life. So today, when we read this verse and those following verses, it all sounds strange indeed. There are probably few young people, even in our churches, who are able to accept what is said in this whole section of scripture. We have a problem. We must now decide if we will interpret this chapter according to current humanistic values, or according to what the Bible teaches. It is just that simple. If we are intent on interpreting these scriptures according to current moral trends, we can essentially forget about having a biblical church or living biblical lives. It is good for us to note that Paul is here primarily addressing propriety in worship. He says that the spiritual head of woman is man. This is like some sort of spiritual chain of command. We see in this scripture that this is the same kind of submission enjoyed within the Trinity. Jesus is submitted to God. That makes him no less God. Man is submitted to Jesus, and that makes him no less a man. The woman is to be spiritually submitted to man, and that makes her no less a woman. This is the divine order that is timeless and always true. It cannot and must not be changed. Again, Paul is talking about propriety in worship and relationships in the home. He is not talking about the business world for instance. Let us talk a little more about the matter of submission. This is also an ugly word for many these days. Paul makes it clear that the wife is to submit to the husband and to his spiritual headship (cf. Col. 3:18; Tit. 2:5; 1 Pet. 3:1). This submission has nothing to do with inferiority, lack of talent or intelligence on the part of the wife. But rather it has to do with mission. There is a spiritual mission to marriage and this mission is involved with bringing glory to God. For this mission to succeed there must be “submission.” [9] Perhaps we should say that there is a prescribed order of things in all the world. God made it that way. When we see a flock of geese or ducks there is always a leader. The same is true when we see a school of fish. There is one person who is leader of a country; one general who is leader of an army; one pastor who is leader of a church and one person who is leader of a family. In the case of the family, that person is to be the husband. It is also good for us to understand that two things are seemingly dealt with together in these verses. He is dealing with things like hair styles and clothing styles that change with the years and centuries. He is also dealing with timeless principles that do not change. Some things were established with the creation of the world and these cannot change. So our problem with this section is trying to separate the styles that change from the permanent principles that do not and must not change. This is a tedious task and has given Bible interpreters many headaches through the centuries. Before we leave verse three, we need to look at the word “head” (Gk. kephalē). Bruce thinks it has to do with the source, and thus woman’s existence depends upon man, since she was taken out of man. [10] Others feel the verse means that man is the ruler and thus has spiritual authority over the woman. [11] This latter interpretation seems to be the best, however, there is truth in both positions. Coffman remarks: “In the current era, there are those who would set aside the apostolic authority regarding the question of the subordination of the wife to her husband; but the wisdom of the ages and also the word of God concur in teaching the necessity that every organism must have a head; and there cannot be any denial that in God’s basic unit of all civilization and all progress, which is the family, the head must be either the man or the woman; and God here commanded man to fulfill that function of being the head of the family.” [12] Smith notes that it is not husband and wife that are so much the focus of this verse, but rather it is used generically as it applies to men and women in general. [13] Wiersbe adds: “It is God’s plan that in the home and in the local church, the men should exercise headship under the authority of Jesus Christ.” [14] “Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head” (11:4). Here we have what seems to be a timeless principle. The man is chosen for headship under the Lord Jesus Christ. The spiritual authority is vested in him. Thus he is not to have his head covered. There should nothing that comes between him and Jesus. Someone has said that we should not preach with our hats on. It is strange that after all these centuries when men begin to pray together they usually remove their hats. However, since the time of Christ, Jewish males have traditionally covered their heads, either with the kippa or the tallit. This must not be the case with Christian men. The Greek for covering is a little vague and it literally means “having something down from his head.” [15] Whatever the “something” is, the Greek does not clearly define. Later in verse 14, Paul will say that it is a disgrace for man to have long hair. This is clearly viewed as a covering for the man. This seems to be a timeless principle that must not change with styles. So this passage teaches against male head coverings in worship. It has nothing to do with male head coverings in the normal affairs of life. In the blistering hot Middle East, if a man went without a head covering, that person might end up with a fried brain. This passage also teaches that man should not let his hair grow long like a woman. To do so would be to cover himself in worship. Although it is stylish today, the scripture gives extremely clear teaching here. Quite often, we even see many pictures of Jesus with long female-type hair. We can be certain that this was not the case. Jesus came to fulfill all the law of God. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head— it is the same as having her head shaved. 1 Corinthians 11:5 Obviously, this is an extremely controversial passage and commentators have written reams of material on it. The popular commentator Albert Barnes just throws up his hands here and says, “I confess, I do not understand it.” [16] We will try to sort through all these comments and hopefully arrive at some kernel of truth on this subject. Once more, we should notice that this passage concerns the propriety of worship in the church. On the positive side, Paul here does seem to give his approval for women praying and prophesying in church. However, they should only do so with heads covered (It is clear in Joel 2:28, that daughters would prophesy). [17] The Greek expression here is akatakaluptō tēi kephalē, and it means simply having her head uncovered. [18] Vincent remarks: “The head-dress of Greek women consisted of nets, hair-bags, or kerchiefs, sometimes covering the whole head. A shawl which enveloped the body was also often thrown over the head, especially at marriages or funerals.” [19] Women in the orient in ancient times were usually veiled in public, or when they were among strangers. Otherwise, they were unveiled. [20] We can understand how this was a custom of those times but it is no longer a custom of our times in most places. However, in Moslem lands today women mostly wear some type of face or body covering. In fundamental Moslem areas women are often covered from head to toe with only the eyes showing. There seemed to be certain problems with uncovered females in Paul’s day. Bruce remarks how the pagan prophetesses in the Graeco-Roman culture often prophesied with their heads uncovered or with disheveled heads. [21] For a woman to pray or prophesy in church with uncovered head would seem to be mimicking these priestesses. Having shorn or shaved heads in the Jewish culture was a mark of adultery (Num. 5:11-31). In the Greek culture it could be a mark of being a lesbian or prostitute. [22] Barclay, in citing Sir William Ramsay says, “In Oriental lands the veil is the power and honor and dignity of the woman. With the veil on her head she can go anywhere in security and profound respect… But without the veil the woman is a thing of naught, whom anyone may insult… A woman’s authority and dignity vanish along with the all-covering veil that she discards…” [23] Smith comments, saying, “…most interpreters suggest that the wearing of a head covering is not a timeless, universal practice to be observed today in the modern Western church but is an ancient cultural expression that is in need of repression today.” [24] Certainly, the Moslem attempts to totally cover the woman seem ridiculous. To copy such dress would be patently un-Christian. My wife and I can say regarding our long experience in the churches, that every attempt we have seen to mandate a head covering for women has ended up bringing people into deep spiritual bondage. The same has been true with attempts to regulate dress or makeup styles in general. These are obviously passing things and are not timeless principles. Of course we always need to dress modestly. “For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head” (11:6). Keener says, “…the greatest physical shame for a woman was to be shaved or have her hair cut like a man’s.” [25] God, in the Bible, seeks to make sure that the genders are not blurred. Women are not to wear men’s clothing and men are not to wear women’s clothing (Deut. 22:5). In our society today unisex is the politically correct word. Our society tries its best to downgrade sexual differentiation and even change the sexes. Some bathrooms are now being marked as sexually neutral. Our highest court in the US has just ruled that homosexual marriage is lawful. We are living in a confusing and sexually mixed-up age. It is tragic that children raised by these homosexuals are seven times more likely to become homosexuals or bisexuals themselves than children raised by heterosexuals. [26] Women are pushing hard to be like men on the job, in the military and elsewhere. Stedman jokingly remarks, “It has now become a question, not so much of women wearing hats in church, but of whether they are going to wear the pants at home!…” [27] For a woman not to be veiled in the ancient culture was a severe breach of modesty. Paul wants to make that fact clear. It was disgraceful for women sporting the new Aphrodite chic haircut, to pray or prophesy in church. Chrysostom says, “A woman does not acquire a man’s dignity by having her head uncovered but rather loses her own.” [28] A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. 1 Corinthians 11:7 Chrysostom also tells us that men who had spent a great deal of time in philosophy often wore long hair and even covered their heads when they prayed. This was apparently a Greek custom. [29] The Lord’s reason for uncovered heads among worshipping men was that man was made in the image and glory of God (Gen. 1:26). Kretzmann adds, “In the case of all other organic creatures, the Lord created them in two sexes at once, but Adam was created alone at the beginning, and it was only afterward that the woman originated, being made out of one of his ribs…” [30] Adam was given authority to rule over all creation (Gen. 1:26, 28). That included woman who was created after man and brought forth from man’s side. Woman was created to be the glory of man and to be his helpmeet (Gen. 2:18-25). We must remember that this was before the fall of humanity. It was to be God’s order throughout time. This authority is fully demonstrated today as the animals, fish and birds all have an innate fear of man. [31] It was only when woman rejected man’s authority and stepped out on her own authority, eating fruit from the forbidden tree, that humanity fell into sin. We see in this verse that woman is the glory of man. Morris says, “…She stands in such a relation to the man as does nothing else…” [32] Barnes says, “All her comeliness, loveliness, and purity are therefore an expression of his honor and dignity, since all that comeliness and loveliness were made of him and for him.” [33] “For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man” (11:8-9). Theodoret of Cyr once said: “Man has the first place because of the order of creation.” [34] Pfeiffer and Harrison say of the woman…“She has her origin and purpose of life in the man (cf. Gen 2:21-25). Every woman taking a new name at her marriage ceremony tacitly affirms the Pauline teaching.” [35] I like what Barnes says about the position of the woman: The woman was made for the comfort and happiness of the man. Not to be a slave, but a help-meet; not to be the minister of his pleasures, but to be his aid and comforter in life; not to be regarded as of inferior nature and rank, but to be his friend, to divide his sorrows, and to multiply and extend his joys; yet still to be in a station subordinate to him. He is to be the head: the ruler; the presider in the family circle; and she was created to aid him in his duties, to comfort him in his afflictions, to partake with him of his pleasures. [36] “It is for this reason that a woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels” (11:10). Now Paul throws us a curve ball. Not only must a woman have authority over her head, but she must do so because of the angels. Perhaps we need to review the subject of angels in their relationship to humans. There is that old account of fallen angels lusting after women, marrying them and having children who were giants (Gen. 6:1-2). It is not felt that Paul is referring specifically to this account here. [37] In the New Testament we see several things about the angels. They minister to the saints of God (Heb. 1:14). They are witnesses to our faith and obedience (1 Tim. 5:21; 1 Cor. 4:9). When God’s people gather in worship, angels are also in attendance as we see in the opening verse. Angels long to look into the things of our salvation (1 Pet. 1:12). They no doubt marvel at God’s patience with us and at our great redemption. Angels are learning things from the church (Eph. 3:10-11). The world to come will not be subjected to angels but to redeemed humanity (Heb. 2:5, 16). In the end we will even judge the angels as we saw earlier in 1 Corinthians 6:3. At this time in history angels are watching, guarding and helping the church. Since they are the uncompromising keepers of God’s order, they are no doubt offended at things which are out of order. If it is customary in a society for women to be veiled in public, the angels will no doubt be offended when this social order is violated. [38] If they observe a woman shorn in public they will likewise be offended. Such things should also be an affront to any husbands involved. This makes us shudder a bit as we think of some of the offensive styles and dress that now come before God regularly on Sunday mornings. So we see that a woman in public or in church should have a sign or symbol of authority on her head. The Greek word is exousia and it has the meaning of power or authority. [39] Guthrie says, “…a woman who shocks men will shock angels.” [40] “Yet, there is a positive side of all this. “Paul appears to be saying that there is a new view of women in Christianity. They are not to be regarded as inferior species, as was generally the case in the ancient world. Christ’s new creation makes everything new (2 Cor. 5:17).” [41] They are now given a new power and authority, that is, if they live according to God’s precepts. “Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God” (11:11-12). As Paul often does when he presents a difficult teaching, he proceeds to balance out that teaching. While the woman is not independent of man, the opposite is true. Man is not independent of woman. Poole says, “… since the creation of the first man, all men are by the woman, who conceives them in her womb, suckles them at her breasts, is concerned in their education while children…the man therefore hath no reason to despise and too much to trample upon the woman.” [42] Guzik adds, “Men and women need each other, so there is no place for a ‘lording over’ of the men over the women.” [43] Men cannot order the woman around in the name of the Lord. They cannot be demanding and abusive, but rather they must be loving. When men begin to boss their wives, we can be guaranteed that marital bliss will soon reach its end. My old pastor used to say that authority is like soap. The more you use it, the less you have. Still, the woman should be careful not to usurp the spiritual authority of the men (1 Tim. 2:11-15). Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 1 Corinthians 11:13 Does all this defame women? Does this mean that a woman is not made in the image of God? The Bible says, “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them” (Gen. 1:27). The New Testament does not defame women. In the ancient world, women had a very low status as we have mentioned. This was true even in the Jewish world, and is still true in some respects today. Jesus lifted women and children up from their lowly status, giving them respect and position. We must not forget this. Amazingly, the first witness to Jesus’ resurrection was a woman (Jn. 20:11-18). When women reject scripture and try to establish their own position, they will in the end cause their situation to revert to pre-Christian times. They will end up in virtual serfdom and slavery as before. Nevertheless, women to really be free must adhere to the Bible and to the eternal patterns set forth in it. God’s rule is that it is not proper for a woman to pray with her head uncovered. This is a timeless rule. When it is not adhered to, the woman lowers herself. Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering” (11:14-15). We see by this that unisex, although politically correct and popular, is really shameful and demeaning. Pett comments: “Unisex is not pleasing to God. It is God’s pleasure that men and women are clearly distinguished.” [44] A man should not look like a woman. It is disgraceful in heaven’s eyes. Nature teaches us the same thing. Long hair on a man may appear to be a mark of effeminacy. [45] It may also be a sign of rebellion. We no doubt remember how Absalom had long hair and he also rebelled against his father, King David. Morris says, “Some of the ancient Greeks had long hair, for example the Spartans and some of the philosophers. But generally speaking, men have reflected the distinctions made in nature by using shorter hair-styles than those of women…The precise length is not specified and it is not important.” [46] Long hair on a man is a shame biblically speaking. However, long hair on a woman is her praise and glory. Paul says that her hair is given to her as a covering. The Greek word for covering is peribolaiou. Smith says, “…This term means ‘an article of apparel that covers much of the body, a covering, wrap, cloak, robe’…the women should take a hint from nature or the customary order of things regarding hair length.” [47] Wiersbe adds, “I do not think that Paul meant for all women in every culture to wear a shawl for a head-covering; but he did expect them to use their long hair as a covering and as a symbol of their submission to God’s order.” [48] “If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God” (11:16). Once we tread our way through its complexities, Paul’s teaching seems to be plain. Men should not look like women and women should not look like men. The women should have a sign of authority on their head. If they live in a society where veils are required for women, they should certainly wear them. If not, their God-given long hair will serve as a veil, indicating that they are under the authority of the man. This was the practice of the early church. It was apostolic doctrine and was to be obeyed. Obviously, this apostolic doctrine will sound very strange to our humanistic and permissive world today. It was McGarvey who said, “One who follows Christ will find himself conspicuously different from the world…” [49] That difference may sometimes bring disgrace on earth but it will bring glory in heaven. In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your meetings do more harm than good. 1 Corinthians 11:17 Paul is here giving some very stern correction. To say that their meetings did more harm than good was to mince no words. Undoubtedly, the Corinthians were shocked to hear such a thing from the apostle. Once more, this information must have come to Paul from Chloe’s people (1:11) or from the more recent visitors from Corinth (16:17). [50] “In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it” (11:18). Paul had already noted these divisions in 1:10-17. Where Christian love warmly flows, the cracks and crevices of divisions between believers are filled and healed. Edwin Markham deals with the matter of division in his little poem “Outwitted:” He drew a circle that shut me out- Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout. But love and I had the wit to win: We drew a circle and took him In! [51] “No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval” (11:19). The “differences” mentioned here is the word hairesis in Greek. It has the meaning of taking sides, or holding views of one party or another. Robertson says, “Heresy is theoretical schism, schism practical heresy.” [52] Today we have many heresy hunters in the church, but few of them seem to realize that division itself is heresy. Division is also a fruit of the flesh as we see in Galatians 5:20. Heresy shows up in things like discord, dissensions and factions. Trapp says, “It behooves that there be heresies in the church; as it is necessary there should be poison and venomous creatures in the world, because out of them God will work medicines.” [53] “So then, when you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat, for when you are eating, some of you go ahead with your own private suppers. As a result, one person remains hungry and another gets drunk” (11:20-21). What we have here is a picture of total disorder regarding Communion. Guzik mentions how ancient culture was extremely class conscious. It was simply expected that the upper classes would receive more and better food than the lower classes. [54] We remember that church meetings were held in private homes in these early days. Keener also fills us in on the culture of New Testament times. He says, “In Greco-Roman society, patrons often seated members of their own high social class in the special triclinium (the best room), while others were served, in plain view of this room, in the atrium…The guests in the larger room, the atrium, were served inferior food and inferior wine, and often complained about the situation. This societal problem spilled over into the church.” [55] Since the earliest times, Christians had eaten meals together (Acts 2:42, 46). After a fellowship meal together (love or agape feast), Communion was celebrated. The early church was an unusual organization or organism. Barclay says it was the only place in the ancient world where all the barriers were down. [56] The rich and poor could come together and so could the slaves, freedmen, women and children. They could all eat a common meal together (probably potluck style). However, the Corinthians had allowed this noble custom to become corrupted. The picture seems to be that the wealthy gathered and ate their special and private food early, while others simply looked on. No doubt the poor had trouble getting to the supper on time and that would certainly have been true of the slaves. Both these groups likely had difficulty bringing enough food to the supper. For them, the agape meal may have been the best meal of the week. Ideally, the wealthy Christians should have brought extra for the poor, but this was not the case at Corinth. Comfort says, “…the rich ate among themselves with their own food, leaving the poor with little or nothing.” [57] Not only did they eat their private meals but they even got drunk on their private wine. “Don’t you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God by humiliating those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? Certainly not in this matter!” (11:22). What a shameful thought— getting drunk at the Lord’s Supper. If people were determined to be gluttons and drunkards, they should at least have done these things at home and not in the assembly of God’s holy people. We can only thank the Lord that the early Gentile church had expert spiritual guidance from Jewish people like Paul, Barnabas, Silas, Mark and others, who knew the significance of the supper and who were able to connect it with the seriousness of the sacrificial system and of the Lord’s own sacrifice for us all on the cross. For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 1 Corinthians 11:23-24 This passage is probably used by ministers in celebrating Communion more than any of the others because of its conciseness. We see here that this was a special revelation to Paul from the risen Christ himself. This was not unusual for Paul, for he received a number of revelations directly (Acts 18:9f.; 22:18; 23:11; 27: 23-25; 2 Cor. 12:7-9; Gal. 1:12; 2:2). In the book of Galatians he claims to have received his revelation of the gospel directly from the Lord and not from the early disciples in Jerusalem (Gal. 1:11-17). [58] It is interesting that this passage gives us information that is not found elsewhere in the Bible. Morris says that the instruction to keep on doing the supper is the only record in the New Testament that the communion should be a continuous celebration. [59] We see in this passage that the bread is taken first and blessed. At least in the original supper this was unleavened bread. It is of note that in the Passover, out of which the Lord’s Supper emerged (Mt. 26:17-29; Lk. 22:7-20), the wine was blessed first. It is likely that Jesus gave thanks for the bread first because it represented the incarnation. [60] Jesus compares the bread to his body, which would soon be broken. This is both a beautiful and meaningful symbol. However, the Roman Catholic Church in time came up with the idea of transubstantiation, the teaching that the bread was actually transformed into the body of Christ and the wine actually became his blood. This teaching has obscured Communion for many under a cloak of superstition and mystery. In this passage we see Jesus giving thanks for the bread. The Greek word used for giving thanks is eucharisteo and it is from this word that we get the term “Eucharist.” This word of course is a synonym for Holy Communion. [61] “In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me’” (11:25). In the Passover celebration it is obligatory that all participants drink the four cups of wine. It is with the third cup of Passover that Jesus institutes the New Covenant (Gk. hē kainē diathēkē). This of course represents the New Covenant as spoken of in Jeremiah 31:31-34. The word diathēkē or covenant is often used in normal Greek for “last will and testament.” However, in the Greek Old Testament the word is used often to translate “covenant.” [62] We are to drink this cup in remembrance of Jesus and his shed blood. “For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (11:26). The Eucharist is sort of an acted out sermon in which we announce or proclaim (Gk. katangello) the Lord’s death until he returns. It is interesting that in the Passover, the program itself is called the haggadah. In Hebrew, this word means “to tell,” [63] and thus it conveys a very similar idea as the Greek. It is a continual retelling of the salvation story. So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 1 Corinthians 11:27 This is a serious supper and we should all be alert to that fact. We should come to the supper in special reverence, remembering that it is the continuing symbol of the New Covenant. None of us is worthy to partake of this symbol and participate in it. Peiffer and Harrison remark, “Unworthily does not refer to the person of the one partaking, but to the manner of his partaking…” [64] “Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup” (11:28). It is also interesting in the Passover that there is much emphasis upon leaven, which represents sin. Before the Passover begins, the father searches the house for the last bit of leaven. He then takes it out of the house and burns it. Paul no doubt has this picture in mind with the eating of only unleavened bread in the celebration. Of course, Jesus was and is the picture of an unleavened life or a life without sin. The clear teaching of the Passover is that our lives should be like his life – Christ in us. Immediately after Passover, the Festival of Unleavened Bread begins and lasts for seven days. This is an appropriate picture of the unleavened life. In Israel all leavened items are removed from homes and the leavened aisles are roped off in grocery stores so that those items cannot be purchased. Only matzah or the unleavened bread can be eaten during this week. No leavened bread is available. “For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves” (11:29). Of course, just to eat the bread without thinking of Jesus and his body broken for us would be a disgrace. There is a deeper problem when we eat the bread and do not discern the special relationship of other believers who make up the spiritual body of Christ. [65] The Corinthians were certainly guilty in this respect. “That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep” (11:30). This is an interesting verse that presents the shocking idea that people can get sick and even die for abusing the Lord’s things. Morris says, “Spiritual ills may have physical results.” [66] This certainly may help explain why so many in the church are sickly today. Bruce citing Nock remarks, “The fact that an idea is foreign to us does not mean that it was an alien and intrusive element in early Christianity….” [67] The point seems to be that God can chasten us with physical illness and even take the life of a saint who is not careful with holy things. Such occurrences often happened in the Old Testament. This is obviously not an eternal judgment but a temporal judgment. The Greek word koimao (sleep) always refers to the death of believers in the New Testament. [68] “But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment. Nevertheless, when we are judged in this way by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be finally condemned with the world” (11:31-32). Chrysostom says: “This is the reason Paul said, ‘If we judge ourselves, we would not be judged,’ Thus if we judge ourselves for our sins every day here, we shall preclude the severity of the judgment in that other place.” [69] “So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together. Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. And when I come I will give further directions” (11:33-34). The agape feast and following Communion should be a blessed picture of the unity we all have in Christ. We should lovingly wait on one another, serve one another, share with one another, and not think only of ourselves. 1. Frank Viola &George Barna, Pagan Christianity: Exploring the Roots of Our Church Practices (Tyndale house, 2002, 2008), pp. 228-229. 2. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, vs. 11:2. 3. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 11:2. Bruce adds: “(Gk paradoseis) were the instructions, relating to matters of doctrine and practice alike which he delivered to his churches on the authority of Christ.” (Bruce, p. 102) 4. David Guzik, David Guzik’s Commentaries on the Bible, Commentary on 1 Timothy. 1997-2003, v. 2:11. https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/1-timothy-1/ 5. Quoted in David Kupelian, The Marketing of Evil, (Nashville: WND Books, 2005), pp. 111-112. 6. Ibid., p. 107. 7. Ibid. 8. Star Parker, Uncle Sam’s Plantation (Nashville: WND Books, 2003), p. 113. 9. David Guzik, Commentary on the Bible, Ephesians, v. 5:22. https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/ephesians-5/ 10. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 103. 11. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 279. 12. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 11:3. 13. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 280. 14. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 482. 15. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 11:4. 16. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 17. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 156. 18. Vincent, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament, v. 11:5. 19. Ibid. 20. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 637. 21. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 105. 22. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Morris adds: “Jewish women were always veiled in public in the first century…Conzelmann can say, ‘It can be assumed that respectable Greek women wore a head covering in public.’” (Morris. pp. 148-149). Barclay also adds: “It was true that in the synagogue, for instance, women had no share whatever in the worship but were segregated completely from the men in a shut-off gallery or other part of the building. In Jewish law and custom it was unthinkable that women should claim any kind of equality with men.” (Barclay, vs. 11:2-16). Utley also comments: “The veil was a cultural aspect of the marriage service. It was expected to be worn outside the home by Roman women. Its absence would be seen as 1. a shamed woman 2. a Prostitute 3. a dominant lesbian partner.” (Utley, v. 11:5). 23. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 24. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 283. 25. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 476. 26. David Kupelian, How Evil Works: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces That Are Transforming America, p. 176. 27. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, vs. 11:1-16. 28. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 107. 29. Ibid., p. 104. 30. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 31. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 32. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 151. 33. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, vs. 11:7. 34. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 108. 35. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1247. 36. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 11: 9. 37. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 152. 38. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 285. Keener adds: “…the angels present in divine worship, who would be offended by a breach of propriety or affront to the husbands…” (Keener, p. 476). Morris comments: “What Paul says is something like ‘the woman ought to have authority on her head’…exousia means ‘authority’ not subjection.” (Morris, p. 151). 39. Strong’s Concordance number 1849. 40. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 1066. 41. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 152. 42. Quoted in Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 43. Ibid., v. 11:10. 44. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 45. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 46. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 153. 47. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 285. 48. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 483. 49. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 11:16. 50. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 109. 51. http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/179023.Edwin_Markham 52. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 11:19. Utley adds: “The term is ‘faction’ (1 Cor. 11:19, i.e., hairesis), from which we get the English word heresies. Its basic etymology is ‘to choose’ or ‘select,’ …It can be used to describe (1) a person who believes false teaching (cf. Titus 3:10) or (2) the false teaching itself (cf. 2 Pet. 2:1)….There is a different term used in 1 Cor. 11:18, ‘divisions’ (i.e., schisma), from which we get the English word schism. Its basic etymology is ‘to split’ (cf. Matt. 27:51).” (Utley, v. 11:19). 53. Trapp, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete Commentary, v. 11:19. 54. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 55. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 477. Smith adds concerning the love feast: “In brief, not only did the ‘rich’ bring their ‘own private meals,’ which they ate in front of the ‘have nots,’…his ‘first-class’ guests were invited to sit in the dining room while the rest, almost surely the ‘have nots,’ were sent outside to the courtyard where conditions were greatly inferior.” (Smith, p. 286). 56. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 57. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 161. 58. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, vs. 11:23-24. 59. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 158. 60. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1248. 61. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 111. 62. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 158. 63. Reuben Alcalay, The Complete Hebrew-English Dictionary (Tel Aviv: Massadah Publishing Co., 1965), p. 486. 64. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1249. 65. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 165. 66. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 160. 67. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 115. 68. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1249. 69. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 116. Now about the gifts of the Spirit, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed. 1 Corinthians 12:1 Often, when Paul uses “brothers,” he is indicating a new subject. This new discussion obviously is in answer to some questions that were asked him by the Corinthians. The apostle does not want them to be ignorant or uninformed on the subject of spiritual gifts. Unfortunately, over the centuries and even up to the present, we seem to be more ignorant about this subject than any other. The expression, “gifts of the Spirit” (pneumatikōn) is not the normal expression for gifts, which is usually charisma. The Greek word pneumatikōn can be translated masculine, meaning “spiritual men” or neuter, meaning “spiritual things.” Translators most generally take the latter meaning. [1] Often, as is here in the NIV, the word “gifts” is added for clarity. McGee remarks, “The first section of 1 Corinthians had to do with carnalities, as we have seen. Chapter 12 begins a new section which deals with spiritualities.” [2] It appears that some of the Corinthians felt they were a little more spiritual than the others because of their special spiritual gifting. “You know that when you were pagans, somehow or other you were influenced and led astray to mute idols” (12:2). Human beings through the ages, and up to the present hour, have been greatly affected by idols and idolatry. Donald McCullough says, “We will be tempted, therefore, to create for ourselves gods who will not threaten us with transcendence, gods who will be manifestly useful in a world of confusing voices, and gods who will conform to the contours of our individualistic desires.” [3] In ancient times idols were fearful things, created solely by the minds of men. The idols were actually nothings – they were dumb blocks of wood, stone and metal. However, these idols became inhabited by evil spirits and therefore they became dangerous. It is clear from history that glossolalia or ecstatic speech was paralleled to a degree in paganism. This was present in the worship of Apollo, in Cassandra of Troy, in the oracle at Delphi as well as the Sibyl of Cumae. [4] Prophecy, or rather false prophecy, was also present in paganism. Severian of Gabala (c. 380-c. 425) once said: “The soothsayer’s soul is darkened, and he does not know what he is saying, whereas the prophet’s soul is enlightened and reveals what the prophet has learned and understood.” [5] Clearly, the Corinthians had been deeply influenced by paganism and by pagan idolatry. “Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, ‘Jesus be cursed,’ and no one can say, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ except by the Holy Spirit” (12:3). Jesus had said of the Holy Spirit: “When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father— the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father— he will testify about me” (Jn. 15:26). Thus, we see that one of the Spirit’s main functions is to testify about Jesus. No doubt, the Corinthians had been exposed to some so-called spiritual influences who were speaking ill of Jesus. Perhaps some evil spirit had hijacked the spiritual gifts and was making such pronouncements. It was certainly true of the Jews in these early years that they often blasphemed Christ. In their synagogue prayers they cursed all apostates and that included Christians. No doubt they felt they had a biblical right to curse Jesus because he was hung on a tree (Deut. 21:23). [6] Even to this day, in some Jewish circles, the Hebrew word for Jesus (Yeshua) is substituted by the word Yeshu. Yeshu is an acronym which means, “May his name and memory be stricken out.” [7] Obviously, this is a subtle way of cursing Jesus. One speaking by the Holy Spirit of God will never curse Jesus. The Greek word is anathēma and it “means a thing devoted to God without being redeemed, doomed to destruction (Lev. 27:28 f.; Josh. 6:17; 7:12).” [8] In time it came to mean “that which is destroyed.” [9] In the early centuries of Christianity the pagan enemies tried to get the Christians to blaspheme the Lord. The word for “Lord” was the Greek kurios, and that was usually the word applied to Caesar. When Polycarp, the famous martyr and bishop of Smyrna was about to be executed the proconsul demanded: “Say, ‘Away with the atheists,’ swear by the godhead of Caesar, and blaspheme Christ.” The aged bishop replied, “Eighty and six years have I served Christ, and he has never done me wrong. How can I blaspheme my King who saved me?” [10] There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them. 1 Corinthians 12:4. Now Paul gets right into what is called the spiritual gifts. There are many different kinds of spiritual gifts, and it does not seem that Paul is trying here to give us an exhaustive list. In other scriptures like Romans 12:4-8; Ephesians 4:11-13 and 1 Peter 4:10-11, he augments this listing considerably. The different kinds, distinctions, differences or distributions of gifts are made clear. The gifts themselves (charismatōn) may need clarification. Utley says, “This is the Greek term charisma. This is from the root term ‘chairō,’ which means to rejoice, or be full of joy (cf. 1 Cor. 7:30; 13:6; 2 Cor. 2:3; 6:10; 7:7, 9, 16…).” [11] Of course, the recent Charismatic Movement has sprung from this word. There is hardly anything that has so divided the church as this subject of spiritual gifts. Miraculous tongue speaking has been the most prominent point of division. Many pastors and church members as well have been sent packing and put out of their churches because they made the mistake of speaking in tongues. Many conservative Christians have simply labeled tongue speaking as a thing of the devil and they have had nothing to do with it. The common argument by many dear leaders is that these miraculous gifts ceased after the First Century. However, since the turn of the twentieth century there have been numerous accounts of the Holy Spirit’s miraculous activity in the church worldwide. So God is still delivering his people. Over the years we have heard many accounts of folks who even have been raised from the dead. It is interesting that those who deny the gifts today still believe that there are gifts of administration. As Guzik says, “… Those who teach against the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit definitely believe they have the gift of teaching…” [12] He also asks, “Where is the scriptural evidence that someone can be saved beyond the time of the apostles?” [13] We only have to look at church history to see that such signs, wonders and miracles were never removed. In AD 160, the church father and apologist Justin Martyr spoke of people receiving gifts of healing, understanding and foreknowledge. [14] The church father Irenaeus (around 180), spoke of devils being cast out, of healings and of the dead being raised and remaining among the church people for years. [15] The early Latin father Tertullian (about 197), wrote of exorcising evil spirits and performing cures. [16] The influential father Origen (around 248), mentioned expelling evil spirits, performing many cures and foreseeing certain events. [17] John Wimber, leader of the Vineyard Movement, in his book Power Evangelism, Signs and Wonders Today, recounts many later miracles and gifts of the Spirit. In the case of Ambrose (339-397), this father recounted gifts of healings and tongues. [18] He states how the great Augustine (354-430) related the miraculous healings of blindness and cancer as well as the casting out of demons. Augustine said that there were actually too many miracles for him to list. [19] Wimber goes on to relate many additional miracles happening in the days of Gregory of Tours (c. 538-594) and even in the later times of Gregory the Great (540-604). [20] Thus, it is obviously false and fallacious for church leaders today to declare that the gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased with the first century. The apostle, in this verse and those following, emphasizes both the unity and diversity of the Trinity and of the church. Guthrie says, “The doctrine of the Trinity is unconsciously but clearly expressed in these verses.” [21] Also, while there is great diversity of gifts in the church there is a unity of the Spirit. “There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but in all of them and in everyone it is the same God at work” (12:5-6). The word for service is the common Greek diakoniōn, from the root of which we get “deacon.” It is not just the deacons, but all members who have the sacred obligation of service to one another in the church. Utley says that the miraculous gifts are not merit badges but service towels. [22] The spiritual gifts in the church are described as different kinds or working (energēmatōn). It is from the Greek root of this term that we get our English word “energy.” [23] Obviously, there is a divine energy at work in the church. It seems that Paul is beckoning us to plunge into the mysterious spiritual realm and to receive God’s gracious spiritual insights and gifts in order that we may better accomplish our ministries. It was said of the great Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) that he, “…after a lifetime of brilliant writings, had a mystical experience that made him consider all of his writings (including Summa Contra Gentiles and his Summa Theologiae) as ‘mere straw’…compared to the knowledge of God that came to him in this experience.” [24] Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. 1 Corinthians 12:7 We note something very important here. The spiritual gifts are given for the common good. Apparently, the Corinthians were treating the gifts as their own private treasures. They were taking pride in them, but not using them for the benefit of the church or to the building up of the Body of Christ. Also, we notice in this verse that spiritual gifts are given to each one, or to every person in the church. Obviously, some people have not yet discovered their gift(s). Those who have not, need to pray and ask for their gifting to be revealed. Sometimes, other people see our gifts clearly while we are blind to their presence. It might be helpful just to ask our friends if they can recognize our gift. Paul challenged young Timothy with these words: “…fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you…” (2 Tim. 1:6). Stedman says, “The most carnal church in the New Testament had these gifts abounding.” [25] We should certainly not be lacking in them today. All gifts are given for the benefit of the Body of Christ, the church. We cannot really grade the gifts as to their importance. The one that is important is the one we need at the time. Bruce says, “Some gifts may be more extraordinary and spectacular than others, but it does not follow on that account that those who receive them are more spiritual than others.” [26] I remember on an occasion or two, we traveled abroad with some person who seemed unimportant at the time, but when we came up against people speaking a different language that unimportant person would suddenly become our greatly needed translator.” “To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit,” (12:8). The Greek word for wisdom is sophias and the word for knowledge is gnōseōs. The Greek scholar Barclay sees gnōseōs as having more of a practical application to human life. It tells us what to do in certain given situations. It helps us apply sophias to everyday life and affairs. [27] He adds, “The two things are necessary— the wisdom which knows by communion with God the deep things of God, and the knowledge which, in the daily life of the world and the church, can put that wisdom into practice…” [28] Of course, Colossians 2:3 tells us of Christ, “…in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” Gifts of supernatural knowledge or the so-called “word of knowledge” gifts are fairly common in the church today. My wife and I remember an occasion when we were in great turmoil about the direction of our lives and ministry— whether we should pursue a secular job or continue on in ministry to Israel. At that critical moment, a much frightened woman in the church gave us a word of knowledge from Isaiah 48:17-22. She charged us with not paying attention to God’s direction, that we should flee from Babylonian things and declare that God had redeemed his servant Israel. With that word, we immediately changed our course and we soon began to work full-time with an Israel ministry— ultimately leading us back to Israel for many years. On several occasions afterward we thanked that dear woman for her apt word of knowledge. In the scripture we see several occasions where a direct word of knowledge was used. The prophet Agabus (Acts 21:10-11) foretold of Paul’s being bound. Paul himself even spoke in detail of the coming shipwreck on the journey to Rome (Acts 27:25). Paul continues: “to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit,” (12:9). The faith mentioned here is not the saving kind of faith. It is rather a special gift of faith for some particular need. I remember long ago that one of our deacons became ill with thyroid cancer. The doctors assured him that his condition would quickly become fatal. At that moment, I felt the Lord give me a special gift of faith for his healing. I became so elated that his poor invalid wife thought I had lost my mind. Her husband lay dying and her pastor had gone crazy. I can remember that there was not a shred of doubt that the deacon would get well. Within a week his condition miraculously reversed. He came to be totally free of cancer and lived to a ripe old age. That gift of faith seemed to have nothing whatever in common with my normal faith, which went up and down. It was purely supernatural. Barclay says, “For too long the church split man into a soul and a body, and accepted responsibility for his soul but not for his body. It is good that in our time we have once again learned to treat man as a whole….” [29] In early Christianity healing of the body was a common thing. We see in this verse that the Lord has given gifts of healing to the saints. The Greek is charismata iamatōn. Morris feels that the gifts are mentioned as plural because there are different gifts for different types of sickness. [30] This seems to be a pretty reasonable assessment. Today we seem to have multitudes of sick people in our churches. We not only need to establish a church ministry of healing according to James 5:14, but we also need to discover those saints in the congregations who possess certain gifts of healing and let them minister to the needy in our churches. Paul continues: “to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues” (12:10). The first gift mentioned in this verse is the Greek energēmata dunameōn, which Smith sees as performing supernatural acts of power. [31] We can all probably remember some of the supernatural acts in the Old Testament. There were all the plagues of Egypt, the crossing of the Sea on dry land, and the supernatural manna each day for forty years. The ministries of Elijah and Elisha abounded with miracles, like the metal axe head floating (2 Ki. 6:5-7); the oil in the poor woman’s jar not running out through all the years of famine (1 Ki, 17:10ff.). There were many more. The New Testament is replete with the many miracles of Jesus, like the miraculous feeding of the 4,000 and the 5,000; like Jesus and even Peter walking on the water. In biblical history miracles seem to abound when God’s people are being delivered. We also see Paul working miracles, like the blinding of Elymas (Acts 13:11), and Peter with the supernatural deaths of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11). In Galatians 3:5, it appears that this church had seen some miracles. The same might have been true for the Hebrew believers (Heb. 2:4). Unfortunately, we do not see too many miracles today. We might ask, “Is the Lord still delivering his people?” Next in this verse Paul mentions the gift of prophecy. Paul says prophecy should continue in the church. However, many commentators deny this fact. One popular commentator even remarked: “Since there are no prophets in the church today, we need not worry about false prophets…” This is a dreadful statement that will leave God’s people defenseless when the False Prophet will make his appearance in the last days. As we mentioned, many commentators do not believe that the gifts have continued to this day and therefore they are not great believers in the gift of prophecy. We are not going to get much help from them. However, Paul tells us that it is the most important gift and he encourages us to seek it (1 Cor. 14:1). Smith sees New Testament prophecy as more in the sense of forth-telling (proclamation) rather than foretelling (prediction). He feels that New Testament prophecy cannot be equated with either teaching or with preaching. [32] However, we do see the prophet Agabus clearly foretelling events in more than one instance (Acts 11:28; 21:11). Prophetic gifts like all other gifts must be tested and approved by the congregation (1 Cor.14:29; 1 Thess. 5:19-22; 1 Jn. 4:1). [33] The reason for this is that all gifts are in part and most will pass away when the Perfect One is revealed (1Cor. 13:8-10). Again, from long personal experience, I can remember a time when my family and I attended a prophetic meeting held by the late evangelist Dick Mills. It was a fairly large meeting and we were sitting somewhere in the middle of the congregation. Mills, without knowing anything about our family, suddenly asked us to stand. He told us that we would minister in Israel and that our children would be for signs and symbols to that nation. In time, our family did go to Israel. My wife and I then ministered in the land for a total of sixteen years, and our oldest son became a licensed tour guide in Israel. He and his wife are still there and their four children are all fluent Hebrew speakers. Our daughter loves Israel and fervently works to bless the people and the land. Our young son would return to Israel in a moment if he could but find any way to do so. The next supernatural gift Paul mentions in this verse is the distinguishing of spirits. We know that Satan can appear as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14). Sometimes God’s people are really taken in by something that looks good and sounds good, but is not of God. Most of the cults look good and sound good at first. Someone once said that nothing can compete in simplicity with the inventors of religion. The cults often “love bomb” the newcomer and make that person really feel loved and wanted. However, all that quickly wears off and the grim reality of deception eventually sets in. In the true church there is unity in diversity and that is healthy. There always needs to be people who can say, “Something is wrong here!” Or, “This is not of the Lord!” In the tragic case of Jim Jones and the Jonestown massacre (Jonestown, Guyana, 1978), where over nine-hundred believers died in a mass suicide, there was no dissent. In earlier days, if just a few believers had expressed their disagreement, the whole disaster may have been avoided. Honest dissent is healthy. People need to be around to raise honest questions in the church. The early church had many differences of opinion but they still had great unity. The spiritual gift of discernment enables certain people in the church to quickly sense whether or not something is of the Lord. This gift is greatly needed today but will become critical in the last days when Antichrist begins to establish his kingdom. Next, Paul deals with the gift of tongues (Gk. glōssōn). This was apparently a big thing in the Corinthian church. Actually, people had probably taken it to extremes, while at the same time ignoring gifts like love for one another. This gift, more than any other, has sparked heated debate through the centuries and especially throughout the Twentieth Century. Commentators love to talk about it, even if many do not believe in it. Guzik defines it as “a personal language of prayer given by God, whereby the believer can communicate with God beyond the limits of knowledge and understanding.” [34] This gift can be practiced privately (14:28) but in some instances it can also be used in the congregation. For congregational use there must be an interpreter present. The Corinthians apparently took great pride in this gift but Paul lists it last, along with interpretation, as if these were the least important gifts. Once again, due to the dearth of positive material from commentators, I will share what I know and have experienced concerning this gift. I do believe it is one of the least-important gifts and that it is probably available to most everyone who desires it. The Bible also never says that it is the evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, despite what many Pentecostals and Charismatics claim. We should probably go easy on the expression Baptism of the Holy Spirit, since it is used only seven times in the New Testament. In all these occasions it speaks of the original historic giving of the Holy Spirit. It seems that the Filling of the Spirit is a much better and more accurate expression for us at this time. The scripture does say that the Spirit is a blessing of Father Abraham (Gal. 3:14). Peter tells us, “The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off— for all whom the Lord our God will call” (Acts 2:39). He was referring a lot to tongues as he spoke this. Many years ago, I was seeking this filling of the Holy Spirit. I was at a jobsite alone in my motel room when in desperate prayer I took this verse as my own. In simple faith I opened my mouth to begin talking and in my great surprise I soon began to speak in a language totally unknown to me. The gifts are without repentance (Rom. 11:28), so they continue with us throughout our lives. Many times this gift has strengthened and assured me in my private devotions. Some may not desire it, but for those who do, it is likely available. It, like everything else in our Christian experience, comes by simple faith. In the Charismatic Movement many people used this gift to divide the churches. That should be avoided at all cost. It should rather be used to strengthen the church and build it up. We should exercise great discretion in using this gift so that we can build up the church rather than tear it down. I like what pastor Mark Driscoll said. He once described himself as “Charismatic with a seat belt.” [35] That is a pretty good way to look at tongues and other miraculous gifts. We must remember again that they are given to build up the Body of Christ. Paul advises us that we should not forbid people to speak in tongues (14:39). He even says that he spoke in tongues more than all the others (14:18). He does instruct us that when we use the gift of tongues in public we should make sure there is an interpreter, so that the congregation can be edified with the message (14:13, 27). Last of all in this verse, Paul deals with the gift of interpreting tongues. Tongues at Pentecost seem to have consisted of known languages that were immediately understood by the many diverse people who were present. While this has occasionally been the case in succeeding history, most tongues are strictly unknown. For all we know, they might be languages of the angels (13:1). It seems that most tongue speakers have no idea what they are saying. When these unknown tongues are interpreted, it most often seems that the interpretation is not literal but that it is a comforting spiritual message. Most tongue speaking involves the person speaking only with God (14:28). Actually, a person can pray in tongues silently, in the mind only. Tongues are a great means of praying when we have absolutely no idea how we should pray. “All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines” (12:11). Paul is insistent that the many gifts come from the one Spirit. Thus, while there is diversity there is also unity. The church father, Jerome, once said: “One and the same rain comes down on all the world, yet it becomes white in the lily, red in the rose, purple in the violets and hyacinths, different and many-colored in manifold species.” [36] So it is with God’s wonderful gifts. Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 1 Corinthians 12:12 For some years Dr. Paul Brand worked with lepers in India, and while there he made remarkable discoveries about the disease. In his book, Fearfully and Wonderfully Made, he shares a great deal of important information on the human body. He says that all the body’s cells are flooded with communication about the rest of the body and that each cell has an infallible sense of belonging. [37] He relates how some cells share all the benefits of being in the body but they remain independent. They are known as cancer cells. [38] Dr. Brand relates how the cells of the body resemble the interworking of the spiritual body of Christ, the church. For instance, each cell has a complete identity code relating to the whole body. With that code in the spiritual body we each become like Christ, genetically speaking we belong to his body. [39] How amazing, that we believers are all sharing the DNA of Christ! He notes that “God requires only one thing of his cells: that each person be loyal to the Head.” [40] In the physical body he notes how pleasure seems to be the result of cooperation. The same thing appears to be true in the spiritual body. [41] In this verse we see that although the body has many parts, there is still a unity in the body. So it is with the church. When we think of the first church we see much diversity. Some kept Sabbath and some did not; some kept kosher in their eating and some did not. Some kept feast days and some did not. Yet, in all that diversity there was unity. “For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body— whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free— and we were all given the one Spirit to drink” (12:13). Some commentators see this as a reference to water baptism, but this is doubtful since he mentions the Holy Spirit in connection with this baptism. Pett says, “It is not baptism that incorporates us into Christ, but the overwhelming work and power and flooding of the Spirit…” [42] Bruce notes, “This is the one place in the New Testament outside the Gospels and Acts where the baptism of the Spirit is mentioned…” [43] Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many. 1 Corinthians 12:14 “In our human body the liver must find the backbone, or heart, or eye, hard to understand, but it serves them. So in a church community we find other members of the body difficult to understand, but we can listen to them and work with them.” [44] We must remember not to judge ourselves by other members who seem to have more usefulness, prominence or gifts than we do. Each member is vitally important to the whole body. If one member is honored all are honored. If one suffers, all suffer (12:26). “Now if the foot should say, ‘Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,’ it would not for that reason stop being part of the body” (12:15). Guthrie says, “A ‘foot’ bearing the weight of the body might easily envy a ‘hand’ swinging free and unencumbered.” [45] Both have vastly different tasks, but in the physical body we find them working together. The hands sometimes steady the feet. The feet take the hands where they need to be in order to do their work. All play their part. Robertson notes the vast difference in Christian understanding of unity and the world’s idea of leveling everyone to one standard. [46] This trend has accelerated mightily since Robertson’s day. “And if the ear should say, ‘Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,’ it would not for that reason stop being part of the body” (12:16). “The foot and hand represent men of active life; the ear and eye, those of contemplative life.” [47] They have to work closely together. Trapp says, “A man had better be blind, lame, dumb, than deaf; because by the ear life enters into the soul (Isa. 55:3).” [48] “If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be?” (12:17). One of my seminary professors used to gross out his classes by speaking of a 175 pound eyeball just rolling around staring up at the sky. Obviously such a member would be a helpless monstrosity or worse still, an eyesore. We can also imagine the body being one super big ear, like a giant radar receiver. It would get sound impulses from everywhere but it would have no brain to decode them. It would also have no nose to detect the skunks that just moved in. Obviously, we really need each other in the Body of Christ. We are really quite helpless when we are all alone. But in fact God has placed the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. 1 Corinthians 12:18 In our physical bodies, the Bible says we are “fearfully and wonderfully made” (Psa. 139:14). How these wonders are totally eclipsed by the glorious splendor of the spiritual body, the church! We all have a great need of each other in the church. Some have practical skills and gifts that are urgently necessary at times. Coffman says, “The nation could get along without its philosophers and politicians much better than it could get along without its farmers and plumbers. The same principle holds in the church.” [49] “If they were all one part, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, but one body” (12:19-20). Pett comments, “There would be no body, just a pile made up of quantities of one particular member, a pile of legs or a pile of eyes, and so on. The idea is ridiculous.” [50] Instead, the parts of the Body of Christ work together and grow together. Our purpose is that the body will grow to the measure, stature and fullness of Christ (Eph. 4:13). Meyer says, “The apostle’s aim throughout this passage is to enforce the interdependence of believers.” [51] The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 1 Corinthians 12:21-22 Barker and Kohlenberger say, “the inconspicuous members of the church – the poor, the despised, the less prominent – are to be cherished and nurtured.” [52] Wiersbe adds: “Diversity in the body is an evidence of the wisdom of God…In a healthy human body, the various members cooperate with each other and even compensate for each other when a crisis occurs.” [53] The great general Dwight Eisenhower once reprimanded another general for speaking of a soldier as “just a private.” Eisenhower replied to him, “The private is the man who wins the war.” [54] Paul continues saying, “and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it,” (12:23-24). Guzik adds, “Often, we consider a part of our body unnecessary or of low importance, until it is hurt – then we realize how important it is! …The parts of our bodies normally covered by clothes are often considered less honorable, but we give them greater honor by clothing them so carefully…. The ‘pride’ of the ‘honorable’ member is checked, as is the ‘shame’ of the ‘less honorable’ member.” [55] Barnes adds: “…those members of the church which are most retiring and feeble apparently which are concealed from public view, unnoticed and unknown – the humble, the meek, the peaceful, and the prayerful – are often more necessary to the true welfare of the church than those who are eminent for their talent and learning.” [56] There are a lot of Christians who have a low opinion of themselves and who feel that their gifts, if they have any, are of no importance. We only have to think of the liver. If we held it in our hands it would no doubt look like a bloody mess. Yet, we would sure hate trying to live without this bloody mess. Paul goes on speaking of the body: “so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it” (12:25-26). The word for division is the Greek schism. It is from this word that we get our English words like schism and schismatic. [57] A division of some sort in our physical bodies would be a terrible thing, but we can imagine that it is much worse in the spiritual body, the church. If some member in the body suffers, the whole body suffers. Calvin refers to this as “fellow feeling.” [58] Dr. Brand in his work discovered that the great damages of leprosy happened because the nerve endings had lost their feeling. [59] How tragic when this happens in the church, when we lose our feeling one for another. It is really a form of spiritual leprosy. Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 1 Corinthians 12:27 Since there is no definite article in the Greek before “body,” we can assume that this is a reference to the universal body of Christ. [60] Pfeiffer and Harrison remark that “Each church is in miniature what the whole aggregate of churches is collectively, ‘the body of Christ’ (compare 1 Corinthians 3:16): and its individual components are members, every one in his assigned place.” [61] Long ago Severian of Gabala commented: “We are not individual members who elect to join together to form a whole, but rather organic members of a wider whole, which is the whole body. [62] “And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues” (12:28). With the listings of gifts, we notice that some gifts might be labeled gifts to the church and others may be labeled gifts in the church. First in his listing here are gifts to the church. First and foremost he lists apostles. It is important that we understand the critical role of the original apostles in the matter of revelation. Many of these had been with Jesus in the flesh. They had heard him speak of wonderful things. Others like Paul had received powerful revelations of Christian truth. On one occasion Paul was caught up to the heavens and heard unspeakable things (2 Cor. 12:2-4). We might need to pause and consider the levels of apostleship. First let us clearly say that the twelve original apostles appointed by Jesus were “one of a kind” and their particular calling will not be reproduced. Why do we say this? In Acts 1:21-22, we read that the eleven original disciples felt it necessary to find a replacement for Judas who had betrayed Jesus. At this time they laid out the prerequisites for the one who would fill this position. In stating these prerequisites they said: “It is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.” We see by this that to be a disciple in the original biblical sense, it was necessary for one to have been present throughout the ministry of Jesus, including his resurrection and ascension. These special men were founders of the church and Paul places them in a very high position. Second, we see that the group of apostles was not limited to the twelve. There were others who had not met all the above requirements. Thus, they were foundational apostles of the second level, so to speak. Although they had not been with Jesus throughout his ministry, they nevertheless had a commission directly from the Lord and had apparently received some type of spiritual experiences with the Lord. We know that Paul, Barnabas and Silas were in this group (Acts 14:14; 1Thess 2:6). James Dunn lists some characteristics of this group of apostles. He says that they were personally commissioned by the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1; 15:7; Gal. 1:1). They were also the church founders (Rom. 1:5; 1 Cor. 3:5 f.; Gal. 1:15f.). They, like the others, had a distinctively eschatological role (1 Cor. 4:9; Eph. 3:5). [63] All these original apostles had a difficult task. They had to convey accurately all the teaching of Jesus. We must remember that in these early years there was no compilation of the New Testament books, and so much rested on oral teaching and repetition. At this early time, all books had to be written by hand and it would have cost something like a year’s wages for the average working person to acquire a New Testament, had one been in existence. So the work of these original apostles was of utmost importance in determining and proclaiming sound Christian doctrine. Third, there were other degrees of apostleship as we see reflected in the New Testament. We realize that certain others were added to the original group. In Romans 16:7 we read of Andronicus and Junia. Then we read of James, the Lord’s brother (1 Cor. 15:7; Gal. 1:19). Still, Paul tells us that these early apostles had certain marks: “The things that mark an apostle— signs, wonders and miracles— were done among you with great perseverance” (2 Cor. 12:12). Finally we must add that there were still others who later came into the apostolic ministry. In 2 Corinthians 11:13 and Revelation 2:2, we see that there were also ‘false apostles.’ This indicates that there must have been a fairly large group of people operating in the apostolic ministry. Had there only been the original small and select group, they would have been easily recognized throughout the church and there would have been no need to warn of false apostles. In Ephesians 4:12, we see that a part of the mission of the apostle was to prepare God’s people for the works of service and to build up the body of Christ. Obviously these works are very much needed today in the modern and postmodern church. When we observe the condition of the church today we may conclude that apostolic ministries of some sort are needed more than ever. The word apostle (Gk. apostolos) simply means ‘one sent out.’ Many are obviously sent out today. Also it cannot be denied that some are doing works that appear to be apostolic in their nature. I am thinking of the great work of Hudson Taylor and his China Inland Mission that opened China to the gospel. I am also thinking of Dr. Victor Choudry and his group, who have started multiplied thousands of churches in the area of India. [64] We can do with a word of caution about this whole subject. For the office of apostle to continue in any sense today, real apostolic work needs to be evidenced. Also, the respect of this high office must be maintained by those who feel this calling. It seems that there are many running around today proudly proclaiming themselves to be apostles, but with little or no regard to the dignity of the apostolic office, and producing few if any apostolic fruits. One new prophetic group called the ICA will make anyone a prophet for an annual fee of $450 (couples $650). If a person fails to renew his or her apostleship, that person becomes a “deactivated” apostle. [65] I have been a Christian for over 70 years and I must confess that I have never met anyone who bears the marks of a true apostle. True apostles are scarce and we need to be very cautious with this gift. Some of our modern apostles are already busy leading the church off into error. A few are saying that the word of God established by the early apostles is less important than the new revelations that they themselves are receiving. Thus, what they are calling “apostleship” might better be described as “apostasy.” Now let us examine the office of prophet. The prophetic gift had to do with the understanding of mysteries and knowledge. The prophets spoke forth the words of God. They could speak in a predictive sense but this was not always the case. As we have said concerning apostles we also say concerning the original prophets. They were one of a kind and we remember that the church was founded upon these original apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:20). In this special group of people we have some women represented. There was Anna (Lk. 2:36-38) and the four daughters of Philip (Acts 21:9). Because of the mysterious nature of this gift we can understand how it quickly came into disrepute. There began to be many false prophets. The aged John wrote of this saying: “Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 Jn. 4:1). Peter also wrote about false prophets and false teachers. He warned the church about the destructive heresies that they would introduce (2 Pet. 2:1). Also, in time, “the settled ministry began to resent the intrusion of these wandering prophets, who often disturbed their congregation.” [66] Apostles and Prophets were traveling ministries that did not remain in any one church but ministered to all the churches. In Ephesians 4:11, Paul mentions a third traveling ministry, that of the evangelist. These three ministries made up the gifts of God to the church or to the churches. Next Paul deals with some of the gifts in the churches. In this important verse Paul mentions teachers. We must remember again that few materials were written down in the First Century. Common people did not have Bibles and there was not yet a New Testament. The teachers had the difficult job of instructing the church on what was proper apostolic doctrine. The apostle lists miracles (Gk. dunameis) next. We spoke a lot about miracles in our comments on verse 4. Apparently, there were a number of people in the early church who had gifts of working various miracles. No doubt, such a person would bring a lot of excitement into the early congregations and would astound unbelievers as well. After miracles, we have listed gifts of healings. We have noted before that this gift is in the plural and apparently different people had specific gifts for certain diseases. As we have said previously, we surely need these people to rise up with their gifts because we have many sick people in our churches today. Then Paul mentions gifts of helps (Gk. antilēmpseis). Robertson feels that such gifts would have been found in the deacons who helped the poor and sick. [67] We note that in Romans 16:3, Priscilla, and Aquilla are called Paul’s helpers. Also in Rom. 16:9, Urbanus is also called his helper. He moves on to mention the gift of administration or government (Gk. kubernēseis). Barclay says of this word, “…it literally refers to the work of a pilot who steers the ship through the rocks and shoals to harbor.” [68] A lot of churches today could use this kind of gift. For some gifted people the tedious work of leading is a snap. As Paul winds up this listing he mentions gifts of tongues. It is probably no accident that he places it last. He no doubt does this as a corrective for the Corinthians who seemed to have placed it first. We note that Paul does not mention pastors or elders in this listing. He does so in the Ephesians 4:11 listing. Coffman remarks: “Acts bears witness to the fact that apostolic churches did not exist without elders, except for the briefest time after their founding (Acts 14:23).” [69] Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 1 Corinthians 12:29-30 In the church some people have more than one spiritual gift, but it is clear that every believer has at least one. While the gift of tongues is a common gift and perhaps the least gift, it is not possessed by everyone. The reason may be that a lot of people do not wish to have this gift. The Corinthians had it and they overdid it. We might consider that these spiritual gifts are distributed among people much like the natural gifts are. Not everyone is an artist, but there are plenty of them around. Not everyone is a musician, but the gift is scattered liberally among people. “Now eagerly desire the greater gifts. And yet I will show you the most excellent way” (12:31). Paul is about to interrupt his teaching on gifts in order to tell us about the greatest gift of all. Before he does, he challenges us to eagerly desire the greater gifts. That must sound like a strange message to those who deny the gifts today. We need to remember that God once gave the important gift of prophecy to Balaam’s donkey. If he can do that for such a lowly beast, just think what he can do for us! 1. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 162. Barnes adds: “The word ‘gifts’ is not in the original. The Greek refers to ‘spiritual’ things in general, or to anything that is of a spiritual nature.” (Barnes v. 12:1). 2. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 136. 3. Donald W. McCullough, The Trivilization of God: The Dangerous Illusion of a manageable Deity (Colo. Springs: Nav Press, 1995), p. 24. 4. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 117. 5. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 118. 6. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshu 8. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 12:3. 9. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 163. Pett notes here: “To put someone or something under ‘anathema’ was to cast it out, to reject it, to allocate it as God-rejected, and to bring God’s stamp of disapproval on it…. So the evil spirits are seen to be capable of denying both the true humanity (compare 1 John 4:2-3) and the full divinity of Jesus Christ… There is here, then, a clear warning that spiritual gifts can be imitated, and that they are no necessary proof of spirituality, and that even some of the supposed charismata may in fact not be genuine.” (Pett vs. 12:1-3). 10. Quoted in Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, vs. 12:1-3. 11. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, vs. 12:4-6. 12. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 13. Ibid. 14. Roberts, et. al., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, 214. 15. Ibid., p. 409. 16. Ibid., Vol. 3, p. 91. 17. Ibid., Vol. 4, p. 415. 18. John Wimber, with Kevin Springer, Power Evangelism, Signs and Wonders Today, (London: Hodder &Stoughton, 1985), p. 155. 19. Ibid., pp. 155-156. 20. Ibid., pp. 157-158. 21. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 1067. 22. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 12:11. 23. Ibid., v. 12:6. 24. Dean L. Overman, A Case For The Existence of God (New York: Rowman &Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2009), p. 14. 25. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 26. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, pp. 118-119. 27. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 28. Ibid. 29. Ibid Barclay adds: “The early Church lived in a world where healing miracles were common-place. If a Jew was ill he was much more likely to go to the Rabbi than to the doctor; and he would most likely be healed. Aesculapius was the Greek God of healing. People went to his temples, usually spending whole nights there, to be healed, and often they were. To this day we find among the ruins of these temples votive tablets and inscriptions commemorating healings; and no one goes to the trouble and expense of erecting an inscription for nothing.” (Barclay, vs. 12:4-11). 30. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 166. 31. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 289. 32. Ibid., p. 290, citing Carson. 33. Ibid., p. 292. 34. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 35. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/adrianwarnock/2006/10/audio-sermons-mark-driscoll-the-charismatic-with-a-seat-belt/ 36. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 123. 37. Paul Brand &Philip Yancey, Fearfully and Wonderfully Made (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1980), p. 44. 38. Ibid., p. 20. 39. Ibid., pp. 46-47. 40. Ibid., p. 40. 41. Ibid., p. 24. 42. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, Barnes adds: “Many suppose that there is reference here to the ordinance of baptism by water. But the connection seems rather to require us to understand it of the baptism of the Holy Spirit Matthew 3:11.” (Barnes, vs. 12:13). 43. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p.120. 44. Robert Brow, Ephesians Commentary, (Odessa, Ontario: J.L.P. Digital Publications, 2002), comment on Ephesians Eph. 4:7. 45. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 1067. 46. Quoted in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 12:15. 47. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 12:15. 48. Trapp, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete Commentary, v. 12:16. 49. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 12:18. 50. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 51. Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, vs. 12:20-31. 52. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 642. 53. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 487. 54. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 12:22. 55. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 56. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 57. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 12:25. 58. Calvin, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Calvin’s Commentary on the Bible, 59. Brand &Yancey, Fearfully and Wonderfully Made, p. 37. 60. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1251. 61 Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 12:27. 62. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 129. 63. Cited in Larry D. Hart, Truth Aflame; A Balanced Theology for Evangelicals and Charismatics (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1999), p. 521. 64. Information taken from Ted Olsen (2015), Far East missionary and mission planner for Global Fellowship. Also, some months ago my wife and I were privileged to meet and talk with Mrs. Choudry during her visit to the US. 65. Grace To You Website http://www.gty.org/Blog/B131118 66. William Barclay, The Letters to the Galatians and Ephesians; The New Daily Study Bible (Louisville &London: The Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), p.168. 67. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 12:28. 68. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 69. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 12:28. If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 1 Corinthians 13:1 This short chapter may well contain the greatest prose ever penned. The famous Lutheran theologian, Adolf Harnack, referred to this chapter as, “the greatest, strongest, deepest thing Paul ever wrote…” [1] The famed British evangelist, G. Campbell Morgan, said that if one examined this chapter, it would be like dissecting a flower to understand it. In the process, one would tear the flower apart and lose its beauty. [2] In reflecting on this chapter the Scottish evangelist, Henry Drummond wrote his famous essay entitled The Greatest Thing In The World. His short essay sold over twelve million copies beginning back in the 1800s. The subject of this chapter is love, real love, agape love, and Drummond saw this as the summum bonum, the highest good; the greatest value; the most worthy goal of life. As Drummond said, “To love abundantly is to live abundantly, and to love for ever is to live for ever.” He saw the various graces mentioned here as merely the light spectrum of love, as seen in patience, kindness, generosity, humility, courtesy, unselfishness, good temper, guilelessness and sincerity. He said, “Where Love is, God is. He that dwelleth in Love dwelleth in God. God is love.” [3] Clearly, Paul was not writing about a subject but a person. Meyer says of him: “His radiant spirit had caught a glimpse of the living Savior. Jesus sits for his portrait in these glowing sentences, and of him every clause is true.” [4] When we first look at this chapter, it seems to be a digression from Paul’s lengthy discussion of spiritual gifts. However, Bruce says that it is not a digression at all, but rather it is an essential and integral part of Paul’s argument. [5] What good are gifts, even the most spectacular gifts, if we do not possess love with them? If we can speak in angelic languages and do not have love we are like a clanging gong. Barclay says, “A characteristic of heathen worship, especially the worship of Dionysus and Cybele, was the clanging of cymbals and the braying of trumpets.” [6] The Corinthians were no doubt familiar with these bronze instruments. It seems that Corinth was famous throughout the ancient world for its excellent bronze work. Josiah Gregory once said, “People of little religion are always noisy; he who has not the love of God and man filling his heart is like an empty wagon coming violently down a hill: it makes a great noise, because there is nothing in it.” [7] What a contrast it is when we quietly live in love and constantly do the eternal work of love. Drummond said, “I shall pass through this world but once. Any good thing therefore that I can do, or any kindness that I can show to any human being, let me do it now. Let me not defer it or neglect it, for I shall not pass this way again.” [8] The word for love is the Greek agape. It was not in common use before the New Testament era. However, the Christians took this obscure word and made it their primary word for love. [9] It is the word that pictures God’s great and unending love for us and also the word that should describe our love for God and for other people. We have this special love because God first loved us (1 Jn. 4:19). In fact, he has poured out his love into our hearts through the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5). The greatest commands of scripture are the commands to love God and to love our neighbors as ourselves (Matt. 22:37-39; Mk. 12:30-31; Lk. 10:27). Love is really the essence of Christianity. Wiersbe says that love is, “The main evidence of maturity in the Christian life is a growing love for God and for God’s people, as well as a love for lost souls. It has well been said that love is the ‘circulatory system’ of the body of Christ.” [10] “If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing” (13:2). Coffman comments, “…While spiritual gifts are important to the functioning of the body (12:12-31), they lose their value if love is not behind them.” [11] Paul regarded the gift of prophecy as the greatest gift and the one that should be sought after. However, here he says that prophecy is nothing without love. It is good to be able to open up the prophetic mysteries of God, but again, without love these are meaningless. The prophet Balaam gave some of the clearest messianic prophesies in the Bible. Yet, he had no love for Israel, and that lack of love destroyed him in the end (Num. 24:1ff; 31:8). Even faith, the mainspring of the Christian life, is no good without love. If we have faith strong enough to move mountains it would be useless if it is loveless (cf. Mk. 11:23; Matt. 17:20). Keener sees the matter of moving mountains as an ancient figure of speech for doing something impossible. [12] For us to actually move a mountain would create an ecological disaster of an immense magnitude. “If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing” (13:3). There is a textual problem in this verse and scholars have had a difficult time giving it the proper translation. Many translations (KJV, NKJ, NAS, ESV, NJB and earlier editions of the NIV) have it reading that one give his or her body to be burned. A few, including later NIV versions have it handing over my body that I may boast. Morris thinks it is more likely that the text should speak of boasting. [13] Regarding the needy, it was often the practice of early Christians to share their possessions with the poor. In some cases believers even sold themselves into slavery just to provide for the poor. Drummond says, “The most obvious lesson in Christ’s teaching is that there is no happiness in having and getting anything, but only in giving.” [14] Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 1 Corinthians 13:4 The word for patient is the Greek makrothumei. It describes an attitude of patience with people. [15] I like to call it loooooong suffering with people. Obviously, the Corinthian Christians did not display this virtue when they shared the communion meal together, as we saw earlier. Some ate all the food before the poor and hungry could get to it. Then we see that love is kind. McGee says, “Love is impossible without kindness. Love without kindness is like springtime without flowers, like fire without heat.” [16] The Greek word is chrēsteuetai. Barclay says of it, “There is a graciousness in Christian love which never forgets that courtesy and tact and politeness are lovely things…Whenever we start thinking about ‘our place,’ we are drifting away from Christian love.” [17] Love is not envious or jealous. In our society we are taught in many ways to be envious. Much of our advertisement is based on this, as we seek a house or car that is better than our neighbor. We may think that envy is a small thing, but Guzik reminds us that “Envy murdered Abel (Gen. 4:3-8). Envy enslaved Joseph (Gen. 37:11, 28). Envy put Jesus on the cross: For he knew that they had handed him over because of envy (Matt. 27:18).” [18] Next we see that love does not boast, “Literally, does not play the braggart…” [19] People boast about a lot of things today, about their money, their education, their status, but all this is for nothing. Barclay tells this story about William Carey the missionary: Carey, who began life as a cobbler, was one of the greatest missionaries and certainly one of the greatest linguists the world has ever seen. He translated at least parts of the Bible into no fewer than thirty-four Indian languages. When he came to India, he was regarded with dislike and contempt. At a dinner party a snob, with the idea of humiliating him, said in a tone that everyone could hear, “I suppose, Mr. Carey, you once worked as a shoe-maker.” “No, your lordship,” answered Carey, “not a shoe-maker, only a cobbler.” [20] Love is not proud. I like the way the Message version translates this. It says, “Love doesn’t strut.” In Psalm 138:6 we read: “Though the LORD is exalted, he looks kindly on the lowly; though lofty, he sees them from afar.” We also read in Proverbs 16:5, “The LORD detests all the proud of heart. Be sure of this: They will not go unpunished.” Paul continues his description of love saying, “It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs” (13:5). Perhaps we should look at some of the Greek words used in this verse. The Greek aschēmonei means to conduct oneself improperly, disgracefully, or in a way that deserves reproach. Such action brings dishonor to other people. [21] Love does not seek its own. In other words, true love goes against the spirit of this evil age that stresses “I,” “Me,” and “My.” The US “Baby Boomer” generation has rightly been called the “Me Generation.” In advertising we often hear the expression, “Is this right for YOU?” It is sad today that the emphasis is upon our rights rather than our duties. Love does not get angry easily. The Greek word is paroxunetai, and it means to sharpen with something. It pictures sharpening a knife or sword. It conveys the meaning of rousing to anger or exciting wrath. [22] Love is not provoked. In the Phillips translation it reads that love, “is not touchy.” Next we read that love “keeps no record of wrongs.” The Greek here is logizesthai. This is an accountant’s word that speaks of keeping a ledger and entering sums into that ledger lest they be forgotten. [23] I remember a meeting once held with our director where I aired a lot of grievances. Afterward, I became convicted that I was keeping a record of wrongs, and then tried my best to forget the offenses. I hardly remember any of them today. “Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth” (13:6). We have such a poor understanding of truth today because our postmodern philosophers have almost totally corrupted it. They have denied that there is any universal standard of truth and have taught that all truth is relative. Each person thus can have his or her own standard of truth. This is all nonsense of course. It does make it quite impossible for many to rejoice in truth. It is equally clear that we must not rejoice in evil. During the Confederate War [Civil War], one day a Federal officer came rushing into General Grant’s headquarters in a great glee, saying, “Oh! I have something wonderfully good to tell you,” and at the same time looking around and observing, “I believe there are no ladies present?” At this moment the old General interrupted: “But I will let you know there are gentlemen present.” The hint was taken and the joke was never told. [24] “It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres” (13:7). The Greek word for “protects” is stegō. The word has reference to a roof and has a metaphorical meaning of covering. [25] Commentators see several meanings in this word. It means that love hides and conceals faults and imperfections of others. It protects others from embarrassment and shields them from gossip and harm. Love is always eager to believe the best in other people. Love always trusts or believes. Bruce says that love is “always eager to believe the best and put the most favorable construction on ambiguous actions…” [26] This does not imply that those who love are simply gullible. Rather, they are faithful and hopeful. The righteous live in a sense of expectation, hoping always for the best. Last in this verse, it tells us that those who love endure. The Greek word is hypomenein. Barclay says that “there is no English word which transmits all the fullness of its meaning.” [27] He speaks of it as “staying power” of “patience.” He says, “It is the quality which keeps a man on his feet with his face to the wind. It is the virtue which can transmute the hardest trial into glory because beyond the pain it sees the goal.” [28] Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 1 Corinthians 13:8 Kretzmann says, “Love never fails, it outwears all gifts, it never drops out of existence; like the eternal God, to whom it owes its being, it lasts forever.” [29] Love is greater than all the spiritual gifts. It is the greatest virtue, it is permanent. All other gifts will pass away in time. Many people think the gifts have already passed away and are no longer of concern for the church. However, we see later (v. 10) that the gifts pass away when the Perfect One comes. Prophecy is the greatest gift but we see that even that will pass away. Certainly tongues and other gifts will fade away at the Lord’s coming. Concerning those who believe that gifts have passed away already, we must ask them a question. We must ask, “Why, O why, did Paul spend two precious and lengthy chapters talking about something that was already passing away?” Paul makes clear that tongues, so valued by the Corinthians, would pass away. Gifts of knowledge would also pass away. Actually, our knowledge is passing away and being replaced so rapidly today that we can barely keep up with its demise. Bruce does remark, “The highest knowledge, the knowledge of God in Christ, far from passing away, would attain transcendent perfection in the age to come (13:12).” [30] “For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears” (13:9-10). This verse answers a lot of question about spiritual gifts. People wonder why a person with a gift of healing, for instance, cannot heal a certain person or why someone with a prophetic gift fails to see some coming event. The answer is that all spiritual gifts are given in part. They are hit and miss, so to speak. They are not perfect. When the perfect (teleios) comes, all things in part will pass away. This Greek word means “perfect, complete” or “full-grown, mature.” [31] Guzik remarks, “Virtually all commentators agree that which is perfect is fulfilled when we are in the eternal presence of the Perfect One.” [32] Comfort adds: “In eternity, we will be made perfect and complete and will be in the very presence of God. We will no longer need the spiritual gifts, so they will come to an end.” [33] “When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me” (13:11). By their overemphasis on tongues the Corinthians were showing that they were immature. Paul insists that they grow up. He had done so himself. Godbey says, “…we see a photograph of Paul the apostle, standing on the Areopagus, preaching to the Athenian philosophers, orators, poets and statesmen, the most learned audience addressed by a gospel herald in four thousand years.” [34] “For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known” (13:12). Barclay reminds us that Corinth was famed for its manufacture of mirrors. These were not to be compared with our mirrors of today that give us a near-perfect reflection. Such mirrors did not come on the scene until the thirteenth century. [35] The mirrors of that day were made of highly polished bronze. Unfortunately, they did not give a very clear reflection. One could only make out their image dimly (Gk. ainigmati), or like a “riddle.” [36] Pett makes application here: “In the same way when we at present look at heavenly things what we see is also dim, imperfect and distorted. But then, after the resurrection or transformation (1 Cor. 15:52), when we have passed into God’s presence, we shall see all face to face…Our eyes will see the King, fully in his glory.” [37] “And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love” (13:13). Faith, hope and love appear together on several occasions in scripture (Rom. 5:1-5; Gal. 5:5-6; Eph. 4:2-5; Col. 1:4-5; 1 Thess. 5:8; Heb. 6:10-12; 10:22-24; 1 Pet. 1:3-8). The three are generally considered to be the pillars upon which Christianity stands. Of the three, love is the greatest. It is likely that love “is the greatest force in the universe.” [38] We must be careful not to confuse this biblical and heavenly love with its cheap imitations in our society today. Much of the so-called love we see around us is a selfish love that demeans and destroys people. True love always builds people up. Obviously, when the Lord appears, even faith and hope will no longer be significant. We cannot have faith and hope for something that we will then fully possess. Love, being the very essence of God, will continue forever in its heavenly beauty and glory. With that, this wonderful chapter draws to a close. Morris remarks in closing, “The commentator cannot finish writing on this chapter without a sense that soiled and clumsy hands have touched a thing of exquisite beauty and holiness.” [39] 1. Quoted in Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 174 2. Cited in Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 3. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/drummond/greatest.html 4. Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, vs. 13:1-13. Keener adds: “Love appears regularly as the supreme virtue in early Christian 5. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 124. 6. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 7. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 13:1. 8. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/drummond/greatest.html 9. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 174. 10. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 487. 11. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 185. 12. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 479. 13. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, 14. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/drummond/greatest.html 15. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 16. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 153. 17. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 18. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 19. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1252. 20. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 21. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 13:5. 22. Ibid. 23. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 24. Godbey, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament, v. 13:6. 25. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 13:7. 26. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 127. 27. William Barclay, A New Testament Wordbook (London: SCM Press LTD, 1959), p. 59. 28. Ibid., p. 61. 29. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 30. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 128. 31. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 297. 32. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 33. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 192. 34. Godbey, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament, v. 13:11. 35. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Barnes adds: “It is, therefore, probable that he refers to those transparent substances which the ancients had, and which they used in their windows occasionally; such as thin plates of horn, transparent stone, etc. …It is known that glass was in quite common use about the commencement of the Christian era. …About this time drinking vessels were made commonly of glass; and glass bottles for holding wine and flowers were in common use. …There is, therefore, no impropriety in supposing that Paul here may have alluded to the imperfect and discolored glass which was then in extensive use.” (Barnes, v. 13:12). 36. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, 37. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the 38. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1253. 39. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, Follow the way of love and eagerly desire gifts of the Spirit, especially prophecy. 1 Corinthians 14:1 In his wonderful 13th chapter, Paul has helped us understand divine love, which is the basis for all spiritual gifts. Without love, the gifts are nothing, but with it they build up the Body of Christ. In this section, Paul encourages us to desire and seek after the gifts, but here he focuses primarily on two of them, tongues and prophecy. Comfort says, “Apparently, the Corinthians had a knack for turning even good gifts into divisive issues…Corinthian believers were using it [tongues] as a sign of spiritual superiority rather than a means for giving spiritual unity.” [1] What they were doing was not unlike what some Charismatics have done in recent times. They have implied that if one has not experienced “the baptism of the Spirit” that person is spiritually inferior or incomplete. Paul says that we are to eagerly desire the spiritual gifts. The Greek word is zēloute. It is a strong verb meaning “pursue.” [2] Other translations bring out the full meaning. The NASB has it, “desire earnestly spiritual gifts.” The NRSV translates it, “strive for the spiritual gifts” and the TEV has it reading, “set your hearts on spiritual gifts.” So we know by this that spiritual gifts are very important to the church. We should not doubt them as many commentators and hosts of Christians have done through the ages and up to the present time. The apostle is crystal clear that prophecy is the most important spiritual gift. He wants us to concentrate on this gift and to seek it most of all. The gift of prophecy (Gk. prophēteuēte) is not here seen as in the sense of the Old Testament prophets. It is not primarily involved in predicting future events (although this is possible), but it is more involved in delivering messages from God under the Holy Spirit’s inspiration. It provides insight, warning, correction and encouragement to the church. [3] We no doubt remember the New Testament prophet Agabus who warned of a coming famine (Acts 11:28-30). The church at Antioch was then able to mobilize and send immediate help to the Judean saints. Paul was not known as a prophet but nevertheless he is responsible for bringing forth some of the most astounding prophecies in the New Testament. In Romans 11:17, he reveals the mystery of our engrafting into Israel, along with several other mysteries about Israel in chapters 9-11. In Ephesians, he reveals how God has blessed us all with every spiritual blessing in the heavens (1:3) and how he chose us before the world’s foundation (1:4). He reveals how we are seated with Christ in heavenly places (2:6). He reveals the deep mystery of how the church and Israel are joined together to become a new spiritual temple of God (2:21; 3:6). Paul was not a prophet but he did some great prophetic preaching. We need to be doing some of that today. It would set our churches on fire. It has been common for people, especially if they do not believe in spiritual gifts, to say that preaching is today’s prophecy. That statement as it stands is untrue. [4] Today’s preaching has little to do with prophecy, unless it is prophetic preaching like Paul often did, and like Peter did on the Day of Pentecost. Guzik makes clear that prophecy is not identical with preaching. He says that there was a common Greek word for preaching (kerusso) and that Paul does not use this word here. [5] “For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to people but to God. Indeed, no one understands them; they utter mysteries by the Spirit” (14:2). Here the apostle proceeds to instruct us on how tongues operate. It never ceases to amaze me that many commentators, who themselves do not believe in tongues, still try to comment on this gift. This seems utterly futile. Paul however does believe in tongues and we will see later that he often uses this gift. Here he makes clear that tongues are a manner of speaking to God in ecstatic languages, not to men, or for that matter, not to ourselves. Tongues are mysterious and it is normally not possible for us to understand our own gift of tongues, that is, unless we have a gift of interpretation. Some commentators make mistakes here assuring us that the gift of tongues is primarily for evangelism so that we can preach the gospel in other languages that we do not know. It is good for us to remember that tongues are primarily addressed to God, not to people. Tongues or glossolalia can be used in our private devotions. [6] This is designed to build up our spiritual lives so that we can in turn build up the Body of Christ. Paul tells us that by speaking in tongues we speak mysteries (Gk. mysteria). In its usage here “mysteries” seem to speak of that which is beyond the range of human understanding. [7] We note in Acts 2 that tongues were actually given in foreign languages that could be easily understood by those present. Over the years, we have heard some isolated accounts where such a thing has happened again, but this is not the main purpose of tongues. Of course, tongues are mysterious, as we have said, and the sovereign God can use this gift in any way he chooses. However, Wiersbe says, “It is…unfortunate that people have the idea that tongues were used to preach the gospel to the lost….At Pentecost, the believers extolled ‘the wonderful works of God,’ but Peter preached the gospel in the Aramaic language his listeners could all understand.” [8] “But the one who prophesies speaks to people for their strengthening, encouraging and comfort” (14:3). We need to look at the Greek words used here. The first is strengthening or edification (oikodomēn), and it conveys the idea of building up. The next is encouraging (paraklēsin), and it has the meaning of calling to one’s side or encouraging. [9] Finally, he mentions comfort (paramuthian). It speaks of encouragement, exhortation, persuasion. [10] Prophecy turns the light on in the house of God. It radically expands the horizons of our faith. If there is prophetic activity going on in a church the people will never suffer from boredom or burnout. Prophecy encourages people because the Holy Spirit is an encourager and comforter (Jn. 14:16, 26; Acts 9:31). He will not tear people down or condemn and discourage them. “Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church” (14:4). A number of commentators seem to feel that it is selfish to edify oneself, but scripture here makes it plain that it is OK. After all, we cannot really edify or build up others unless we ourselves are built up. Chrysostom once said: “The difference between tongues and prophecy is precisely the difference between benefit to the individual and benefit to the entire church.” [11] Of course, the whole church can be edified if the tongue is interpreted. “I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy. The one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless someone interprets, so that the church may be edified” (14:5). Imagine that! Paul wants all of us to speak in tongues. How can we so dispute his word today by denying that tongues still exist? Has the word of God lost its validity? Is it no longer true? Comfort says, “Paul never wrote disparagingly of the gift of tongues, only the Corinthians’ overemphasis of it.” [12] And will we also forbid prophecy? The Bible says that our sons and daughters will prophesy (Acts 2:17-18). Paul had rather that we speak in prophecy for it is more advantageous for the church. Unfortunately, today a lot of Christians do not believe either tongues or prophecy still exist. Now, brothers and sisters, if I come to you and speak in tongues, what good will I be to you, unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge or prophecy or word of instruction? 1 Corinthians 14:6 Tongues are mystifying, and they certainly have some attraction for the people listening. However, unless people are instructed, the tongue display is useless. Paul speaks of revelation, knowledge, prophecy and instruction in this verse. Revelation knowledge and prophetic knowledge can revitalize a church. Again, I think of some of Paul’s revelations. For instance, Paul says he was chosen to make this mystery known among Gentile people, “which is Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col. 1:27). This one mystery is so great and so profound that we could spend the rest of our lives thinking about it and meditating on it. We can easily see how revelation played a very important role in the early church. In Galatians 2:2, we see how Paul by revelation went up to Jerusalem to consult with the apostles of the church (Gal. 2:2). [13] It was by divine revelation that Paul and Barnabas were sent on their First Missionary Journey (Acts 13:1-3). It was also by divine revelation that Paul and Silas were sent into the area that would become Europe (Acts 16:6-10). Thus, it was by revelation knowledge that the gospel came to us all. “Even in the case of lifeless things that make sounds, such as the pipe or harp, how will anyone know what tune is being played unless there is a distinction in the notes?” (14:7). Chrysostom comments here: “If we require precision even in lifeless instruments, how much more will we require it in living beings?” [14] Probably all of us, at one time or another, have been agitated by some child banging on a piano. [15] The child is no doubt having fun, but the banging is meaningless and offensive to us. So it can become with tongues, unless they are interpreted. It is interesting that the harp (kithara) mentioned here is the word from which we get “guitar” today. [16] Often in our society even guitars can become offensive to us. “Again, if the trumpet does not sound a clear call, who will get ready for battle?” (14:8). In ancient times, armies were directed by differing trumpet sounds. There was a sound indicating a charge and another one indicating a retreat. We can easily understand how great confusion would result if the wrong sound was given. Several years ago my wife and I ministered in South Africa for several weeks. Since I was speaking on Israel most of that time I used a shofar blast to challenge the people and end each service. On one occasion, when we spoke to our largest group, I pursed my lips to give the shofar blast and absolutely no sound came out. I composed myself, pursed my lips even tighter, and gave another blast. Again, absolutely nothing came out. With the third unsuccessful try I apologized using this very verse and promptly sat myself down. Paul is saying that the same confusion will reign in a church when tongues without interpretation are given. “So it is with you. Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying? You will just be speaking into the air” (14:9). Keener says here, “Intelligibility is the key to edifying others (14:6-12).” [17] Our tongues are a part of our body that is hardest to control and when we are speaking ecstatically it is harder still. Konrad Adenauer once said, “All parts of the human body get tired eventually – except the tongue.” Undoubtedly there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without meaning. If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and the speaker is a foreigner to me. 1 Corinthians 14:10-11 The word “foreigner” in the Greek is barbarous. It is an onomatopoeic word and it means that someone sounds like “bab bar” and makes no sense at all. [18] The Greeks looked upon all foreigners as barbarians. We note that Paul encountered some of these barbarians when he ministered at Malta and Lycaonia (Acts 14:11). Paul did not understand their dialect and apparently they did not speak the almost universal Greek language. [19] “So it is with you. Since you are eager for gifts of the Spirit, try to excel in those that build up the church” (14:12). Chrysostom says, “The building up of the church is Paul’s touchstone in everything he says.” [20] Comfort gives us a literal translation of this verse: “Since zealots you are of spiritual things, be zealous that you may abound in the edification of the church.” [21] We see the importance of building up the church in a number of passages (cf. Rom. 15:2; 1 Cor. 3:10; 1 Thess. 5:11). “For this reason the one who speaks in a tongue should pray that they may interpret what they say” (14:13). Since some are zealous and anxious to speak in tongues, they should also be just as zealous and anxious to have the gift of interpretation. In my ministry career I have heard numerous interpretations of tongues in the churches. However, it should be said that most of these interpretations do not seem to be literal translations. They appear to be mostly words of comfort, encouragement and direction for the people. Sometimes the tongue is short and the interpretation is long, and sometimes it is just the opposite. Derek Prince, who had long experience in the Charismatic world, says of interpretation: “To properly exercise the gift of interpretation of tongues, we must understand its nature. Interpretation must not necessarily be understood to mean a word-for-word translation, but rather a rendering of the general sense of what was spoken in the tongue.” [22] “For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful” (14:14). We should understand that the mind has nothing to do with the language of tongues. The various words are not framed with the mind but they flow through the mind and tongue in an almost automatic manner. As Morris says, “Anyone who prays in a tongue is not using his mind (nous).” [23] As Comfort puts it: “That is part of the mysterious beauty of this particular gift – it does not engage the intellect in order to use it. It is a gift filled with fervor and passion for the Lord. Yet even as the person prays, he or she does not understand his or her own words.” [24] “So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my understanding; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding” (14:15). Paul will pray both ways, with his spirit and with his mind. Tongues are a spiritual way of praying. Only God can understand the deep groaning of the Spirit within us. One can pray silently in tongues on those various occasions where we have no idea how to pray. Abraham of Nathpar, the sixth century Syrian writer, says, “… this spiritual prayer is not offered up or prayed by the tongue, for it is deeper than the lips and the tongue, more interiorized than any composite sounds, lying beyond psalmody and wisdom.” [25] The apostle also says, “I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my understanding” This could be another spiritual gift, that of singing in the Spirit (cf. 1 Cor. 14:26; Col. 3:16). From personal experience, I must say that a spontaneous spiritual song in tongues is one of the most beautiful and heavenly things I have ever heard. In Ephesians 5:19, we are commanded to “Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs…” I must ask, “When was the last time we spoke to another person with a spiritual song?” God expects us to be doing these things. “Otherwise when you are praising God in the Spirit, how can someone else, who is now put in the position of an inquirer, say ‘Amen’ to your thanksgiving, since they do not know what you are saying?” (14:16). All these beautiful tongues and spiritual songs presuppose a translation. If there is no interpretation, there will be no edification. The inquirer (Gk. idiotes) is speaking of the private person who is unlearned. [26] That person will be unable to say “Amen” to our spiritual exercise. This reflects the fact that it was a custom for people in the early church to say “Amen” when someone prayed or gave a message. [27] “You are giving thanks well enough, but no one else is edified” (14:17). Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown say, “The synagogue prayers were called ‘eulogies,’ because to each was joined a thanksgiving. Hence, Christian prayers also were called blessings and giving of thanks. This illustrates Colossians 4:2 and 1 Thessalonians 5:17-18.” [28] We are not thankful enough today in our age of entitlement. Our thanks need to be in plain language so that all can hear and we need to go through each day thanking God for all his goodness. Perhaps it would be good if we tried a bit more to explain the gift of tongues. How can we begin speaking in tongues anyway? Guzik says, “It doesn’t happen as one just opens their mouth and God ‘takes over’ their tongue…It doesn’t happen as they are told to repeat a nonsense word or phrase faster and faster until God ‘takes over’…A word or a sound occurs to our mind, and we vocalize that word or sound. In the gift of tongues, one simply continues to speak the words and sounds coming into their mind, trusting God is prompting them…” [29] Some may be fearful that Satan will interfere in this process and cause a person to speak blasphemies. Matthew 7:8-11 assures us: “For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. Which of you, if your son asks for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!” Guzik adds, “…We don’t need to fear we will find Satan when we sincerely seek God.” [30] I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. But in the church I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue. 1 Corinthians 14:18-19 It must sorely distress many of those who detest and despise tongues that their favorite apostle Paul spoke in tongues more than everyone. In true religion there has always been that mystical and supernatural element. The early prophets were evidence of this. They did strange things and spoke strange and puzzling words at times. There were miracles that could not be explained and that did not fit into the every-day scheme of things. It is still that way today. However, the unusual alarms us. We would like it to go away but it will not. “Brothers and sisters, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinking be adults” (14:20). In 13:11, Paul testified that he had put away childish things and now he instructs the Corinthians to do the same regarding tongues. As Bruce says, “Over-concentration on glossolalia is a mark of immaturity…” [31] “In the Law it is written: ‘With other tongues and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to me, says the Lord’” (14:21). Here Paul refers back to the scripture in Isaiah 28:11. We should not be confused that he refers to this passage as the “Law.” Among the Jewish people, they often used the term “Law” to refer to the whole of scriptures. [32] God had tried through the centuries to instruct his people in simple Hebrew but they would not listen. With this verse he promises that they will someday have to be instructed through the mouths of foreign, Assyrian invaders. Bruce says, “In this sense the message of God conveyed in unfamiliar language was a sign…for unbelievers, a sign of divine judgment.” [33] In this sense tongues can be a sign, although a warning sign, to unbelievers. “Tongues, then, are a sign, not for believers but for unbelievers; prophecy, however, is not for unbelievers but for believers” (14:22). Comfort says, “…Tongues are a sign for unbelievers in the same way that Old Testament signs were understood.” [34] There was a strange account that happened during the Azusa Street Revival of the early 20th century. A teenage girl was in the “Upper Room” where many had gathered to pray. She saw a man coming up the stairs and was moved to speak with him. She talked to him several minutes in a strange language. This account is recorded in the book They Speak With Other Tongues. The man reportedly said: I am a Jew and I came to this city to investigate this speaking in tongues. No person in this city knows my first or my last name, as I am here under an assumed name. No one in this city knows my occupation or anything about me. I go to hear preachers for the purpose of taking their sermons apart, and using them in lecturing against the Christian religion. This girl, as I entered the room, started speaking to me in the Hebrew language. She told me my first name and my last name, and she told me why I was in the city and what my occupation was in life, and then she called upon me to repent. She told me things which it would be impossible for any person in this city to know. [The author adds that the man then dropped to his knees and cried and prayed as though his heart would break]. [35] So we see that tongues can be used by God in some cases as a warning to unbelievers. This section is a little confusing for it seems that Paul is contradicting himself. When we understand that tongues can be used as a warning for unbelievers, the matter is cleared up considerably. Generally speaking, tongues make no sense at all for the unbeliever. They may in fact, turn the unbeliever off. [36] In fact, Paul assures us of this in verse 23. Paul insists that prophecy is for believers, but he also declares that prophecy can greatly influence unbelievers. “So if the whole church comes together and everyone speaks in tongues, and inquirers or unbelievers come in, will they not say that you are out of your mind?” (14:23). Again, if the whole church is speaking in tongues unbelievers will think that they are all crazy. Smith thinks that the “whole church” mentioned here is a general meeting of all the house churches in the whole area. [37] Smith also adds: “A meeting of the whole church would have been the exception rather than the rule; it would have simply been too crowded and awkward. Meeting in small house-church groups, then, would have been the norm (usually estimated at twenty to thirty persons…)” [38] “But if an unbeliever or an inquirer comes in while everyone is prophesying, they are convicted of sin and are brought under judgment by all, as the secrets of their hearts are laid bare. So they will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, ‘God is really among you!’” (14:24-25). Chrysostom says, “Tongues are a sign to unbelievers not for their instruction, as prophecy is for both believers and unbelievers, but to astonish them.” [39] I think of the preaching of John the Baptist, which was heavily weighted with prophecy. When unbelievers heard him, they fell under great conviction and rushed to be baptized. Henry Halley longs for such power again, “Power to make unbelieving visitors fall down on their faces and worship God, O for such today, instead of dead formalism on one hand and irreverent monkey business on the other!” [40] What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up. 1 Corinthians 14:26 Morris comments: “This little paragraph is very important as giving us the most intimate glimpse we have of the early church at worship…” [41] We immediately see that there was no prescribed order of service. Yet, no one would leave bored in a service such as this. While there were elders, they did not “run the show” as often happens in our churches today. The Holy Spirit ran the gathering and it was an interesting mixture. It is clear that each member participated and that they were not mere observers as it often is today. Barclay says “… The really notable thing about an early church service must have been that almost everyone came feeling that he had both the privilege and the obligation of contributing something to it.” [42] One came with a hymn on the heart. The Greek word for hymn is psalmon, probably reflecting the ancient Psalms, and likely speaking of a stringed accompaniment. It was a common thing in the early church for congregations to sing (cf. Matt. 26;30; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). The New Testament gives us several of these Christian songs (e.g. Lk. 1:46-55, 68-79, plus the songs in the Book of Revelation). A member could also bring a song of his or her composition. [43] It is interesting today in Israel that in the Hebrew congregations many people are writing new Hebrew songs, and some of these are written by young folks. We see other beautiful spiritual songs in the New Testament. There are the songs of Mary; Zechariah; Simeon, and Anna, (Lk. 1:1-80). [44] These particular songs are rich in prophetic content and have blessed people through the centuries. The attendees might have said: “I am coming to church, but not only to receive a blessing. I am coming to give a blessing to someone, and I will ask God for an opportunity to bless someone today.” [45] Others came to worship with a word of instruction (doctrine or teaching) or revelation. It was not up to some professional clergyman to deliver his little ditty. These messages were from the heart, from experiences, and were directed by the Holy Spirit, who is really the teacher (Jn. 14:26). Then, of course, there were tongues and interpretations. Everything had to be done for the strengthening and edification of the church (1 Cor. 14:40). We cannot help but note the spontaneous and varied character of these gatherings. [46] We should remember that these informal and Spirit-led groups of the First Century mostly met in private homes. No doubt many of these were in fairly small groups, perhaps of 20-30 people as we have said. Such groups are more advantageous for individual sharing. For a number of years in the US there has been a movement toward home groups, even in some of the mega-churches. Such groups today are not always edifying. Sometimes people are not Spirit-led and there may not be much teaching or revelation. “Spurgeon once described a man coming from such a gathering, and meeting a friend. ‘How was the meeting?’ the one asked. The other answered, ‘Oh, it was wonderful. No one knew anything and we all taught each other!’” [47] It is very important in small groups that one person does not dominate. That is just a trait of human nature that often manifests itself. “Evangelist D. L. Moody was leading a service and asked a man to pray. Taking advantage of his opportunity, the man prayed on and on. Sensing that the prayer was killing the meeting instead of blessing it, Moody spoke up and said, ‘While our brother finishes his prayer, let us sing a hymn!’” [48] “If anyone speaks in a tongue, two— or at the most three— should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and to God” (14:27-28). Guzik says, “…the issue isn’t whether a person can speak in tongues during a church meeting. The issue is if they can speak publicly in tongues during a church meeting” [49] Obviously, the Corinthians had abused tongues by all speaking publicly at the same time. Such a thing is not to be. Bruce comments, “If edification is to be the aim, then there must be orderliness and balance.” [50] Paul makes it clear that the gift is always under the control of the speaker. No one can claim that he or she is driven to speak. This is the kind of thing we might see with the manifestation of an evil spirit. Two people or a maximum number of three should speak and that is only the case if there is one present with a gift of interpretation. It brings discomfort and makes people nervous if more than that speak. It is a little like singing far too many songs in a worship service. “Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said” (14:29). The previous instruction applies equally to prophets. Two or three at a time should speak. We note that others should judge carefully what is said. We do not see such an instruction regarding the Old Testament prophets. People were given the task of obeying them not of judging them. They spoke a message directly from God. New Testament gifts of prophecy, like all other spiritual gifts, are given in part (1 Cor. 13:9). They must be judged regarding their content in order to determine if it lines up with the Bible. Guthrie comments, “The use of prophecy is qualified. Messages through this medium are not to be accepted uncritically, but tested against scripture (cf. 1 Thess. 5:21).” [51] “How do we explain the actions of those that shout and writhe and jump or act weird, supposedly under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Often, they are actually resisting the Holy Spirit, and this leads to stress, which finds an outlet in strange actions…” [52] “And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop” (14:30). This at first seems a little odd, and we might think that the second person should not interrupt the first. Apparently in God’s order, he wishes the freshest revelation to take precedence. It may be like when we receive a message by text or email. We would often scroll to see if there is a newer message. It is clear by this that each person is totally in charge of his or her message, whether in tongues or in prophecy. They are never out of control and can always stop. [53] Bruce cannot help but remarking how “prophesying appears to be as common an exercise as praying…” [54] “For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets” (14:31-32). Clearly, the prophets must do things in order and they must be in control of their own spirits. “If the prophets had no control over their spirits, any prospect of an orderly assembly would vanish.” [55] “For God is not a God of disorder but of peace— as in all the congregations of the Lord’s people” (14:33). It was Alexander Pope who said, “Order is heaven’s first law.” [56] Indeed, this statement seems to be true. There can be no edification in the midst of confusion. Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. 1 Corinthians 14:34 At this point Paul drops a bomb on us, at least so far as those in the western world are concerned. Thus, Smith says, “This section of 1 Corinthians represents one of the most discussed and debated texts within the letter.” [57] We have now had well over a half century of indoctrination in women’s rights and most people are anxious to be seen as “politically correct” in this area. For the sake of Christ and his kingdom though, now we all need to try and be “biblically correct.” It is very important that we understand the cultural situation in the New Testament. Many in the women’s liberation movements virulently accuse the church and the gospel as systems for imprisoning women. These women are grossly lacking in their understanding of history. In ancient times, even Judaism was quite oppressive of women. Women could not talk at a public meeting and they had few legal rights. In the Greek world, the married woman didn’t dare show her face outside the house. She was not even allowed to eat with other family members and she certainly did not speak in public. This is amazing when we consider that Greece was probably the most highly advanced nation on earth at the time. In the Roman world, the father was like god. He had absolute rights over the family and could even kill a child if he chose. It was only the teaching of Jesus that liberated women and children from their universal bondage. It is quite possible that the trouble with women at Corinth was an abuse of this newfound freedom in Christ. [58] In Greek culture, women were discouraged from speaking in public, as we have seen. Plutarch had said that the virtuous woman, “ought to be modest and guarded about saying anything in the hearing of outsiders.” [59] Several commentators have felt that these Greek Christian women were asking disruptive questions and perhaps participating in the judging of prophecies. [60] Redpath mentions how the ancient Greek word laleo means, “to talk, question, argue, profess, or chatter.” [61] “There is the story of the woman who was rebuked for talking too much. She said, ‘Well, how can I know what I think if I haven’t heard what I have to say?’” [62] There is another factor that may have some bearing on the situation at Corinth. First Century women were generally uneducated. The Jews even regarded it as a sin to teach a woman and this situation was not much improved in the Greek and Roman worlds. [63] Thus, women were quite unqualified to discuss prophecies or other matters of theology. Still, we cannot look at this situation as one of mere culture or educational background. Paul makes clear that the basic principles regarding women are based on the law of God. While culture changes over the centuries, the law does not change. It seems that Paul is basing his judgment on verses like Genesis 1:26ff; 2:20-24, and 3:16. Smith says that these instructions have a universal nature about them and that they are not based on the particular local and cultural situation at Corinth. [64] While women were permitted to pray and prophesy in church (1 Cor. 11:2-16), it would seem that the men alone were responsible for doctrinal purity (1 Tim. 2:11-12). [65] It was forbidden for women to lord it over men in the assembly (Eph. 5:22-24). Regarding the Old Testament, Origen mentions, “…although Deborah was reputed to be a prophetess, there is no indication that she ever corporately addressed the people in the way that Isaiah or Jeremiah did. The same is true of Huldah.” [66] This understanding had filtered down as an ordinance in Judaism: “women were not permitted to teach in the assemblies, or even to ask questions…This was their condition till the time of the gospel, when, according to the prediction of Joel, the Spirit of God was to be poured out on the women as well as the men, that they might prophesy” [67] “If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church” (14:35). Women should ask their husbands at home if they have a question. Presumably, single women should ask their fathers or other men in the household. With this, Wiersbe sighs, “…Sad to say, in too many Christian homes today, it is the wife who has to answer the questions for the husband because she is better taught in the Word…” [68] In our politically correct age women are encouraged to take the lead and to place themselves above the men as leaders and even as pastors. We do not see such a thing in all the pages of holy writ. Obviously, we need to deal intelligently and spiritually with the new ideas and trends in this area. Barker &Kohlenberger state: “…At any rate, a woman’s femininity must not be disgraced by her trying to take a man’s role in the church…” [69] Peter says of a woman’s femininity and beauty that, “…it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight” (1 Pet. 3:4). In ancient times Cyril of Jerusalem (313-386) commented: “I wish to see each man’s earnestness and each woman’s devotion. Burn out impiety from your mind, put your soul on the anvil and your stubborn infidelity under the hammer…Then let the gate of paradise be opened to each man and each woman among you.” [70] Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 1 Corinthians 14:36 It seems that Paul is using a little sarcasm here. Of course, the word of God did not originate in Corinth. It came from Jerusalem and there were multitudes of churches in between Corinth and Jerusalem. They could not act independently, picking and choosing what doctrine would apply to them. “If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command” (14:37). Bruce says, “…the man of the Spirit, the man with the gift of prophecy, will show his quality by recognizing this to be true.” [71] Paul puts them under pressure to prove their gifts authentic in this manner. “But if anyone ignores this, they will themselves be ignored” (14:38). Barker &Kohlenberger have this reading, “…anyone who ignores it will be ignored by Paul and the churches, or possibly even the Lord…” [72] It was serious business in the First Century for individuals or churches to dispute or ignore apostolic doctrine. “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues” (14:39). We should be zealous and eager to prophesy and we should not forbid tongues. It is strange indeed that multitudes of pastors and numerous denominational boards ignore prophecy and zealously forbid speaking in tongues. How can this not be a breach of God’s order? Spurgeon says, “Never hang your flag at half-mast when you praise God; no, run up every color, let every banner wave in the breeze, and let all the powers and passions of your spirit exult and rejoice in God your Savior. They rejoiced. We are really most horribly afraid of being too happy. Some Christians think cheerfulness a very dangerous folly, if not a ruinous vice.” [73] Comfort attests, “The quality of our worship forms a powerful expression of the reality of our conversion.” [74] “But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way” (14:40). Coffman says, “This is the golden rule for organizing and conducting public worship services of the church in all ages.” [75] However, “what we, as modern readers assume is fitting and orderly may not be what Paul thinks is fitting and orderly… Wise and biblically informed Christian worship: does not pursue ‘freedom at the expense of order, or unrestrained spontaneity at the expense of reverence.’” [76] 1. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 195. 2. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 645. 3. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 197. 4. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 489. 5. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, v. 14:1. 6. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 130. 7. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 298, citing Fee. 8. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 489. Guzik adds: “He who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God: With the gift of tongues, the speaker addresses God, not men. Disregard of this principle leads to one of the most significant misunderstandings regarding the gift of tongues – believing tongues is a supernatural communication ‘man to man’ instead of ‘man to God’… Acts 10:46 describes the hearing of the gift of tongues: they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God…. A true interpretation of the gift of tongues will be addressed to God, not men. It will be a prayer, praise, or some other communication to God.” (Guzik, vs. 14:2-3). 9. Robertson, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Robertson’s Word Pictures of the New Testament, v. 14:3. 10. Abbot-Smith, A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 342. 11. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 139. 12. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, pp. 198-199. 13. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, v. 14:6. 14. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 139. 15. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the Bible, 16. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 185. 17. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 481. 18. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 186. 19. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 14:10. 20. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, pp. 139-140. 21. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 201. 22. Derek Prince, The Gifts of the Spirit (New Kingston, PA: Whitaker House, 2007), 23. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 186. 24. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 202. 25. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 141. 26. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 187. 27. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 28. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 14:17. 29. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 30. Ibid. 31. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 132. 32. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 14:21. 33. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, pp. 132-133. 34. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 205. 35. John Sherrill, They Speak With Other Tongues (New York: Pyramid Books, 1964), 36. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 37. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 302. 38. Ibid. 39. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 142. 40. Quoted in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 14:25. 41. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 190. 42. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 43. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 190. 44. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 14:26. 45. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 46. Guthrie, et al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised p. 1070. 47. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 48. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 491. 49. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 50. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 134. 51. Guthrie, et al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 1070. 52. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 53. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 211. 54. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 134. 55. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 192. 56. Alexander Pope, http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/149559-order-is-heaven-s-first-law. 57. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 304. 58. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 59. Quoted in Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, Barclay adds: “We have already said that in the ancient world the place of women was low. In the Greek world Sophocles had said, ‘Silence confers grace upon a woman.’ Women, unless they were very poor or very loose in their morals, led a very secluded life in Greece. The Jews had an even lower idea of women. Amongst the Rabbinic sayings there are many which belittle their place. ‘As to teaching the law to a woman one might as well teach her impiety.’ To teach the law to a woman was ‘to cast pearls before swine.’ …that absolutely nothing, must be done which would bring upon the infant Church the faintest suspicion of immodesty.” (Barclay, vs. 14:34-40). 60. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 61. Cited in Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, vs. 14:34-35. 62. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 63. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 193. 64. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 307. 65. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 492. 66. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 146. 67. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 14:34. 68. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 492. 69. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 647. 70. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 146. 71. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 136. 72. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 648. 73. Quoted in Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 74. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, 75. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 14:39. 76. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 309. Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 1 Corinthians 15:1 The subject of this chapter is the gospel of the glorious resurrection of the Lord Jesus and the subsequent resurrection of all those who believe in him. We must note that “resurrection” is something truly new with Christianity, and something almost unheard of in other faiths. Barclay says of this chapter, that it “is both one of the greatest and one of the most difficult chapters in the New Testament.” He adds, “…it is from this chapter that we mainly derive the idea of the resurrection of the body…It is of great importance to remember that the Corinthians were denying not the resurrection of Jesus Christ but the resurrection of the body…” [1] McGee says that the denial of the bodily resurrection of Christ was the very first heresy of the church. [2] Perhaps it would be good for us to understand some of the thinking about the body that was going on in the time shortly after Jesus. First of all, there was the Jewish understanding of the afterlife. There was very little comprehension of the resurrection in Jewish thought. After all, it is only Jesus, “…who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10). Throughout the Old Testament we see that when people died they believed that they went to Sheol, the abode of the dead. This was a shadowy existence with no remembrance of God (Psa. 6:5). The dead could not praise the Lord (Psa. 115:17), nor could they hope for his faithfulness (Isa. 38:18). There was no work, thought, knowledge, or wisdom in Sheol (Eccl. 9:4-5. 10). [3] However, we must note that a few scattered people had visions of a pleasant afterlife for the faithful. Job, through all his troubles, finally exclaimed: “I know that my redeemer lives, and that in the end he will stand on the earth. And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God…” (Job 19:25-26). David also said, “…you will not abandon me to the realm of the dead, nor will you let your faithful one see decay” (Ps. 16:10). In his beloved Psalm 23, David said, “…I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever” (Psa. 23:6). Next, we need to understand the prevailing Greek ideas of the afterlife. The Greek language and culture were universally spread throughout the Roman world. Greek thought from Plato onward felt the soul was immortal. The Greeks saw the body as a tomb. It was the antithesis of the soul and the source of all weakness. For the Greeks, the secret of real life was to get rid of the body. Thus, for the Greeks the resurrection of the body was totally unthinkable. [4] Greek thought was so adverse to the resurrection that the philosophers at Athens actually laughed at Paul when he preached it there. [5] It seems pretty obvious that some of the Christians at Corinth were simply reflecting the prevailing Greek ideas in their denying the resurrection of the body. Thus, Paul had to remind them of the gospel he had preached to them. He was insistent that denying the resurrection of Christ’s body was emptying the Christian message of its truth and reality. [6] That was what the gospel (Gk. euaggelion), the good news or glad tidings, was all about. Comfort goes so far as to say, “…Every claim about Christianity has roots in his resurrection…The resurrection is the central theme of the gospel message…The resurrection is a fulfillment of the Old Testament Scriptures…” [7] “By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain” (15:2). Morris says, “You are saved is present continuous, ‘you are being saved.’ There is a sense in which salvation is once for all (as in ‘received,’ v. 1) and another sense in which it is progressive (cf. 1:18; 2 Cor. 2:15).” [8] There is always the matter of persevering or holding on in our faith and that is our responsibility (with God’s help of course). For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 1 Corinthians 15:3 Morris sees this as an example of the earliest kerygmatic preaching or the simple proclamation of the gospel. [9] It is interesting that Paul uses two Greek terms in this verse, paradidomi and paralambano (received &passed on), technical rabbinic terms that were used in transmitting tradition. [10] We see that the information passed on is of first importance. The apostle is actually giving a very simple summary of the gospel, beginning with the death of Jesus. It is important for us to realize that Jesus did not just die a martyr’s death. Rather, he died a death in atonement for the sins of the whole world (1 Jn. 2:2). As was written in the prophet Isaiah: “But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to our own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all” (Isa. 53:5-6). Isaiah says further: “Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life an offering for sin, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand” (Isa. 53:10). Jesus fulfilled many more scriptures like Psalm 16:8-11 and the whole of Psalm 22. Some feel that Jesus repeated this latter Psalm as he hung on the cross. Jesus did not just die, but he died the most horrible death that was possible, on a Roman cross. The cross was designed to inflict the maximum amount of pain and suffering on the crucified. Prior to the actual crucifixion the victim was scourged almost to unconsciousness, then made to carry his cross. At the crucifixion site nails were driven through the hands (or wrists) and feet. Once on the cross, it became extremely difficult to breathe, which caused severe muscle cramps. It was a slow and agonizing death that could finally come through suffocation, acute shock, dehydration, blood loss, or congestive heart failure. [11] In addition, since Jesus became a sin offering, even his Father turned away from him as he hung on the cross (Matt. 27:46). Wiersbe says, “Many people were crucified by the Romans, but only one ‘victim’ ever died for the sins of the world.” [12] Paul continues saying: “…that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,” (15:4). The gospel message not only states that Christ died, but that he was buried. We have considerable information about his burial. We know who buried him and where he was buried. Centuries before, the prophet Isaiah had predicted: “He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth” (Isa. 53:9). The gospel accounts verify that Jesus was buried by the rich man Joseph of Arimathea, in the man’s own private tomb (Mk. 27:57-60). He was assisted by another rich man, Nicodemus, who brought expensive spices that were used in the burial procedures (Jn. 19:39). Both men were previously secret followers of Jesus. It is important that Jesus was verified as dead and that he was buried. Guzik comments, “The gospel isn’t a matter of religious opinions, platitudes, or fairy tales; it is about real historical events…” [13] Jesus was not only buried but he was raised from the dead. This is the very heart of the gospel message. We note that just as he was buried according to scriptures he also arose from the dead according to scriptures. Jesus had said, “…This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day” (Lk. 24:46; cf. Hos. 6:2). According to scripture, Jesus had to be in the tomb three days and three nights (Jon. 1:17). Jesus was in the tomb from Friday evening until Sunday morning and by our modern calculation this was somewhat short of three days and three nights. However, by Jewish calculations any part of a day or night was counted as a whole one. [14] There is also some discussion among scholars that Jesus was crucified on Thursday, since this would have allowed him to be crucified on the holiday itself, as the Passover Lamb. [15] If such was the case he would have been in the tomb three full days and three full nights. Jesus’ time in the tomb was the “sign of Jonah” that he gave to the Jewish people (Matt. 12:39-40). As Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights, so the Son of Man would be in the heart of the earth for the same period. Over the centuries, skeptics have denied that Jesus really died or was buried. A popular idea is the “swoon theory,” claiming that Jesus, swooned and later recovered from the cross. This idea is based on a total misunderstanding of what death on the cross was like. People did not survive the cross. Also, there were several witnesses, including the centurion in charge, who all knew that Jesus was in fact dead. We are not just dealing with the gospel account but with the historical facts of Jesus’ death. The apostle verifies that Jesus not only died but was raised the third day. As we have said, this resurrection was according to scripture. Again, skeptics have charged that Jesus’ disciples stole away the body and rigged the resurrection account. This story is preposterous. When we read the resurrection accounts we realize that none of the disciples believed in the resurrection, even after proof was given to them— until Jesus appeared to them. Meyer thus says, “…the resurrection was primarily not a doctrine but a fact.” [16] So what Paul is giving us here, the things of first importance, are these: “1 Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures…2 He was buried…3 He was raised on the third day according to the scriptures.” [17] This is the simple gospel, and hardly will we find a better summary of it. Paul continues on with his gospel account saying, “and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve” (15:5). The resurrection of Jesus was not something that happened privately or in some back alley. It was very public and there were many witnesses, most of whom were still alive at Paul’s writing. Jesus first appeared to Cephas (Peter) and then to the Twelve. It is reflective of the Lord’s great love and patience that he appeared to Peter first, or even at all. We remember that Peter had denied Jesus three times and ended his denial with a curse. Barclay comments: “It is one of the most heart-moving things in all the story of Jesus that two of his first appearances, after he rose from the tomb, were to men who had hurt him and were sorry for it. Jesus meets the penitent heart far more than halfway.” [18] Obviously, “the Twelve” mentioned here is referring only of the eleven remaining disciples after the betrayal and death of Judas Iscariot. The expression “the Twelve” was simply a designation. Later, Matthias was added (Act.1;21-26) to fill up this gap. Some have wondered why Jesus’ appearances to women are not mentioned by Paul here. The likely reason was that the testimony of a woman in that society was not formally admissible as evidence. Such a mention may have discredited the account to certain people. [19] “After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep” (15:6). This appearance to so many may have happened in the Galilee, where there were numerous disciples. This is the only place in the New Testament where this event is mentioned. [20] McGee remarks, “Any lawyer today would love to have as many witnesses for his position as Paul lists here as proofs of the resurrection.” [21] If this general appearance is reflected in Matthew 28:16-20, then the Great Commission was not just given to the disciples but to the church in general. [22] We note again that most of the five hundred were still living when Paul wrote, although some had fallen asleep or died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born” (15:7-8). This appearance to James the half-brother of Jesus is not mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament. The early church father, Jerome, tells us of a legend that James had made a vow not to eat or drink until he had seen the resurrected Christ. In the legend the Lord appeared to him and said, “My brother, eat thy bread, for the Son of Man is risen from the dead.” [23] Although Jesus’ brothers had not believed in him during his ministry, it appears that all joined him in time (Acts 1:14). James eventually became the leader of the church at Jerusalem and Jude wrote the epistle named for him. Jesus appeared to his disciples on several occasions and at last he revealed himself to Paul on the Road to Damascus. Because he had persecuted the church (cf. Acts 9:1,13, 21), Paul felt himself unworthy to be compared with the other disciples. Here Paul uses the Greek word ektromati, which means “the miscarriage” or “the abortion.” [24] The apostle for certain was unusually born, being almost compelled into the kingdom by the Risen Christ in an astounding and miraculous appearance. For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 1 Corinthians 15:9 Paul could never forget that he had persecuted the church (cf. Acts 8:3, 9:1-35, Gal. 1:13, Phil. 3:6, and 1 Tim.1:15). No doubt, he had dragged whole families off to prison and some perhaps even to their deaths. That memory always haunted the apostle. He also had the memory of Stephen’s stoning (Act. 7:58). No doubt because of this background, Paul referred to himself as the “least” of the apostles. Tradition has it that Paul was small in stature, and his name Paulos in Latin meant “little.” [25] However, we must not forget that in his spiritual work for the Lord, Paul became a giant. He literally outdid all the other apostles as he carried the gospel to the uttermost parts of the Roman Empire. “But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them— yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me” (15:10). The words “worked harder” are the Greek word kopiao, and it means to work to the point of weariness. [26] Although Paul’s body was often wracked with pain, although he was severely persecuted, beaten, stoned and even imprisoned, he kept on keeping on. He took the gospel to Europe and to the farthest reaches of the known world. He did more than all the others, yet, in all his great work he never forgot that it was God’s grace that was making his ministry possible. “Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed” (15:11). In the last analysis, it was not a matter of personalities. Paul and the others had simply preached the saving gospel. The people had simply believed it and were thus saved. The same pattern has gone on now for almost two thousand years. But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 1 Corinthians 15:12 Comfort expands on the Greek view that matter was evil and that the physical body would not be resurrected. He says, “…According to Greek philosophers, the soul was the real person, imprisoned in a physical body, and at death the soul was released.” [27] The Greeks believed that the soul was immortal as we have said. Some of that belief has crept into Christian thinking. However, we see in scripture that only God is immortal. 1 Timothy 6:16 speaks of God, “who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see…” All the immortality we will possess will be graciously given by the Almighty. Some of the Corinthians, who apparently were influenced by their own Greek philosophy, did not believe the resurrected body was possible. Barclay sums up what such a view would do to Christianity: “If you take up that position it means that Jesus Christ has not risen again; and if that be so, the whole Christian faith is wrecked…” [28] Comfort sums it up another way saying, “The resurrection of Jesus from the dead is the central fact of Christian history. On it, the church is built; without it, there would be no Christian church today.” [29] The resurrection was proof positive that the Father accepted the work of the Son on earth. It was proof positive that life is stronger than death; that truth is stronger than falsehood; that love is stronger than hate. “If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith” (15:13-14). Barnes says, “If Christ was not raised, he was an impostor, since he repeatedly declared that he would rise (Matthew 16:21; Matthew 18:22-23; Luke 9:22)…” [30] Not only was Christ an imposter but those who preached the gospel, including Paul, were all imposters. They were declaring something that was not true. They were false witnesses. Obviously, if the gospel was false all Christian faith was therefore useless. However, the whole New Testament declares that there was a resurrection (Gk. anastasis) and there will be a resurrection on the last day for all those who believe in Jesus. The famous preacher Charles Spurgeon said, “The fact is, that the silver thread of resurrection runs through all the blessings, from regeneration onward to our eternal glory, and binds them together.” [31] “More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either” (15:15-16). If there is no resurrection then Paul was justly stoned, imprisoned and run out of town. He was justly beheaded by Nero. He was nothing but a false witness. However, McGee asks, “Have you ever noticed that men do not die for that which they know to be a lie?” [32] People will not die for a lie but countless thousands have died for the truth and continue to do so. Paul rejoiced in prison; he gladly suffered persecution; he endured all kinds of hardships even to the point of death, because he knew the resurrection to be true. “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost” (15:17-18). What a dreary scenario! Can we even imagine a world without faith; a world without salvation; a world without forgiveness of sins; or a world without hope? All those who gladly offered their lives in martyrdom over the centuries were only hopeful fools. All those who have died in faith have perished forever. Can we even bear to think about such a scenario? “If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied” (15:19). If there is no resurrection, Christian people are the most miserable of all. Barnes says “The word used here (elēinoteroi) means, properly, more deserving of pity, more pitiable.” [33] The First Century Christian life left much to be desired in the natural realm. Christians were often persecuted. They no doubt often lost their jobs or even their places of residence. They no doubt lost their positions in that depraved society. In addition, they were often looked upon with scorn and ridicule. If their belief was a false one, then they had lost both heaven and earth. They were indeed pitiable wretches. But they knew the resurrection to be true and that truth was worth the loss of everything else. The resurrection was the grand finale of all of Christ’s work and it would be the grand finale to their own lives as they would be resurrected with Christ in the end. Regarding the resurrection, someone has said, “the Resurrection is God’s ‘Amen’ to Christ’s ‘it is finished.’” [34] But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 1 Corinthians 15:20 Christ has been raised from the dead. Morris comments, “He uses the perfect tense has been raised …with full meaning. Not only did Christ rise on a certain day in history, but he continues permanently in his character as the risen Lord.” [35] Then Paul takes a look at Israel’s history regarding the offering up of the firstfruits (Lev. 23:10-14). The firstfruits (Gk. aparchē) were made up of the very first ripe barley in the springtime. This sheaf of course was a sign of the coming harvest of both barley and wheat. The sheaf was brought to the temple and offered to God. In a very real sense the firstfruits offering sanctified the whole harvest. Barclay remarks how until this offering was made barley could not be bought or sold in the markets, nor could bread be made from the flour. [36] We know from scripture that Jesus was and is the firstfruits offering as we will see later in verse 20. He was the beginning of a great harvest with many to follow his example. It is interesting that the firstfruits offering was made on the first day after the Sabbath following Passover. Of course this day became known as Sunday, the day of the Lord’s resurrection. On that first Easter Sunday Jesus came from the grave to become the firstfruits of all those who were dead. Up until this time some people had been raised from the dead, only to eventually die again. However, Christ rose from the grave never to die again. He was and is the first person to arise from the dead with a truly resurrected body. So Jesus is like a pioneer who has explored a totally new country and who has come forth to tell us all about it. Smith says, “In short, Christ is the firstfruits, the first and the forerunner, of all those who die in him…Christ then, is the pioneer blazing a new trail, changing the course of human destiny, and drawing us along in his wake!” [37] The significance of this day cannot be overlooked. God in his infinite wisdom set aside a high holy day called firstfruits. He established this day from eternity past, knowing on this day Jesus our Messiah would be resurrected, that he would become forevermore our firstfruits in the New Covenant which is spoken of in Jeremiah 31:31. This would bring us great hope and a new heart. To him be glory and honor forever, Amen! The resurrection of Christ is therefore the assurance that we and millions more Christians will be resurrected with a glorious new body on that last day. Jesus says, “For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day” (Jn. 6:40). This message of Christ’s resurrection was the heart of the early gospel. N.T. Wright says, “For almost all of the first two centuries, resurrection in the traditional sense holds not just center stage but the whole stage.” [38] For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive” (15:21-22). Here the apostle deals with the original cause of death for humanity. It resulted from Adam, the head of us humans who fell into sin. It could almost be said that Adam by his fall placed the tendency to sin in our human DNA. Adam was the Federal Head of humanity and his actions have affected us all. Although we westerners live in an individualistic society, many in the world do not, and still look to the patriarch or head of a large family. Of course in the US our President can make decisions that affect us all. We also see how a football player’s actions may affect the whole team. [39] We can learn more about this typology in Romans 5:12-21. Just as Adam delivered humanity to death, Jesus delivers those who believe in him to life eternal. Just as Adam was made from the dust of the earth Jesus will raise the new humanity up from the dust. Wright says, “Dust we are and to dust we shall return. But God can do new things with dust.” [40] Perhaps we should note here that even the wicked will be raised from the dead at the second or last resurrection. When Jesus returns, there will be a resurrection of damnation and judgment (Dan. 12:2; Jn. 5:29; Rev. 20:11-15). This is just previous to the Great White Throne Judgment. Wiersbe says, “Nobody in the first resurrection will be lost, but nobody in the second resurrection will be saved.” [41] Many in our society no longer have the hope of a bodily resurrection. Some may have a vague optimism and others, under Oriental religious influences, think they might someday merge with the divinity. The thought of our physical bodies being restored is too much for some today just as it was for certain of the Corinthians. Wright again gives a word of explanation: “As we know, we change our entire physical kit, every atom and molecule, over a period of seven years or so…and yet, I am still me.” [42] Thus, he obviously feels that it is no problem for God to change the whole body. “But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him” (15:23). The word for turn or order is the Greek tagma. Morris says of this word that it was “originally a military term, referring to a detachment of soldiers, though it came to be used more generally.” [43] Thus, we see that there is an order in the resurrection. Christ is raised first and afterward all those who believe in him. Stedman tells of some lines that were written on a tombstone. They said: Remember, friend, as you pass by, As you are now, so once was I. As I am now, soon you will be, Prepare for death, and follow me. He says that someone had written underneath these lines saying: To follow you I’m not content, Until I know which way you went. [44] Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power” 1 Corinthians 15:24 There are several things involved as this evil age comes to an end. We see in this verse that Jesus will destroy all other dominion, authority and power. This seems to be a process as we see from the Book of Revelation. Jesus will return to earth, defeat the Antichrist and his armies, and will inaugurate the thousand-year millennial reign on earth (Psa.2:6-9; 8:6; 110:1). It seems that during this time there will continue to be natural people who grow old and even die (Rev. 20:9; Isa. 65:20), and there also will be resurrected saints who are ruling the earth on behalf of Christ. In reflecting on the Millennial Age, we can view it as a prototype kingdom of God finally established on the earth. It is a natural fulfillment of everything promised to Israel by her prophets (Ez. Chs.36-37; Isa. 2:1-5). It is designed to fulfill all the things for which Israel has long hoped and prayed. When we look at the Millennium we are looking at a totally new era that is still largely hidden from our eyes. Although we do not fully understand the peculiarities of this age and it leaves us with many questions, we had best believe in its existence until we understand it better. We certainly should not deny it as many Christian thinkers came to do in the church’s early history. We can perceive some things about this age. Because of the absence of the Beast and False Prophet, people will likely not be deceived by false prophecy during this period. Satan himself will be temporarily out of the picture as he is bound for the thousand years, and apparently will not be able to tempt people and nations. It attests to the rebellion deep in human nature that even after this wonderful period of heaven on earth, sinful man driven by the released devil, will once again go to war against Israel and God (Rev. 20:7-10). This will likely be the shortest war in earth’s history as the full and final wrath of God is poured out on the devil and his forces. This will end all wars forever and Satan himself will at last be thrown into the lake of fire. At some point, perhaps at the Lord’s initial appearing, the wicked shall be removed from the earth for their eternal punishment. The earth will begin to undergo a complete rejuvenation or renovation. The present heaven and earth will be replaced by a new creation. Perhaps we can say that the heavens and earth will be recycled and purged by fire (Matt. 28:20; 2 Pet. 3:10). The word for destroyed is the Greek katareo, which has the meaning of rendering null and void or making inoperative. [45] In the new earth there will no longer be a sea dividing peoples and nations. [46] When we think of the remaking of earth and the Lord’s conquest of all powers and authorities we remember that old hymn: Jesus shall reign where’er the sun Does his successive journeys run, His kingdom spread from shore to shore, Till moons shall wax and wane no more. [47] “For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death” (15:25-26). Barker and Kohlenberger state: “The picture is total, including the physical kingdoms of this world…Christ must continue his reign, (i.e., his millennial reign; Rev. 20:4-6) until all his enemies are conquered. The expression ‘under his feet’ (an allusion to Psa. 110:1; cf. Mt. 22:44) is an Old Testament figure for total conquest.” [48] Regarding the demise of death, Chrysostom commented, “In the beginning death entered last, after the counsel of the devil and our disobedience. Similarly, death will be the last thing to be destroyed.” [49] We cannot miss the fact that the Lord’s triumphant and overcoming saints will reign with him on this earth. [50] We have often spoken of reigning with him in heaven but that is not a correct understanding according to the Bible (cf. 6:2). “For he ‘has put everything under his feet.’ Now when it says that ‘everything’ has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ” (15:27). As Keener says, “the Son will reign over all else as God’s viceroy but remain subordinate in role to the Father…” [51] In this verse Paul is quoting from Psalm 8:6 in the Greek Septuagint version. This quote seems to be in close association with Psalm 110:1, which is the most quoted Old Testament scripture in the New Testament. [52] It is clear that the Lord’s Messianic role is but a phase of his eternal Sonship. That role will draw to a close in time. [53] Yet, the Son will continue eternal with the Father. Morris sums up this difficult passage saying: “Paul’s point, then, is that God the Father has given to the Son unlimited sovereignty over all creation. This, of course, does not involve any infringement on the Father’s own sovereignty.” [54] “When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all” (15:28). The triumphant Son has now subdued all things, although it was the Father who placed all things under his feet (Psa.110:1). The Son then hands all things back to the Father so that God can be all in all. Long ago, Gregory Nazianzen compared this to “a torch temporarily withdrawn from a great flame and then joined up again with it.” [55] Hodge explains it saying, “The son of a king may be the equal of his father in every attribute of his nature, though officially inferior. So the eternal Son of God may be coequal with the Father, though officially subordinate.” [56] Guzik says, “each person of the Trinity desires to glorify another person of the Trinity. The Son glorifies the Father (Jn. 17:4), the Father glorifies the Son (Jn. 17:5), and the Holy Spirit glorifies the Son (Jn. 16:14).” [57] This is a very difficult passage, as is any passage dealing with the mysterious doctrine of the Trinity. When the Son of God came to earth he emptied himself of his divine prerogatives (Phil. 2:6-7) and became truly a human being. He even became lower than the angels that he himself had created. In utter humiliation he then died on a cruel Roman cross to procure our salvation. [58] Morris adds, “…Paul is not speaking of the essential nature of either the Son or the Father. He is speaking of the work that Christ has accomplished and will accomplish.” [59] Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them? 1 Corinthians 15:29 Clarke says flatly, “This is certainly the most difficult verse in the New Testament…” [60] Obviously, this verse is based upon some mysterious and superstitious practice related to baptism. The present tense of the verse indicates that the practice was still going on among the Corinthians as Paul was writing. [61] The apostle chooses to make a point concerning this practice without correcting it. More than likely he felt that there were more weighty matters to discuss and that he could deal with this practice when he was present with the Corinthians. Morris notes, “…The most natural way to understand the words is to see a reference to vicarious baptism.” [62] Let us say that a person accepted the Lord Jesus, but while that person was under instruction, he or she died without receiving baptism. In such a case, a member of the church could then be baptized for that person. In those early days baptism was considered as extremely important to salvation. [63] Paul’s point of course is that such a practice would be in vain if there was no resurrection. “And as for us, why do we endanger ourselves every hour? I face death every day—yes, just as surely as I boast about you in Christ Jesus our Lord” (15:30-31). Paul was one who lived his life on the “cutting edge.” His life was always in danger because of the gospel he preached (cf. 2 Cor. 1:8-9; 4:11; 11:23-25). Barker and Kohlenberger think that the apostle is here alluding to a grave peril that was looming up before him at Ephesus. [64] We do not know what this peril was but we know it apparently caused Priscilla and Aquila to risk their lives for him (Rom. 16:4). “If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus with no more than human hopes, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised, ‘Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die’” (15:32). We sense that something terrible happened to Paul at Ephesus. Keener comments, “Roman gladiatorial shows were also held in the theater at Ephesus during many festivals…It is unlikely, however, that Paul was literally cast to beasts in that arena.” [65] Guthrie says, “fighting with beasts at Ephesus is evidently metaphorical (sentence to the arena involved loss of citizenship – which Paul still retained in Acts 22:25).” [66] All we know is that some awful encounter happened at Ephesus. More than likely it was a dangerous encounter with some of his enemies in the city. Comfort adds, “Paul probably meant this metaphorically…The human enemies that Paul had faced in Ephesus had been as vicious as wild beasts…(see Acts 19).” [67] If there is no resurrection, all of life is lived in vain. We might as well eat, drink and be merry (cf. Eccl. 5:18; 8:15). This actually seems to be a quote from Isaiah 22:13, perhaps with some reference to Jesus’ parable in Luke 12:19. The modern summary is “You only go around once in life, so get all the gusto you can!” [68] South has said about this, “If men but persuade themselves that they shall die like the beasts, they soon will live like beasts too.” [69] “Do not be misled: ‘Bad company corrupts good character’” (15:33). I remember well as the rebellious 60s began, some of the “scholars” scorned Christians for believing and saying this very thing. They had convinced themselves that bad and evil people did not affect good people in the slightest. They were wrong of course, but they still influenced the age for evil. This statement was taken by Paul from one of Menander’s comedies and it had likely become proverbial by his time. [70] “Come back to your senses as you ought, and stop sinning; for there are some who are ignorant of God— I say this to your shame” (15:34). The Corinthians were so proud of their knowledge but Paul charges them with gross ignorance concerning the resurrection. It was Fee who called this “the ultimate put-down.” [71] But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” 1 Corinthians 15:35 Obviously, Paul is probing into the unknown here, but he did have some spiritual experiences that may have helped him understand this difficult subject. The scripture does declare that God, “… by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body” (Phil. 3:21). Meyer comments, “… It is not difficult to believe in this, when we have seen the caterpillar become the butterfly.” [72] To answer the question Paul uses a very earthly example, that of farming. He says “How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies” (15:36). Spurgeon says, “No farmer ever weeps when he sows his seed.” [73] Seed are sown in hope that they will produce a crop. What we plant in the ground, of course, will be much different than that which comes up. It really comes forth with a new body. “When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body” (15:37-38). Pett says, “Nobody looking at the acorn would imagine that within it was a mighty oak.” [74] Jesus says, “Very truly I tell you, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds” (Jn. 12:24). The sowing makes it possible that the seed, although dying and decomposing, can bring forth a marvelous new crop. The new crop will initially be quite different than the seed sown. So it is with the resurrection. “Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another” (15:39). Here we briefly glimpse the great diversity of God’s creative ability. There is such a vast difference, for instance, between a bird and a fish. In fact, when we probe below the oceans we find unusual and incredible life forms. The same is true when we peer through a microscope. “There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another” (15:40). There is a glory in the terrestrial but surely a much greater glory in the celestial. Wiersbe thinks that Paul may be speaking of differences in glory between one believer and another when we receive our new bodies. [75] Surely we will be given bodies that are well adapted to living in the spiritual realm. “The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor” (15:41). Now that we have the advantage of the Hubble space telescope, we are able to see the astounding colors and configurations of deep space. God is a God of infinite and astounding variety. So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 1 Corinthians 15:42-44 Smith says, “Resurrection…is not the mere restoration of life, the reanimation of dead bodies, or the resuscitation of corpses…Rather, resurrection is the transformation of the present earthly body into an imperishable, glorious, powerful, and supernatural body that is adapted to eschatological (end-time existence).” [76] Comfort adds, “The ‘natural’ body (Gk. soma psuchikon) is suited to life in the present world; however, such a body is not fit for the world to come. That future world, where Christ will reign in his kingdom, will require a ‘spiritual’ body (Gk. soma pneumatikon).” [77] Augustine in thinking of all this says, “This spiritual body: will not only be better than any body on earth in perfect health but will surpass even that of Adam or Eve before their sin.” [78] Can we even imagine the glory of this new body? There will be no more death, decay, weariness, weakness, sickness, heartache, fear, dread, and a multitude of earthly ills. The curse over the earth will be gone with all its trouble, labor, disappointment, war, and such things. We will no longer have to be concerned with food and shelter. The only picture we have of this new body is the resurrected body of Jesus. He suffered no time-space limitations. He could quickly go from place to place and even move through locked doors. Yet, he was able to eat with the disciples. They could also touch him and feel him (Lk. 24:22-43; Jn. 20:19-29). [79] To try and understand this new spiritual body is far beyond our mental powers. We only know that it will be glorious. “So it is written: ‘The first man Adam became a living being;’ the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual” (15:45-46). Morris says, “Paul refers to Genesis 2:7 (inserting first before man and Adam after it)…Adam was the progenitor of the race, and his characteristics are stamped on the race. In the same way, Christ is the last Adam, the progenitor of the race of spiritual people. In modern times we often read of ‘the second Adam’, but Paul never uses this term…There is a finality about ‘the last Adam.’” [80] There is a biblical law in these verses that it is important for us to know and understand. The natural always comes before the spiritual. Sometimes in our haste we wish to skip over the natural and go on to the spiritual. This cannot be done. Often, the natural is a picture or type of the spiritual just as the old tabernacle and temple were types of the coming spiritual temple. It is only in being faithful with the former that we can understand and enter into the later. “The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven” (15:47). Jesus was and is the heavenly man. He said to the Jews, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world” (Jn. 8:23). In his glorious resurrection the Lord fully demonstrated the difference between himself and fleshly beings. We know only a few things about his resurrected body and what we do know astounds us. As we have said, he had no space-time limitations, he could appear and disappear, walk through locked doors, and at last ascend to his Father in heaven. “As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the heavenly man, so also are those who are of heaven. And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man” (15:48-49). We have all certainly borne the image of the earthly man Adam, with all his failure and sin. But the good news of the gospel is that we will bear the image of the heavenly man, Jesus. In 1 John 3:2, it is written: “Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.” Long ago Augustine said, “The Lord who was heavenly became earthly that he might make heavenly those who were earthly.” [81] The founder of modern psychiatry once wrote, “And finally there is the painful riddle of death, for which no remedy at all has yet been found, nor probably ever will be.” [82] We now have wonderful good news for Mr. Freud. There is a wonderful resurrection for those dead who believe in Jesus! Paul sums it up in speaking of Jesus, “who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body” (Phil. 3:21). I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 1 Corinthians15:50 When we come to the resurrection we are clearly dealing with things which totally baffle our minds. We are dealing with the unseen, the unknown, even the unimaginable. With these verses we find little commentary available because, quite simply, none of us know enough to elaborate on this mysterious subject. Obviously, this is a realm where flesh and blood cannot go. The perishable flesh cannot inherit this realm. Morris says, “The blunt statement that flesh and blood cannot participate in the kingdom plainly excludes all crude ideas of resurrection…the combination of flesh and blood and the perishable means that neither the living nor the dead at the coming of Christ will go into the kingdom as they are. Both must be changed.” [83] To in any way comprehend this section we must get ourselves into a spiritual mode of thinking. In this mode all things are possible and nothing is impossible. Yet, we cannot exclude our bodies. Gundry says, “This statement sounds not at all like an exchange of physicality for nonphysicality, but like an exchange of inferior physicality for superior physicality…” [84] It will not just be humankind that is changed but the whole creation itself that will be delivered and changed. Paul assures us “that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God” (Rom. 8:21). In the imperishable realm the curse in the earth will be removed. There will be no more death, decay, pain, tears. God will remove all these things forever (Isa. 25:8). Quite simply, we cannot even imagine the joy, bliss, glory and liberty we shall experience in this realm. Augustine says, “There will be no further conflict within ourselves. And just as there will be no more external enemies to bear with, so neither shall we have to bear with ourselves as enemies within.” [85] “Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed” (15:51-52). Here is another great mystery that the apostle reveals to us. We will not all die but we will all be changed. Bruce comments that we will “be changed to conform to the condition of the resurrection age.” [86] This simply means that there will be Christians still living on earth when Christ returns. 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 gives us another picture of this event: “For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.” Perhaps we should think a little about the sounding of the trumpet. In Israel each year on Rosh HaShana the trumpets are sounded. It is always an awesome and spine-tingling thing to hear the trumpet pierce the crisp fall air in Israel. This sounding is a sign of the approaching end of the present age. If we look at Revelation carefully we will see that there are several trumpets that will sound, bringing on various aspects of the end. Actually, for there to be a last trumpet there must be a first trumpet. Revelation says that there are seven trumpets in all (Rev. 8:6 – 9:21). It is interesting that the re-gathering of Israel is said to have happened in response to the sounding of a great trumpet (Isa. 27:13). We did not hear that trumpet but the Jews heard it, and in the 1880s they began to come home to Israel, and they are still coming. This makes us wonder if we are hearing the other trumpets. When the last trumpet sounds, we believers who are still living shall be changed in a moment and in the twinkling of an eye. Morris says of this: “…the change in the living will take place with startling suddenness. ‘Flash’ translates atomos, ‘that which cannot be divided’ i.e. the smallest possible…‘Twinkling’ (rhipe) is connected with the idea of throwing. The twinkling of an eye is the time it takes to cast a glance, or perhaps to flutter an eyelid.” [87] All this fills us with wonder. We certainly want to be prepared for the sounding of the last trumpet. Long ago the sixth-century monk Cassiodorus said: “Anyone who is not changed in this world cannot experience change in the next.” [88] “For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory’” (15:53-54). The Greek word for clothe is endunō. It means “to go in, to envelope, to put on as a garment…” [89] This is not something we can do but something God does for us in a miraculous way. When this happens the words of Isaiah 25:8 will find their fulfillment and death will be swallowed up in victory (Rev. 7:17; 21:4). Spurgeon once remarked, “Expiring saints have often said that their last beds have been the best they have ever slept upon.” [90] “Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?” (15:55). In Hosea 13:14 we read: “I will deliver this people from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death. Where, O death, are your plagues? Where, O grave, is your destruction?…” Barnes describes the abode of the dead in these words: “…According to the Hebrews, Hades, or Sheol, was a vast subterranean receptacle, or abode, where the souls of the dead existed. It was dark, deep, still, awful. The descent to it was through the grave; and the spirits of all the dead were supposed to be assembled there; the righteous occupying the upper regions, and the wicked the lower…” [91] But when Christ ascended, death was led captive in his train (Eph. 4:8). Death has lost its power and its captives forever. Physical death for the saint of God is now described as a sleep. The horror of death is gone. The awful sting of death has been removed in Christ. This sting (Gk. kentron) is described by Barnes in this way: “…The idea is derived from the venomous sting of serpents, or other reptiles, as being destructive and painful.” [92] Now in Christ this awful sting has been taken away. “The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law” (15:56). The sting of death results from sin, and this comes about by the breaking of God’s law. It is now done away with by the death and resurrection of Jesus. Paul says in Romans 8:2, “…through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death.” Paul sums up saying, “But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (15:57). In Romans 8:37, the apostle says, “No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.” Morris adds, “There is also the implication that we participate in that victory now, and that we participate in it daily.” [93] All this makes us want to exult in the words of Psalm. 98:1 (NKJ) “…Oh, sing to the LORD a new song! For He has done marvelous things; His right hand and His holy arm have gained Him the victory.” In light of all these wonderful truths Paul closes the section with this great challenge, “Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain” (15:58). 1. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible, 2. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 170. 3. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 4. Ibid., Intro. “Celsus, who lived about A.D. 220,…. How can those who have died rise with their identical bodies? He demands. ‘Really it is the hope of worms! For what soul of a man would any longer wish for a body that had rotted?’” 5. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 492. 6. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 7. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, 8. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 197. 9. Ibid., p. 198. 10. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 138 Smith adds that this may, “represent technical rabbinic terms which were used to indicate the transmission and reception of oral (or written) tradition.” (Smith, p. 310). 11. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 12. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 493. 13. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 14. Ibid. 15. Jim Gerrish, see commentary on Mark, https://www.wordofgodtoday.com/mark-chapter-15/ Some have gone to the great and painstaking task of checking the stages of the moon in the early centuries (remember, Israel runs on a lunar calendar). Many scholars feel that Jesus was probably crucified in the year AD 30. In that year the fourteenth of the Hebrew month of Nisan fell on Thursday. Thus the day of Jesus’ crucifixion would have been on Thursday and not on Friday according to this scientific evidence. The Day of Preparation mentioned would then have been for the Passover Sabbath and not for the normal Sabbath. In effect, there would have been two Sabbaths in close proximity to each other. The interesting use of “Sabbaths” (sabbaton) in the plural in Matthew 28:1 seems to corroborate the passing of two Sabbaths while Jesus was asleep in the tomb. 16. Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, vs. 15:1-11. 17. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, 18. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 19. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 140. 20. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 21. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 175. 22. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 15:6. 23. Quoted in Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 15:7. 24. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 200. 25. J. D. Douglas &Merrill C. Tenney, The New International Dictionary of the Bible (Basingstoke, Hants, UK: Zondervan Publishing House, 1987), p. 756. 26. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 201. 27. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, 28. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 29. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, 30. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 15:14. 31. Quoted in Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 32. McGee, First Corinthians, Thru The Bible Commentary, p. 180. 33. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 15:19. 34. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1256. 35. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 205. 36. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 37. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 312. 38. N. T. Wright, Surprised By Hope, Rethinking Heaven, he Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church (New York: Harper, Collins, 2008), p. 42. 39. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 313. 40. Wright, Surprised By Hope, Rethinking Heaven, he Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church, p. 158. 41. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 494. 42. Wright, Surprised By Hope, Rethinking Heaven, he Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church, p. 151. 43. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 206. 44. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 45. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 207. 46. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 652. 47. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 48. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 652. 49. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 162. 50. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 147. 51. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 486. Comfort adds: “Psalm 110:1…Although God the Father and God the Son are equal (Phil. 2:6), each has a special work to do and an area of sovereign control 15:28.” (Comfort, p. 229). 52. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised p. 1072. 53. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1257. 54. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 208. 55. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 164. 56. Quoted in Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 57. Ibid., pp. 24-18. 58. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 59. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 208. 60. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v. 15:29. Guzik adds: “It is a mysterious passage, and there have been more than thirty different attempts to interpret it…Significantly, Paul did not say, ‘we baptize for the dead,’ but asked, ‘what will they do who are baptized for the dead,’ and ‘why then are they baptized for the dead?’” He cites Mare who said, “Paul simply mentions the superstitious custom without approving it and uses it to fortify his argument that there is a resurrection from the dead.” (Guzik, vs. 15:29-32). 61. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 652. 62. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 209. 63. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 64. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 653. 65. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 487. 66. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised p. 1072. 67. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, 68. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, v. 15:32. 69. Quoted in Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 15:32. 70. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 150. 71. Quoted in Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 317. 72. Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, vs. 15:29-41. 73. Quoted in Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 74. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 75. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 496. 76. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 319. 77. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, 78. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 174. 79. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 495. 80. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 218. 81. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 176. 82. Quoted in Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 495. 83. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 221. 84. Quoted in Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 321. 85. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 177. 86. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 154. 87. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 222. 88. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 179. 89. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 90. Guzik, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, David Guzik Commentaries on the 91. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, 92. Ibid. 93. Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, p. 224. Now about the collection for the Lord’s people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do. 1 Corinthians 16:1 There is an amazing transition in this verse. Paul has just dealt with high and heavenly subjects, and suddenly he deals with the lowly subject of the offering. Stedman says of this: “…Paul moves from the great and lofty themes of the resurrection, where you almost hear the sound of the ‘last trump’ ringing in your ears, and suddenly he says, ‘And now concerning the collection,’ which proves that money is not to be separated from the great spiritual entities of Christianity…” [1] Guthrie adds, “Saint and theologian though he is, he keeps his feet firmly on the ground when it comes to details of administration.” [2] The collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem was a subject that was often on Paul’s mind, especially on the Third Missionary Journey. Some scholars think that Paul was so insistent about this because of his agreement with the leaders of the church during the Jerusalem Council of AD 49. The leaders, in agreeing to the Gentile mission, asked that Paul would continue to remember the poor (Gal. 2:9-10). Shortly before that time, Paul and Barnabas were involved in bringing an offering from Antioch to the Jerusalem church (Acts 11:27-30). It is important to understand that this present large offering was gathered over an extensive period of time. Smith thinks it spanned a period of at least five or six years, and possibly a lot longer. [3] The offering is mentioned explicitly a number of times (cf. Acts 24:17; 2 Cor. Chs. 8 &9; Rom. 15:25-32). In talking about the offering, it is amazing that the apostle uses a total of nine different Greek words to describe it, beginning with the word logias here. This word means an extra collection. [4] We might ask, “Why an offering for Jerusalem?” In a real sense, Jerusalem was the mother church from which all other churches sprang. Paul no doubt wanted the Gentile churches to remember this fact. He says in Romans 15:27, “… For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings.” Comfort says, “Paul believed that the conversion of the Gentiles would bring the Jews to Christ …The Jews would see the gift as a fulfillment of Isaiah 2:2-4; 60:6-7, 11 and Micah 4:13, where it was promised that the Gentiles would bring gifts to Jerusalem.” [5] Another fact behind the offering was that there was much poverty in Jerusalem. Some of this may have happened because of the great famine around mid-century that hit Judea hard (Acts 11:28-30). We also know from scripture that the Jerusalem church cared for many widows (Acts 6:1-6). Through the centuries, Jerusalem has had a difficult time, and even today in the heart of the city many people are very poor. For several years I was in charge of delivering food to the needy in Jerusalem through our Christian organization. Through time, we literally delivered hundreds of tons of food to the poor Orthodox people in the heart of the city. Today, as in days gone by, many of these religious people live on contributions from abroad. Paul had given certain instructions to the Galatian churches concerning this offering and he repeats the instructions here. No doubt, he wished to spark a bit of friendly rivalry between the churches regarding which one could raise the greatest offering. “On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with your income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made” (16:2). In this verse we have a solid proof that the early Christian church met on Sunday, the day of resurrection (cf. Acts 20:7). [6] It was true then just as it is today in Israel that Sunday, or the first day of the Hebrew week, was a work day. This no doubt presented Christians with a special challenge and their meetings would have necessarily been confined to early mornings or evening services. Today in Israel, a number of churches meet on the Sabbath rather than Sunday because it is difficult for people to get off work for church services. Some Jewish Christians in the First Century no doubt continued to observe the Sabbath as well as Sunday, just as they do today. For Christians, Sunday was not the same as the Sabbath, but some considered it a day of rest and worship anyway. [7] Although the Greek word used here is sabbatou, it does not mean “Sabbath” but “week” (cf. Lk.18:12). [8] These early Christians were instructed by Paul to lay aside an offering each week in proportion to their income. We must remember that many believers were poor in the First Century and they probably lived at subsistence levels. Setting aside any amount must have been a sacrifice for these. [9] A good number were slaves, and giving any kind of offering would have presented a special problem for them. They were to lay aside this amount as a gift on the first day of the week. Scholars do not agree as to whether it was to be laid aside at home or brought to the church gathering and placed in the offering. [10] Wiersbe gives a couple of quips here saying, “An open heart cannot maintain a closed hand.” And, “When your outgo exceeds your income, then your upkeep is your downfall.” [11] This special offering and the information concerning it is really the only place where the New Testament speaks to any degree about our offerings as Christians. [12] Since we are no longer under the law, the tithe does not really apply to us. However, we should want to give more than the tithe because our salvation is much greater than theirs. When we look at the Hebrew offerings and count them up, we realize that the average person probably gave in excess of 50 percent of his or her yearly income. [13] “Then, when I arrive, I will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with your gift to Jerusalem. If it seems advisable for me to go also, they will accompany me” (16:3-4). Paul was extremely cautious about the handling of money. His plan was to have representatives from each of the churches actually accompany their gifts. If the gift was large enough, he himself would go along (cf. Acts 20:4). [14] This united offering was no doubt quite a large sum of money. We remember that this was the day before banks and international wire transfers. The vast amount had to be carried on their persons in cash. Surely, there must have been many anxious thoughts of pirates, shipwrecks, and the numerous other things that could befall travelers in the ancient world. In the end, there must have been a large collective sigh of relief when the money was finally delivered to the church in Jerusalem. After I go through Macedonia, I will come to you— for I will be going through Macedonia. 1 Corinthians 16:5 In his Second Missionary Journey, Paul had delivered the gospel to Philippi, Berea and Thessalonica, making the first thrust into what would become Europe. He was now anxious to return to these churches and check on their welfare. After that, his plan was to then visit the Corinthians and spend some time there. When it took place, this evangelistic tour consumed some time, even throughout much of the summer and autumn (Acts 19:21; 20:1-2). It might have even included some time in Illyricum (Rom. 15:19). [15] Paul’s plan was interrupted somewhat as he had to make a quick and painful visit to Corinth to settle some unknown but urgent problem (2 Cor. 2:1; cf. 12:14; 13:2). He returned to Ephesus, afterward sending Timothy and Erastus to Macedonia (Acts 19:22) and presumably on to Corinth (1 Cor. 16:10). Later he sent Titus to assist with the gathering of the offering and to further help with church problems (2 Cor. 2:13; 7:6, 13). Paul departed from Ephesus to Macedonia after an ugly and dangerous riot erupted over his teaching (Acts 20:1ff.). “Perhaps I will stay with you for a while, or even spend the winter, so that you can help me on my journey, wherever I go” (16:6). Paul was being careful with his planning. Later we learn that some in the Corinthian church thought he was “fickle” with his travel arrangements (1 Cor. 4:18). Of course, traveling by ship was a little difficult to plan. Because of winter storms it was impossible to travel on the sea between November to February. [16] The Greek verb he uses in this verse is propempō. It has the technical meaning of supplying travel needs for God’s itinerant ministers. [17] Paul’s extensive travels and his final three month stay in Corinth are a little sketchy. Bruce feels that it could have even been the following winter after that when he actually stayed with them. [18] “For I do not want to see you now and make only a passing visit; I hope to spend some time with you, if the Lord permits” (16:7). We see in Paul’s journeys that he relied very much on the providence of God (Acts 18:21; 1 Cor. 4:19). [19] We know that at least on one occasion his plans were completely and radically changed by the Holy Spirit (Acts 16:6-10). “But I will stay on at Ephesus until Pentecost, because a great door for effective work has opened to me, and there are many who oppose me” (16:8-9). It is clear that Paul planned to keep this Jewish feast. [20] Pett says, “The fact that he refers to Pentecost demonstrates that he expected the Corinthians to have some awareness of Jewish feasts…” [21] Also, the fact that Paul would stay on in Ephesus is proof that this letter was written from that place. [22] A great door of opportunity had opened for Paul at Ephesus and this brought about also a great tide of opposition. It is amazing that Paul wished to stay there with this in mind. Trapp says, “Truth never lacks an opposite.” [23] When Timothy comes, see to it that he has nothing to fear while he is with you, for he is carrying on the work of the Lord, just as I am. 1 Corinthians 16:10 Wiersbe says, “Money and opportunities are valueless without people.” [24] Paul no doubt realizing this surrounded himself with good and dependable workers. Timothy was a favorite of Paul, although he was quite young (cf. 4:17). Paul’s sending of Timothy must be connected with Acts 19:22, where the apostle sent Timothy and Erastus to Macedonia, while he himself stayed in Ephesus. Erastus was a Corinthian believer (Rom. 16:23; 2 Tim. 4:20) and may well have been the same Erastus who is mentioned in a Latin inscription that was uncovered at Corinth. [25] Although Timothy was a favorite of Paul, he was young and appears from several references to be a little timid. The church at Corinth was obviously a pretty intimidating crowd from what we see. No doubt there was a good deal of concern with Paul as to how Timothy would be received. Thus, we see Paul building Timothy up and highly recommending him. Barclay says, “The situation in Corinth was difficult enough for the experienced Paul; it would be infinitely worse for Timothy.” [26] Yet, “the vine is the weakest of trees, but full of fruit. A little hand may thread a needle. A little boat may do best in a low river…” [27] We cannot be absolutely certain that Timothy ever reached Corinth. In sending him out, Paul only mentions Macedonia. The expression “when Timothy comes” is rendered in several translations as “if Timothy comes.” In 2 Corinthians 1:1, we see him with Paul in Macedonia. Also, in 2 Corinthians 12:18, as Paul speaks of Titus and the group sent to Corinth, he does not mention Timothy (cf. 2 Cor. 2:13; 7:6-7). Paul’s sending Titus to Corinth may have been in some way to make amends if Timothy did not arrive. [28] “No one, then, should treat him with contempt. Send him on his way in peace so that he may return to me. I am expecting him along with the brothers” (16:11). In case Timothy did arrive in Corinth Paul was taking extra care that he would be treated well. He wanted no one to despise Timothy’s youth (1 Tim. 4:12). Timothy should be sent away in peace. Paul obviously is expecting Timothy to be with other brothers. One of these was obviously Erastus but we have no idea who else was involved here. Now about our brother Apollos: I strongly urged him to go to you with the brothers. He was quite unwilling to go now, but he will go when he has the opportunity. 1 Corinthians 16:12 We know from scripture that Apollos was a highly educated Jewish believer from Alexandria. He was instructed in the things of Jesus but he knew only the baptism of John. Priscilla and Aquila befriended him in Ephesus and explained the faith to him accurately. Apollos then planned to go to Corinth. He did so, and there he powerfully debated with the Jews and proved to them that Jesus was their Messiah (Acts 18:24-28). Paul greatly desired that Apollos go and minister once more to Corinth but Apollos was unwilling. We see by this that Apollos conducted a rather independent ministry and was not under the direction of Paul. We can understand that there was absolutely no jealousy between Paul and Apollos. Both were powerful ministers of the gospel working in the areas assigned by them by the Lord. We do not know from scripture whether or not Apollos ever returned to Corinth, although he was highly esteemed there. Ambrosiaster felt that Apollos did not wish to go to Corinth because the church was divided. [29] We already know from 1:12 and 3:6 that there was an Apollos party in the church at Corinth. Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong. Do everything in love. 1 Corinthians 16:13-14 Paul uses several Greek military terms here as he gives final instructions to the Corinthian church. [30] First of all they are to be on their guard, to be alert and to stay awake or vigilant (grēgoreite). They are also to stand firm in their faith and be courageous. The Greek word for courageous is andrizesthe, and it means “to play the man.” [31] They were not to be spiritual wimps but they were to stand up and be strong. What kinds of things were they to watch for and guard against? Coffman summarizes them for us: “(1) the danger of division, (2) the deception of false teachers, (3) the atheistic denials of the resurrection, (4) the failure of love of the brethren, etc…” [32] The apostle has already spent all of chapter 13 to emphasize love. Really, love has to be the basis of everything in the Christian life. All of our efforts, if they are without real agape love, count for nothing. “You know that the household of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, and they have devoted themselves to the service of the Lord’s people. I urge you, brothers and sisters, to submit to such people and to everyone who joins in the work and labors at it” (16:15-16). The household of Stephanas (cf. 1:16) was the first whole family of converts in the Roman province of Achaia. We know from Acts 17:34, that there were previous converts, such as Dionysius, Damaris and some others from Athens, which was also in Achaia. While these were individuals, it seems that the family of Stephanas was the first whole household. [33] It is fair to assume that Stephanas and the others carried the letter of 1 Corinthians back to Corinth. [34] Stephanas seems to have been a leader in the church but perhaps one whom the Corinthians had not given proper respect. [35] Paul was seeking to remedy this situation by asking that the Corinthians submit to him. He and his family were people devoted to the Lord and his work. “I was glad when Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus arrived, because they have supplied what was lacking from you. For they refreshed my spirit and yours also. Such men deserve recognition” (16:17-18). This is the first mention of the traveling companions, Fortunatus and Achaicus. Together, they may have delivered some of the questions asked by the Corinthian church as well as returning Paul’s letter to the church. It seems from history that Fortunatus actually survived Paul. Some forty years later we see him as the bearer of the letter from Clement of Rome to the Corinthian church. [36] “The churches in the province of Asia send you greetings. Aquila and Priscilla greet you warmly in the Lord, and so does the church that meets at their house” (16:19). When Paul speaks of Asia, he is speaking of the Roman province by that name that was located in the western portion of what is now Turkey or Asia Minor. There were other important churches in that province, like Colossae, Ladiocea, and Hierapolis. We have the mention here of Aquila and Priscilla, the Jewish couple who were no doubt some of the greatest church workers in history. This dynamic couple had been forced out of Rome by the decree of Emperor Claudius in AD 49 (Acts 18:2). From there, they went to Corinth where they became acquainted with Paul as they worked together in tent making. From there they went to Ephesus (Acts 18:18). Finally we see them back at Rome (Rom. 16:3). In all these places they seem to have established churches in their home. In order to do such traveling they must have had some wealth. Since Priscilla is mentioned first in many of their appearances (cf. Acts 18:26; Rom. 16:3) it is thought that she may have been a woman of some importance and perhaps of some wealth. [37] It is of note that this couple had a lot to do with the true conversion of Apollos. They also risked their lives to protect Paul in Ephesus. The fact that they had a church in their house tells us a lot about the church in the First Century. Churches did not meet in church buildings but in homes. This custom went on for the first three-hundred years of the church’s existence. [38] Morris cites R. Banks who says, “The entertaining room in a moderately well-to-do household could hold around thirty people comfortably…” [39] This helps us understand how larger houses could accommodate a small church. We need to realize that cities like Ephesus and Corinth could have had several house churches of this type. Since Aquila and Priscilla had lived in Corinth they were no doubt well known to the church. Throughout Paul’s ministry we see that he was surrounded with good friends and fellow-workers. Meyer says of him, “The apostle was careful to cultivate friendship, one of the priceless gifts of God; and he was very generous not only in his references to his friends, but also in his dealings with them.” [40] “All the brothers and sisters here send you greetings. Greet one another with a holy kiss” (16:20). Sending greetings from one group of Christian friends to another group was a very common practice in the First Century. Another well-known practice was the giving of a holy kiss. The “holy kiss” (Gk. philēmati hagiōi) sounds a little strange in our western culture. The kiss was common though in Jesus’ day and we read of him rebuking his Pharisee host because he failed to give Jesus the expected kiss of greeting (Lk. 7:45). We also read of the kiss of greeting that Judas gave Jesus at his betrayal. The custom of giving the holy kiss of greeting continued in sub-apostolic times. Justin Martyr (c. AD 160) remarks about it: “Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss.” [41] Apparently, as time passed the holy kiss was abused by some. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195) complains: “There are those who do nothing but make the churches resound with a kiss, not having love itself within.” [42] Keener remarks about it also: “Due to abuses, in subsequent centuries the church limited the practice of the liturgical kiss of fellowship to men kissing men and women kissing women, although this was not the initial practice.” [43] We might wonder if this practice is still in vogue particularly among the Jewish people. In Israel the kiss as a greeting is probably more popular than a handshake. It is very common to see Jews of both sexes giving a greeting kiss, but the kiss is quite unlike our Hollywood style of kissing. When two people meet, the greeting kiss and light embrace is given gently and simultaneously by both parties and both sides of the face are kissed. Each person is actually kissed three times, to one side and then the other and finally returning to kiss the side that one began on. There is nothing sensual about this kiss even when it is done between a man and a woman. We might hasten to add that such a kiss while practiced commonly with Arab men would never be given by a strange man to an Arab woman. The same is true in regard to Orthodox Jewish women. In these cases even a handshake is usually out of order. There should in fact be no handshake unless the woman initiates it. Today, because the holy kiss is so foreign to our culture we would probably do much better to stick with a warm handshake or a gentle loving embrace. “I, Paul, write this greeting in my own hand” (16:21). It was Paul’s custom, in order to authenticate his letters, to take the pen from his scribe or amanuensis and write the final note in his own handwriting (cf. Gal. 6:11; Col. 4:18; 2 Thess. 3:17). This was the apostle’s way of guarding against false letters from false teachers. [44] “If anyone does not love the Lord, let that person be cursed! Come, Lord!” (16:22). Other translations like the NJB have it reading, “If there is anyone who does not love the Lord, a curse on such a one. Maran atha.” This translation makes plain that the original Aramaic word is used in the text. The word Maran atha was apparently quite common in the early church and probably did not need translation. It means simply “Our Lord, come!” The apostle brings down a curse upon those who do not love the Lord and who are in fact his enemies. This is the Greek equivalent to the Hebrew herem, meaning a thing cursed, devoted to the Lord for destruction. [45] “The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you. My love to all of you in Christ Jesus. Amen” (16:23-24). While Greek letters often contained the word chairein (greetings), Paul usually changed this Greek word to charis, which means grace. [46] Then the apostle ends with a statement unusual for him, “my love to all of you.” Utley notes how this statement is given to a church with many factions, and to a church that had given Paul much trouble. [47] 1. Stedman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Ray Stedman Expository Studies, 2. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 1073. 3. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 322. 4. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study “It has been pointed out that, in different letters and speeches, Paul uses no fewer than nine different words to describe this collection. (i) logia…means an extra collection… (ii) charis (1 Cor.16:3; 2 Cor. 8:4)…describes a free gift freely given …(iii) koinonia (2 Cor. 8:4; 9:13; Rom. 15:6)…means fellowship, and the essence of fellowship is sharing…(iv) diakonia… (2 Cor. 8:4; 9:1, 12-13)…means practical Christian service…(v) hadrotes …meaning is abundance (2 Cor. 8:20)…(vi) eulogia...means bounty (2 Cor. 9:5)…(vii) leitourgia…(2 Co. 9:12)…a word with a noble history. (viii) eleemosune … (Acts 24:17)….the Greek word for alms…(ix) prosphora (Acts 24:17)…the word for an offering and a sacrifice.” 5. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 244. 6. Guthrie, et. al., The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 1073. 7. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 185. 8. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 323. 9. Ibid., p. 324. 10. There is considerable discussion among commentators on where the offering is kept. Smith says, “this phrase probably means ‘at home’…and the line seems to be better translated as ‘let each one of you set aside at home [a sum of money]’” (Smith, p. 324). Coffman quoting Lipscomb says, “The idea that the storing was to be at home is incompatible with the idea that ‘no collections be made when I come.’” (Coffman, v. 16:2). 11. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 497. 12. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 323. 13. It might be helpful for us to realize just how much the Hebrews offered. The religion of the Old Testament was a costly religion. King David once said, “I will not sacrifice to the Lord my God burnt offerings that cost me nothing” (2 Sam. 24:24). Today, in our giving we strain to reach the tithe or 10 percent. Old Testament religion started at this point. After the tithe there was the Sabbatical Year. When one lived in an agricultural society and didn’t farm his land one year out of every seven, that is effectively another 14.2 percent offered up to God. This does not consider that on the Sabbatical, all Hebrew slaves were freed and all debts to fellow Hebrews were canceled (Deut. 15:1,12). If one did not harvest the corners of his fields or go back for second pickings, so that the poor could glean (Lev. 19:9), there is possibly another 5-10 percent. For those who kept the Sabbath, that lost day of production could amount to another 14.2 percent. Then there was the year of Jubilee every 50 years. At that time all property reverted back to its original family ownership and all Hebrew servants were set free. That might amount to another 2-10 percent, depending upon how wealthy a family happened to be. Of course, we are already getting up into the area of 50-60 percent of total income offered to God. All this does not count the offerings. There were the offerings of the first-born and first-fruits that we have mentioned. Plus, all males were required to go up to Jerusalem three times each year (Ex. 23:17), and they were forbidden to appear before the Lord empty (Deut. 16:16). They had to bring animals from their flocks each time. Then there were the whole offerings, cereal offerings, drink offerings, peace offerings, sin offerings, and trespass offerings (Lev. 1-5). All these offerings could easily total up to another 5-10 percent of a family’s income. 14. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1259. 15. Kretzmann, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Kretzmann’s Popular Commentary, 16. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 497. 17. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, vs. 16:5-9. 18. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 159. 19. Utley, Free Bible Commentary, vs. 16:7. 20. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 489. 21. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 22. Barnes, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament, v. 16:8. 23. Trapp, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete Commentary, v. 16:9. 24. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe Bible Commentary, NT, p. 498. 25. Smith, 1 Corinthians, The Bible Knowledge Word Study, p. 324. 26. Barclay, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, William Barclay’s Daily Study 27. Trapp, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, John Trapp Complete Commentary, v. 16:10. 28. Jamieson, Fausset, &Brown, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, v. 16:10. 29. Bray, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary On Scripture, VII, p. 188. 30. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, p. 1259. 31. Bruce, The New Century Bible Commentary, I &II Corinthians, p. 160. 32. Coffman, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament, v. 16:13. 33. Barker &Kohlenberger, Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, p. 656. 34. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 490. 35. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, p. 249. Bruce adds: “One of the roots of the trouble at Corinth was a tendency to anarchy, a failure to give due recognition to those who were qualified to be ‘administrators’ in the church.” (Bruce, p. 160) 36. Clarke, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, The Adam Clarke Commentary, v.16:17. 37. Pett, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, Peter Pett’s Commentary on the Bible, 38. Viola &Barna, Pagan Christianity?, p. 12. 39. Quoted in Morris, 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 7, 40. Meyer, Commentary on 1 Corinthians, F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary, vs. 16:13-24. 41. Roberts, et. al., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 185. Utley adds: “This form of public greeting (kissing on one or both cheeks) and sign of fellowship can be seen in the Old Testament in Exod. 4:27. It can be seen in the gospels in Mark 14:45. It became standardized in the early church (cf. Rom.16:16; 2 Cor. 13:12; 1 Thess. 5:26; 1 Pet. 5:14), which followed the pattern of the Synagogue. …it still continues on special occasions in the eastern churches. Its modern equivalent western would be a warm handshake or hug.” (Utley, v. 16:20). 42. Ibid., Vol. 2, p. 291. 43. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 448. 44. Comfort, gen. ed., Life Application Bible Commentary, 1 &2 Corinthians, 45. Pfeiffer &Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1259-60. 46. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary, New Testament, p. 490.