1. Introduction (1:1–9) and Divisions in the Church, part 1 (1:10–31) Outline 1:1–9 I. Introduction 1:1–3 A. Greetings 1:4–9 B. Thanksgiving 1:10 6:20 II. Paul's Response to Reported Problems 1:10 4:21 A. Divisions in the Church 1:10–17 1. Factions 1:18 2:5–2. The Folly of the Cross 1:18–20 a. The Lost and the Saved 1:21–25 b. Wisdom and Foolishness 1:26–31 c. The Weak and the Strong I. Introduction 1:1–9 1 1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, 2 to the church of God which is in Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours: 3 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. 4 I always thank my God concerning you for the grace of God which was given to you in Christ Jesus, 5 for in him you have been enriched in every way, in every utterance and all knowledge, 6 just as the testimony to Christ was confirmed in you, 7 so that you are not lacking in any spiritual gift as you are eagerly awaiting the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. 8 He also will confirm you to the end and keep you blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 God is faithful, through whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. A. Greetings 1:1–3 This is the first of the three major epistles (I Corinthians, II Corinthians, and Romans) Paul wrote. His earlier epistles were the two letters to the church in Thessalonica and his letter to the Galatians (generally accepted as the first epistle Paul composed).^[1] As these earlier epistles and the extant Corinthian letters attest, controversies and questions compelled Paul to write. The necessity to write is more pronounced in I Corinthians than in any other Pauline epistle. William Hendriksen observes, Among all Paul's epistles there is none that covers such a wide variety of subjects and problems, stretching all the way from those relating to lawsuits, marriage and divorce, meats offered to idols, ministers remuneration, propriety in worship, celebration of the Lord's Supper, speaking in tongues, belief in the resurrection of the body, to the exercise of Christian benevolence. ^[2] 1. Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother. a. Name and calling. Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus. As he does in all his other epistles, Paul begins this letter by introducing himself as the writer and sender. He emphatically states that he has been called (Rom. 1:1; Gal. 1:15). At the time of Paul's conversion, Jesus personally called him to be an apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15). He was ordained to this office when the Holy Spirit set him and Barnabas apart for the work to which [the Spirit] called them (Acts 13:2). Elsewhere Paul declares that as an apostle he had been sent by Jesus Christ and God the Father (Gal. 1:1). In brief, Paul was called by the Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. When Jesus called Paul to be an apostle, he endowed Paul with divine authority to preach the gospel and to address all the churches (4:17; 7:17; 14:33b; 16:1). Consequently, no one in the Corinthian church could legitimately question Paul's apostolicity (compare 9:1–2). Should one do so, he would be opposing the Lord. In most of his letters, Paul affirms that he is an apostle of Christ Jesus.^[3] Only in the introductions of Philippians, I and II Thessalonians, and Philemon does he omit the reference to his apostleship. He uses the phrase an apostle of Christ Jesus as a standard introductory formula that characterizes his epistles. And he knows that an apostle functions as the representative of his sender Jesus Christ, whose message he must accurately communicate. In a sense, an apostle can be compared with an ambassador (II Cor. 5:20) who represents in another country the president or prime minister of his government. By the will of God. Declaring that his apostleship is based on God's will,^[4] Paul effectively affirms that his calling as an apostle originates with God. Sosthenes our brother. The word order of this introductory verse excludes Sosthenes from the office of apostle. Paul presents him as our brother, which means that Sosthenes is a Christian who is well known to the believers in Corinth. Yet Paul mentions him only once in all his epistles. Perhaps this Sosthenes was the ruler of the synagogue in Corinth who received a beating at the court of Proconsul Gallio (Acts 18:17). But lacking further information, we can only say that he served as a co-worker with Paul. Although Paul writes the pronoun I instead of we (e.g., vv. 4, 10, 14, 16), scholars affirm that Sosthenes supported Paul in the message communicated to the Corinthians.^[5] 2. To the church of God which is in Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours. b. Recipients. Paul addresses his letter to the church of God which is in Corinth. He writes the word ekklsia, an expression that in the Hellenistic world of the day was a time-honored technical term that generally referred to either political or guild meetings (Acts 19:32, 39, 41). By the middle of the first century, Christians began to refer to their own assemblies as the church (ekklsia) in Christ. They used the term to distinguish themselves from the Jews, who used the word synagogue for their meeting places (James 2:2). Paul carefully differentiates the gatherings of Christians from both Gentile assemblies and Jewish synagogues. Note how he does this in one of his earlier epistles: To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (I Thess. 1:1; II Thess. 1:1). He directs his two Corinthian epistles to the church of God in Corinth (I Cor. 1:2; II Cor. 1:1) without linking the church directly to Jesus Christ. Yet, the concept church can be understood only with reference to Jesus Christ, for the church of God is in him.^[6] To those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus. The church belongs to God, who through Christ has called his people out of the world to a life of holiness. His people do not leave the world (see 5:10) but demonstrate to the world that they have been made holy in Christ Jesus. Despite their frequent quarrels, factions, and immorality, Paul nevertheless describes the Corinthians as people who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus (Eph. 5:27).^[7] In this epistle, Paul first states that the believers have been set aside by God to live holy lives and then paradoxically points out their sins and shortcomings. He intimates that when a believer is made holy, he is fully aware of God's gracious act, for the Christian realizes that he is constantly called to be holy (Rom. 1:7) and to live a life of holiness. Called to be saints. Holiness is more than a state. For believers, sanctification is both a definitive act of God and a lifelong process.^[8] God's gracious act of sanctifying believers includes their accountability to be holy. In the Greek the verb to be is absent from the phrase called to be saints, but Paul's intent is to instruct his readers to fulfill their commitment to be holy. Paul was called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus, and thus he committed himself to be Christ's spokesman. Similarly God has called believers to a state of holiness and expects them to practice holiness. That call continued to come to both Paul and the Corinthians, so that throughout their lives they remained called.^[9] Together with all those who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. With these words, Paul embraces both Gentile and Jewish Christians as equals in the church of Jesus Christ. Paul refers to the church universal, in which all believers everywhere call on the name of our Lord, and groups the Corinthians with all other believers. But is Paul addressing his epistle to the believers both in Corinth and in all other places? Although Paul's letters were designed to be read in the churches (Col. 4:16; I Thess. 5:27; and compare II Peter 3:15–16), this epistle is addressed specifically to the church in Corinth. The second part of verse 2 stresses the unity that believers exhibit in prayer when they call on the name of Jesus Christ. Prayer unites Christians before the throne of grace. Their Lord and ours. Paul wants the Corinthians to know that they belong to the body of believers. This body is worldwide, for believers everywhere acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord. Thus Paul writes, their Lord and ours. In the Greek text, the word Kyrios (Lord) is omitted; in translation it has to be supplied from the context. 3. Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. c. Greetings. Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the common greeting that Paul employs in most of his epistles;^[10] in modified form, it also appears in the letters of both Peter and John.^[11] In the Hellenistic world, people commonly greeted each other with the Greek word chairein (Acts 15:23; 23:26; James 1:1). Its derived form charis signifies grace. The Jews, however, greeted one another with the term shalom (peace). In the epistolary literature of the Christian church, the two expressions grace and peace appear together and have a decidedly theological meaning. R. C. H. Lenski observes that grace is always first, peace always second. This is due to the fact that grace is the source of peace. Without grace there is and can be no peace; but when grace is ours, peace must of necessity follow. ^[12] Paul links both grace and peace to their ultimate source: they originate from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. The virtues of grace and peace are God's gifts to his children, and he grants these favors as a Father. In harmony with the Lord's Prayer, in which Jesus taught his followers to say our Father, Paul also portrays God as our Father. Everyone who prays in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ has God as Father. Hence, all believers are God's children through Christ. And through him, they receive the blessings of grace and peace. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 1:1–2 Verse 1 [Greek] this noun is preceded by [Greek] (called) to indicate that Paul was passive and God active in Paul's appointment to apostleship. Verse 2 [Greek] the perfect passive participle in the dative plural stands in apposition to the noun church, which collectively is in the dative singular. In this text, the verb [Greek] (I make holy) refers to a definitive act of God. The perfect tense denotes completed action with lasting result. The passive indicates that God is the agent and that he sanctifies the Corinthians in Christ. The fundamental thought of the word is that of belonging to God; it carries the duty of being like to Him in character. ^[13] B. Thanksgiving 1:4–9 For all the spiritual and material blessings that he and the recipients of his letters possess, Paul faithfully expresses thanks to God. In the opening verses of his epistles, he invariably voices words of gratitude on behalf of the people he addresses.^[14] 4. I always thank my God concerning you for the grace of God which was given to you in Christ Jesus. When Paul writes I always thank my God concerning you, ^[15] he reveals his pastoral heart. He prays for the churches he has founded and thanks God for them. He uses the adverb always to qualify the verb thank. But how is Paul able to express his gratitude to God on behalf of the Corinthian church? The members have caused him untold grief with their divisions, immorality, marital problems, and lawsuits. Can Paul accurately write the word always? Is he using a formula at the beginning of his epistle? No, Paul's heart is filled with gratitude because God chose to call his people out of the immoral and idolatrous environment of Corinth. Even there God established the church in fellowship with Jesus Christ (v. 9). For that reason he can continually thank God. For the grace of God which was given to you in Christ Jesus. This is the second time in as many verses (vv. 3 and 4) that Paul uses the expression grace. In the Greek, derivatives of this expression also appear in the verb thank (v. 4) and in the noun gift (v. 7). In brief, Paul stresses the concept grace in these verses. What is the significance of this concept? Paul is amazed at God's grace, in the form of spiritual gifts, lavished on the Corinthian Christians (see, e.g., the enumeration of gifts in 12:4–11). God's grace becomes evident in the gifts he gives to his people. Notice that Paul uses the passive construction in the second half of this verse. Grace was given to the Corinthians by God. He is the implied agent and the Corinthians are the passive recipients (Rom. 12:6; II Cor. 8:1). Paul gives thanks for God's faithfulness to the believers in Corinth, but he says nothing about any inherent virtues of the Corinthians. Further, Paul states that God's grace has been given in Christ Jesus. That is, in Christ the recipients of this grace have been redeemed and are now set apart from the pagan world in which they live. 5. For in him you have been enriched in every way, in every utterance and all knowledge. a. Translation. This verse features variations of two crucial words. The first word in this sentence can be translated either that (a conjunction introducing a statement which completes the phrase I always thank God for you) or for (a causal conjunction that explains the phrase in Christ Jesus). Translators generally favor the second choice. The next variation is either in him (NIV, RSV) or, as some translations have it, by him (KJV, NKJV). In apposition with the similar construction of the preceding sentence, the reading in him is preferred. In Christ, then, the believer has received untold spiritual riches. b. Message. When Paul writes in him you have been enriched in every way, he is not specifically referring to the material possessions of the Corinthians. Some of them may be affluent (v. 26), but Paul calls attention to their spiritual treasures in Christ (see 3:21–23; in a parallel passage, Paul wishes that the Corinthians might become rich through Christ's poverty [ (II Cor. 8:9; 9:11]). God has untold spiritual riches which he desires to give to the redeemed through Christ.^[16] According to the Scriptures, God is rich in kindness, patience, mercy, and graceRom. 2:4; 9:23; Eph. 1:7; 2:4). Christ possesses unsearchable riches (Eph. 3:8), for in him lie hidden all the treasures of knowledge and wisdom (Col. 2:3). God meets the believer's needs from the glorious riches that are in Christ Jesus (Phil. 4:19). God has adorned the Corinthians with the riches that are in Christ not sparingly, but in every way. In verse 5, Paul refrains from providing a list of spiritual gifts (see 12:4–31) but focuses attention on the number of gifts which the Corinthians have received. In this short verse, he stresses the words every and all to indicate that the recipients of God's blessings are spiritually rich beyond measure. Paul illustrates in what respect the Corinthians have received spiritual riches: in every utterance and all knowledge. He elucidates articulation and knowledge as two of these special gifts. The Greek term logos refers to the uttering of gospel knowledge (gnosis) which the people had. They objectively voiced the truth of the gospel which they subjectively understood. That is, with their mouths they confessed the spiritual knowledge they had its their hearts.^[17] This is the first time the word knowledge appears in this epistle; it occurs frequently in both letters to the Corinthians^[18] and is closely related to the term wisdom. Various shades of meaning appear in particular contexts, but the notion of the intellectual apprehension and application of Christian truth is constant. ^[19] The spiritual gifts of utterance and knowledge when appropriately used are an eloquent testimony to Christ (II Cor. 8:7). In another letter, Paul writes that he is convinced that Christians are complete in knowledge and competent to instruct one another (Rom. 15:14). 6. Just as the testimony to Christ was confirmed in you. The message of verse 6 is either an afterthought that explains the preceding verse or an introduction to the following verse. I favor the first of the two choices for the following reasons: the words just as balance and present a comparison with the preceding verse. The verb was confirmed is a passive construction which implies God is the agent. This construction parallels the passive verb have been enriched in verse 5. Also, the gift of utterance is analogous to the witness of Christ. And last, the phrase in you compares with the pronoun you that denotes the recipients of spiritual gifts. Some translations have the reading the testimony of Christ, which can be understood subjectively of the gospel itself (KJV, NKJV, MLB). In other words, God confirmed the truth of Christ's gospel in the hearts of the Corinthians. Other versions read the testimony to (or about) Christ, which would refer objectively to the preaching of the gospel by apostles and evangelists (e.g., NIV, RSV, REB).^[20] In view of the general statement in every utterance (v. 5), the second translation is preferred to the first. The question ultimately is how God confirmed the testimony to Christ in the hearts of the Corinthians. Even though Paul does not explain, we venture to say that God by faith confirmed the message of the gospel in the believers through the working of the Holy Spirit. 7. So that you are not lacking in any spiritual gift as you are eagerly awaiting the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Note these two points: a. Result. So that you are not lacking in any spiritual gift. Because God conferred numerous spiritual gifts on the Corinthians, they were not lacking any of these blessings. The present tense of the verb to lack in this result clause indicates that they actually possessed these gifts; at this point in his epistle, however, Paul is not interested in listing the specific gifts (refer to chapters 12 14). With this verb Paul does not suggest that the Corinthians lack any gifts; rather, he means that in respect to other churches, they are not lagging behind.^[21] Through God's grace they have indeed received an abundance of spiritual talents. If we interpret verse 7 in the flow of the paragraph, we conclude that the Corinthians are not lacking in any of the spiritual gifts precisely because of the preaching of the gospel. The mention of spiritual gifts relates more to the verb have been enriched (v. 5) than to the verb was confirmed (v. 6).^[22] The word gift appears here for the first time in this epistle, and in this context it does not mean miracles (see 12:9, 28, 30). To interpret the word narrowly (i.e., as a miracle that serves to confirm the preaching of the gospel) would be restrictive and consequently unacceptable. We should not limit the term gift but rather interpret it in the broadest possible sense. b. Expectation. As you are eagerly awaiting the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Paul links spiritual gifts to the expectation of Jesus return. In this passage Paul twice mentions the end of time: here and in the next verse (v. 8), where he refers to the day of the Lord Jesus Christ. This emphasis is significant in view of Paul's lengthy explanation of the resurrection of the body in 15:12–58, where he explicitly discusses the eschatological moment. The Corinthians interest in the imminent return of the Lord seems to have waned (compare 15:12, 33 34), so at the outset of his epistle, Paul wants to encourage his audience to await eagerly Christ's return.^[23] The verb to await eagerly is in Greek a compound that connotes intensity and earnestness in connection with Christian hope, as Paul's use of it in other epistles reveals: The creation waits in eager expectation (Rom. 8:19) We wait eagerly for our adoption as sons (Rom. 8:23) We wait for it patiently (Rom. 8:25) But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope (Gal. 5:5) And we eagerly await a Savior from (heavenPhil. 3:20)^[24] This particular verb usually occurs in the New Testament with reference to believers who express a genuine eschatological longing for the restoration of all things. With the noun revelation, Paul states that at his return Jesus will remove the mystery of his being by unveiling his presence (II Thess. 1:7; I Peter 1:7, 13; 4:13). The Corinthians should eagerly look forward to the day of that revelation. 8. He also will confirm you to the end and keep you blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. a. He also will confirm you to the end. Who will confirm the Corinthians? God or Jesus? The person mentioned in the preceding clause is Jesus Christ. But for four reasons the flow of the paragraph (vv. 4 9) demands that not Jesus but God be the subject of verse 8. First, the paragraph begins and concludes with a reference to God (see vv. 4 and 9). Next, God enriched the Corinthians in every way and confirmed them by the preaching about Christ (vv. 5, 6). Third, the opening phrase of verse 9 denotes not a new subject but a concluding benediction in a paragraph in which God is the agent. And last, the subject of a parallel verse is God:^[25] Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is GodII Cor. 1:21, NASB . In the Greek, Paul employs the verb to confirm/to establish twice in this paragraph (vv. 6, 8). As the preaching of the gospel confirms the believers in their faith so the promise of God's abiding power establishes them until the consummation. The phrase will establish you expresses not a mere wish but rather a promise which God is going to fulfill. b. And keep you blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. Paul is not saying that the Corinthians are blameless at the time of his writing. Instead, he looks to the future and voices his certainty that God will present them without blame at the time of the final judgment. That is, no one will be able to accuse them, for on that day they will be irreproachable. Elsewhere Paul teaches the manner in which the believers will be presented blameless before the highest court: it is through the death of Christ's physical body that God is reconciled to the sinner and declares him free from blame (Col. 1:22). In the Old Testament, the term the day of the Lord is a description of the day of judgment (Joel 3:14; Amos 5:18 20). In the New Testament, the term alludes to the return of Christ (Phil. 1:6, 10; 2:16; I Thess. 5:2). Christ's return includes judgment in which both God and Christ serve as judge (Rom. 14:10; II Cor. 5:10). In that day, believers are declared blameless through the verdict of the judge. ^[26] 9. God is faithful, through whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. a. God is faithful. Should anyone doubt the veracity of the preceding verses, Paul states unconditionally that God is trustworthy in fulfilling his promises. To emphasize the concept faithful, Paul places this word first in the Greek sentence: a literal translation is faithful is God, who unwaveringly supports his people to the end (v. 8). The echo of this truth resounds throughout the Scriptures.^[27] God is completely reliable. b. Through whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son. God the Father works out his plan of salvation through his Son, Jesus Christ; the Father originates and the Son executes this plan (compare 8:6). But is God's calling effectual for everyone? Hardly. Many are called but few are chosen, Jesus said (Matt. 22:14). Only those who have been called into the fellowship of the Son experience the Father's enduring faithfulness. Calling is always linked to Jesus Christ, as in the case of Paul's apostleship (v. 1) and the Corinthians call to holiness (v. 2). Calling is real when the believer has true fellowship with Christ. This fellowship, however, demands a life of holiness in which a Christian is in body and soul conformed to the likeness of God's Son (Rom. 8:29). As Charles Hodge puts it: Fellowship includes union and communion. ^[28] Fellowship as union and communion includes both partaking of Christ's suffering and glory and belonging to the body of Christ. It means accepting the sacrament of holy communion: remembering that Christ died for us (10:16). When the believer is completely transformed in the core of his being, he has genuine fellowship with Christ. The proclamation of the gospel accepted in true faith, says John, leads to fellowship with the Father and the Son (I John 1:3). c. His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. Paul acknowledges that God the Father calls the believer into fellowship, and that the believer has communion with the Son, who is Jesus Christ, namely, our Lord. Paul ends his thanksgiving with a compilation of divine names and functions. The Son, eternally begotten by the Father (Ps. 2:7), assumed human flesh and was given the name Jesus. The Old Testament name Joshua became Jesus in the New, with an explanation: He will save his people from their sins (Matt. 1:21). While the Son's given name is Jesus, his official name is Christ, that is, the Anointed One or the Messiah. The name points to his office of prophet, priest, and king. And last, when Paul calls Jesus Christ our Lord, he alludes to his exaltation: King of kings and Lord of lords (I Tim. 6:15).^[29] Practical Considerations in 1:4–9 According to Luke, Paul stayed in Corinth for only a year and a half while he founded a churchActs 18:11; presumably a.d. 50 52 . In the following years, Apollos taught the Corinthians the Scriptures and continued to strengthen the believers (1:12; 3:4–6). The church was blessed with an exceptionally talented group of people (12:7–11, 27 31) but was burdened by strife, divisions, moral problems, and irregularities in the worship services. When Paul wrote I Corinthians, he pastorally approached the readers by thanking God, who had called them to a life of holiness. Many of them had lived in spiritual darkness but by God's grace now had fellowship with Jesus Christ. Paul rejoiced in their salvation. In a positive manner, he reminded the Corinthians of their commitment to Christ and urged them to ascend to a higher level of serving him in church and society. In his thanksgiving to God, he addressed the people positively in spite of their lack of love to God and their fellow men. He thus gained their confidence and interest. Referring to the return of Christ and the end of time (vv. 7 8), Paul brings the paragraph on thanksgiving to a climax that functions as an introduction to the rest of his epistle.^[30] The body of his epistle consists of admonition, rebuke, teaching, and correction. But in the longest chapter of his epistle (chap. 15), Paul discusses the doctrine of the resurrection and the eternal destiny of the believers. In short, by calling attention to the day of the Lord in this passage, Paul sets the tone for the remainder of the letter. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 1:4, 8 Verse 4 [Greek] at least two major manuscripts (codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) lack the possessive pronoun. The text, however, has strong support from a wide variety of Greek witnesses and versions. Many translators favor the inclusion of the pronoun my,^[31] although others omit it.^[32] Verse 8 [Greek] this is a verbal adjective that expresses a passive voice. The compound consists of the privative (un-), the preposition [Greek] (in), and the adjective of the verb [Greek] (I call). II. Paul's Response to Reported Problems 1:10 6:20 10 I exhort you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and thought. 11 For some of Chloe's people have told me concerning you, my brothers, that there are quarrels among you. 12 What I mean is this: that each of you says, I am of Paul, or I am of Apollos, or I am of Cephas, or I am of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 that no one should say that you were baptized in my name. 16 I baptized also the household of Stephanas; beyond that I do not know if I baptized any other. 17 For Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the gospel, not in wisdom of words that the cross of Christ may not be emptied. A. Divisions in the Church 1:10 4:21 Jesus said that a kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste and a household divided against itself will fall (Matt. 12:25; Mark 3:24 25; Luke 11:17). When Paul heard about the divisions within the Corinthian church, he knew that he had to confront the readers of his letter about their factions, quarrels, and boasts before he could teach them principles of spiritual conduct. 1. Factions 1:10–17 10. I exhort you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and thought. We make these observations: a. Exhortation. Paul realizes that the quarreling of the Corinthians has not yet resulted in schism, but he knows that he must call his readers back to a living relationship with the Lord and do so pastorally and positively. Thus, he addresses them as his spiritual brothers (and sisters) and exhorts them to consider the name, that is, the full revelation, of the Lord Jesus Christ. Having been called into the fellowship of God's Son Jesus Christ (v. 9), they should understand that this fellowship includes unity and harmony and excludes dissension and strife. Paul admonishes the Corinthians through (lit.) the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. In his epistles he often exhorts his readers by calling on the mediation of God or of Christ. For instance, he exhorts the readers by the mercy of God (Rom. 12:1); by our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 15:30); by the meekness and gentleness of Christ (II Cor. 10:1); in the Lord Jesus Christ (I Thess. 4:1; II Thess. 3:12); and, finally, as in the case of Euodia and Syntyche, to agree with one another in the Lord (Phil. 4:2).^[33] When he appeals to the name of Jesus Christ, he urges the believers to be one in the Lord. b. Agreement. The reason Paul is exhorting the members of the church in Corinth is to have them agree with one another (Rom. 15:5). They should confess with one accord their faith in Christ. They should be at peace with each other. Paul is not pleading for uniformity of opinion but rather for a loving disposition that strives for harmony and peace (Phil. 2:1–2). Paul forbids the Corinthians to form parties in the church. He intimates that by undermining the unity of the church, the Corinthians are becoming an affront to Jesus Christ.^[34] In the same sentence, he exhorts them to be harmonious and commands them not to be schismatic. In his discourse he is not refuting heresies; rather, he seeks to prevent discord.^[35] Both his positive and negative instructions form the two sides of the proverbial coin. The expression divisions conveys the thought of wrangling and strife that tear the church apart. In a word, Paul tells the Corinthians to desist. c. Unity. The church is comparable to the human body (see 12:12–27), which is perfectly joined together and reflects unity and harmony. The Greek word katartizein means to make a person what God intends him or her to be, namely, perfect. It is used of those people who have been restored to harmony. ^[36] They are now exhorted to work together in unity of mind and judgment. The contrast with the preceding clauses in this sentence is striking, for Paul writes, But &be united in the same mind and thought. The term mind relates to the power of observation and the word thought to forming a judgment or opinion. Paul wants the Corinthians to be united in their observations and judgments and to relinquish their divisiveness. He is telling them that in respect to their mind and thought they must strive for perfect harmony and continue to live together in peace. Although Paul desires to rid the church of divisiveness, he is not asking the Corinthians for uniformity in thought. Instead, among God's people he allows diversity in unity. As the seventeenth-century writer Rupert Meldenius put it: In necessary things unity; In nonessential things mutual toleration; And, in all things, love. 11. For some of Chloe's people have told me concerning you, my brothers, that there are quarrels among you. a. For some of Chloe's people. We have no information about Chloe other than her name, which occurs only once in the New Testament. Whether she lived in Ephesus, where Paul was when he wrote the letter, or in Corinth, is not known. We would expect that she resided in Corinth, for the text implies that the Corinthians knew her. Also, the news concerning the factions originated there. Another possibility is that Chloe was a businesswoman who lived in Ephesus and that her employees (either slaves, freedmen, or members of her family) regularly traveled between Corinth and Ephesus and were fully acquainted with the church. Whether Chloe was a Christian cannot be determined.^[37] b. [They] have told me concerning you, my brothers. Paul mentions the source of his information and so indicates that he has not heard rumors but has received facts. He is told by people who are not sent as messengers by the church in Corinth but who come to him on their own accord. Obviously the church has not taken the initiative to inform Paul about its quarrels. Nonetheless, he deals pastorally with the members of the Corinthian church by calling them my brothers (and sisters). He desires good relations and thus uses the term brothers a second time in as many verses (vv. 10, 11). c. That there are quarrels^[38] among you. These contentions had not yet resulted in permanent divisions but contributed to a spirit of divisiveness that hampered the spiritual welfare of the church (James 4:2). Moreover, quarrels demonstrate a lack of love and so violate God's command to love one another. 12. What I mean is this: that each of you says, I am of Paul, or I am of Apollos, or I am of Cephas, or I am of Christ. The clause what I mean is this shows that Paul is fully informed about the quarrels in Corinth. He is saying: Let's come to the point. The issue is that the Corinthians themselves have created groups within the church and even have associated these factions with specific persons. The irony, however, is that the persons whose names have been affixed to these parties (Paul, Apollos, and Cephas) repudiate such groups and quarrels. To look at the matter from a different perspective, no leader went to Corinth to form his own party. In the Corinthian church, one member claims that he is a follower of Paul, another declares that he belongs to Apollos, still another states that he emulates Peter, and a last one asserts that he is a disciple of Christ. We ought not to draw the conclusion that these four parties embrace all the members of the church. No doubt there were Corinthians who joined none of the four parties. ^[39] a. I am of Paul. Paul's name occurs first in the list of the four names. In an ascending order the name of Christ is last as the highest in rank; consequently, Paul's name is the least important. Paul had founded the church, but because of the existing factionalism not everyone in the church favored the apostle. Even those who were favorably disposed to Paul had gone beyond his teaching and intentions, for Paul himself had not originated a separate party. Because he preached the gospel, he had become the Corinthians spiritual father in Christ Jesus (4:15). But Paul was not interested in receiving recognition for work he had done; rather, he was engaged in confirming the Corinthians in Christ (see v. 6). He did not want them to look at him but at the Lord. Rejecting the divisive spirit of the Corinthians, Paul continued to uphold the integrity of Apollos. He realized that Apollos, too, repudiated the quarrels and factions in the church. We know that throughout this epistle, Paul honors his co-worker Apollos and speaks appreciatively of his labors (3:4, 5, 6, 22; 4:6; 16:12). b. I am of Apollos. We know that Apollos hailed from the renowned city of Alexandria a university center where he was educated. He had a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures and, although he taught about Jesus, he had to learn the way of salvation more accurately from Priscilla and Aquila in Ephesus (Acts 18:24 26). He became Paul's successor in Corinth and was an eloquent speaker (Acts 18:24 28). Some people in the church were impressed by this orator, especially since they regarded Paul as a weak person whose oral presentations lacked eloquence (II Cor. 10:10; 11:6). From a human point of view, Paul faced a competitor who had bested him in the pulpit at Corinth. But both Paul and Apollos refused to see each other as competitors. They were fellow workers in proclaiming the gospel of Christ. c. I am of Cephas. Whether in Paul's absence from Corinth Cephas (Peter) had visited the church cannot be verified. It is probable that he went there.^[40] We assume that the Corinthians were acquainted with Peter, for Paul mentions that Peter was accompanied by his wife on missionary journeys (9:5). Peter, known as the head of the church and spokesman of the apostles, was highly respected. Paul identifies Peter as Cephas and seems to have a proclivity for using his Aramaic name instead of the Greek translation Petros. In his epistles, he refers twice to Peter (Gal. 2:7, 8) but eight times to CephasGal. 1:18; 2:9, 11, 14; see John 1:42for the same construction . Peter and Paul had mutual respect for one another, so that we can be sure that Peter also would abhor having his name attached to a faction in Corinth. d. I am of Christ. We encounter a number of questions when we try to interpret this saying. For example, did the Corinthians who were not associated with the other groups form a party of Christ? Were not all these Christians followers of Christ? Is Christ not in a category different from the other three persons? Did Paul set himself against the Corinthians by saying, I am of Christ? We are unable to answer many of these questions because Paul provides no information other than what is given in this section of the text. The grammar of this text precludes the interpretation that Paul uttered the saying I am of Christ. Elsewhere he mentions the three names Paul, Apollos, and Cephas once more and then emphatically tells the Corinthians that they are of Christ (II Cor. 10:7). He implies that the church universal with all its individual members belongs to Jesus Christ. Practical Considerations in 1:10–12 Sabine Baring-Gould wrote the magnificent hymn Onward Christian Soldiers and, comparing the church to a mighty army, said: Brothers, we are treading Where the saints have trod; We are not divided, All one body we, One in hope and doctrine, One in charity. However, the countless divisions in the church make the Christian weep. Apart from geographical and linguistic conflicts, disputes within the church have been the cause of many schisms. John Calvin observes, Where divisions are rife in religion, it is bound to happen that what is in men's minds will soon erupt in real conflict. For while nothing is more effective for joining us together, and there is nothing which does more to unite our minds, and keep them peaceful, than agreement in religion, yet if disagreement has somehow arisen in connexion with it, the inevitable result is that men are quickly stirred up to engage in fighting, and there is no other field with fiercer disputes. ^[41] 13. Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? a. First question. Is Christ divided? Most translators understand the first three words of this verse as a question, not as a statement.^[42] Because these words are followed by two interrogative sentences, scholars see a logical sequence of three questions. All three questions are rhetorical and expect a negative answer. Paul directed the readers attention to Christ with the query whether Christ is divided. Paul said no to this question but the Corinthians apparently said yes. These people thought that they could divide the Christ.^[43] Was Christ divided up in the sense that he was torn to pieces? One commentator does not think so. G. G. Findlay comments that to divide denotes distribution, not dismemberment. ^[44] But it is impossible to distribute Christ, for he is the head of the church which is his body. And the body must honor its head; from its head the members receive sustenance and direction. With the question Is Christ divided? Paul directed attention to the head of the body, honored Christ, and promoted the unity of the church. b. Second question. Was Paul crucified for you? The Corinthians should immediately perceive the absurdity of this question. Not Paul but Christ was crucified for them. Some of the Corinthians may have the highest esteem for the founder of the church in Corinth, but they will have to admit that Paul did not die on a cross to deliver them from sin. They ought not to say that they belong to Paul (or even Apollos or Peter), for then they dishonor Christ. In Paul's epistles the verb group to crucify occurs only eight times.^[45] Here he applies to himself the term that belongs exclusively to Christ. c. Third question. Were you baptized in the name of Paul? When the Corinthians received the sign of baptism, they were either baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19) or in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38; 10:48; 19:5). Baptism or faith constitutes the belonging to God or to the Son of God. ^[46] Baptism implies that one identifies completely with the person in whose name he or she has been baptized. The absurdity of claiming Paul's name (or the name of Apollos or Peter) is evident. Because of their baptism into Christ's death (Rom. 6:3), the Corinthians belonged to Jesus Christ and lived a new life. Because of the sign and seal of baptism, they were called Christians. 14. I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15. that no one should say that you were baptized in my name. a. I thank God. Editors and translators of the Greek New Testament are divided with respect to the inclusion or deletion of the word God. More of them favor inserting^[47] the word than excluding it. Paul's usage throughout his epistles supports its inclusion, yet it is omitted from some of the major manuscripts. b. I baptized none of you. Paul is not offering a prayer of thanksgiving (see v. 4) but is expressing satisfaction that he has not baptized many of the believers in Corinth. He had left the task of baptizing converts to others. Similarly, not Peter and John but Philip baptized the Samaritans (Acts 8:12), and Peter instructed the six Jewish Christians from Joppa to baptize the members of Cornelius's household (Acts 10:48; 11:12). c. Except Crispus and Gaius. According to Luke's account, Crispus had been a synagogue ruler in Corinth, who with all the members of his household believed in Jesus (Acts 18:8). When he withdrew from the synagogue, Sosthenes succeeded him (Acts 18:17). The name Gaius occurs five times in the New Testament (Acts 19:29; 20:4; Rom. 16:23; I Cor. 1:14; III John 1). When Paul spent the winter in Corinth, where he composed his letter to the Romans, he stayed at the house of Gaius (Rom. 16:23). We suspect that this Gaius is the same person Paul baptized when he founded the Corinthian church. d. No one should say that you were baptized in my name. Paul is thankful that during his ministry he did not baptize believers, so that no one could attach significance to his name. Paul certainly did not baptize people in his own name, but he wanted the people to look to Christ who redeemed them and not to the preacher who baptized them. 16. I baptized also the household of Stephanas; beyond that I do not know if I baptized any other. Paul appears to have a lapse of memory. He fails to place Stephanas and his family with Crispus and Gaius. However, near the end of his epistle Paul reveals that Stephanas's household were the first believers in the province of Achaia (16:15). Some commentators think that Stephanas was converted in Athens, which was part of Achaia, even though his family lived in Corinth.^[48] But this is nothing more than a conjecture. Stephanas himself was present when Paul wrote this epistle; he may have been the scribe who wrote the letter for Paul and refreshed his memory. Paul reveals normal human characteristics even when he is writing an inspired book of the Bible. Stephanas and the members of his household were ardent workers in the Corinthian church who ministered to the spiritual needs of the Christians (16:15). How large was the circle of his household? The Bible teaches that the term household included husbands, wives, children, other relatives, slaves, and visitors. For example, Abraham had 318 trained men who had been born into his household (Gen. 14:14). Heads of families considered their households religious units in which they themselves gave leadership. Thus Luke says that when salvation came to Zacchaeus, it came to his household, too (Luke 19:9; compare John 4:53). In Acts, he reveals that households and their heads were saved and baptized: Cornelius (10:2, 48; 11:14); Lydia (16:15); the Philippian jailer (16:31–34); Crispus (18:8). Paul mentions Onesiphorus's household (II Tim. 1:16) and refers to believers who belonged to Caesar's household (Phil. 4:22). We have no information concerning the extent of Stephanas's household. As an influential person, he may have been the head of a broad family circle. Paul writes that he cannot remember anyone else whom he baptized. He puts no value on the privilege of baptizing converts, for his calling was not to baptize believers but to preach the gospel. 17. For Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the gospel, not in wisdom of words that the cross of Christ may not be emptied. In this text, Paul expresses one positive element and three negative ones. The affirmative statement is that Christ sent him to preach the message of salvation. The disclaimers are that Paul was not told to baptize believers, that the proclamation of this message should not become a philosophical treatise, and that Christ's cross should not lose its central position. a. Task. In the preceding two verses (vv. 15, 16) Paul emphatically states that he has no interest in baptizing converts. Now he conveys the reason: Christ commissioned him to be a preacher of the gospel (Rom. 1:1; 15:15–16; Gal. 1:16). The task of preaching the gospel requires talent, education, tact, and skill. Baptizing believers is a simple act that requires no training, but preaching is a constant task of leading people to repentance, faith, new life, and growth. Baptizing is a one-time act that distinguishes a Christian from the world, but preaching takes place every Lord's Day and often on weekdays. Paul is by no means discrediting baptism. He is following the example Jesus set during his earthly ministry: Christ proclaimed the gospel and the disciples baptized the believers (John 4:1 2). Jesus designated the apostles fishers of men (Matt. 4:19) and commissioned them to catch men through preaching. To preach the gospel is to cast the net; it is apostolic work. To baptize is to gather the fish now taken and put them into vessels. ^[49] Paul had to use all his time and talent to preach the Word and hence left the matter of baptism primarily to others. b. Manner. Not in wisdom of words. Paul does not say words of wisdom or wisdom to speak, but, to be precise, in wisdom of words. This is the first time in the epistle that Paul writes the word wisdom. In the succeeding verses of chapters 1 and 2, he uses the word as he contrasts God's wisdom and worldly wisdom. But in this verse, the phrase wisdom of words describes the manner of a Greek orator who eloquently delivers a speech. In Greek rhetoric, speakers cleverly presented philosophical arguments to support a particular viewpoint. Paul separates himself from this procedure, for he proclaims the message of the cross in simple terms. By preaching the gospel in plain terms, Paul follows the example of Jesus. Jesus proclaimed the message of salvation and the common people heard him gladly. Similarly, the apostles were commissioned to preach the gospel with simplicity and clarity. To tell good news in wisdom of word is a contradiction; news only needs and admits of straightforward telling. To dress out the story of Calvary in specious theorems, would have been to empty the cross of Christ, to eviscerate the Gospel. ^[50] [So] that the cross of Christ may not be emptied. When Paul proclaimed the message of Christ's death on Calvary's cross, he was scorned in the Greco-Roman world. That world rejected the message of an ignominious death on a cross. If Paul, however, had adopted Greek practice and had delivered his message with rhetorical eloquence, the message of the cross would have been emptied of its power and glory. Then his message would have had a hollow ring and consequently no conversions and baptisms would have taken place. The Corinthians knew that Paul had preached the gospel of Christ's death without resorting to oratory and human wisdom (see 2:1). In humility, he had called them to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ. He had pointed to the shameful cross of Christ by which they were saved from sin and death. Practical Considerations in 1:16 North American culture accepts individualism as a way of life. It stimulates a desire for freedom and promotes striving for success in a competitive society. It encourages the individual to climb the social, economic, and political ladder on his or her own merits. Statistics reveal that at least one third of the population in North America moves every year. Families are often scattered from north to south and from east to west. Adults frequently live at great distances from their parents and from their brothers and sisters. When aging parents need daily care, they are placed in retirement homes where their sons and daughters can visit them from time to time. Because of divorce, desertion, and separation, increasing numbers of families are headed by a single parent. Consequently, the family as such is a rather small unit consisting of either one or two parents and usually two to three children. In other cultures, the family usually consists of a clan that includes grandparents, fathers and mothers, sons and daughters, uncles and aunts, nephews and nieces. Retirement homes for the elderly are nonexistent, for aging parents are cared for by their children and grandchildren. The family provides for the material, social, emotional, and spiritual needs of all its members. When either North Americans or people of other cultures read a Scripture passage with the word household, the interpretation and understanding of the word invariably differ. We may safely assume that a culture which regards the family as a clan has stronger resemblance to the biblical pattern than a structure which promotes individualism and rootlessness. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 1:10, 12, 16 17 Verse 10 [Greek] the conjunction introduces not a pure purpose clause but an object clause following a verb that exhorts. The [Greek] is clearly adversative to set apart the periphrastic construction [Greek] (that you may be complete). The construction is in the perfect tense to show lasting effect and in the passive to imply that God is the agent. Verse 12 [Greek] &[Greek] the contrast indicates that some are saying this and others that. The repetition of [Greek] points to similar speakers. Verses 16 17 [Greek] this adverbial expression means in addition to that. [Greek] the particle literally negates the verb send, but the flow of the sentence definitely suggests that it limits the activity of the infinitive to baptize. 2. The Folly of the Cross 1:18 2:5 18 For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and the intelligence of the intelligent I will set aside. 20 Where is the wise? Where is the expert in the law? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know God, God was pleased to save those who believe through the foolishness of the message that was preached. 22 And since Jews request signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to Gentiles foolishness. 24 To those who are called, both the Jews and the Greeks, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 26 Consider your call, brothers, that there were not many wise men according to the flesh, not many powerful, not many of noble birth. 27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 And God has chosen the insignificant things of the world and the despised things, the things that are not, that he might nullify the things that are, 29 that no man should boast before God. 30 But because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who has become wisdom from God for us: righteousness, and holiness, and redemption, 31 that just as it is written, Let him who boasts boast in the Lord. In this section, Paul teaches that what is foolishness to the world (namely, the preaching of the cross) is wisdom to God, and what is wisdom to the world (that is, philosophical systems devised by man) is foolishness to God. He delineates the effect of preaching the message of Christ's cross (v. 18), supports his teaching with an Old Testament passage (v. 19), and forces the Corinthians to draw their own conclusions by asking a series of questions (v. 20). a. The Lost and the Saved 1:18–20 18. For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. Every word in this text is significant, for each contributes to one powerful message. The conjunction for serves as a link to Paul's reference to the cross of Christ (v. 17) and makes verse 18 explanatory. When Paul writes the word of the cross, he separates it from the phrase wisdom of words (v. 17). Although the two terms translated word and words have the same original form (logos) in Greek, in context they have nothing in common. In fact, they are opposites. The word of the cross is the message that proclaims an event of historical and theological significance. It points to Christ who died the death of a criminal but whose death concerns the eternal destiny of man. But the wisdom of words that the orator utters is of human origin and is opposed to the message of the cross. The word of the cross is foolishness. For Paul's Gentile contemporaries, the account of Christ's death on a cross outside the city of Jerusalem was folly. They classified Jesus as a criminal or a degenerate slave, for only such social deviates were crucified by the Romans. Paul's message of the cross, therefore, was foolishness to the Greeks (v. 23). [Foolishness] to those who are perishing. The present participle are perishing denotes action that is in the process of occurring. This expression has both a subjective and an objective element: subjectively, the people repudiating Paul's message regard it as folly; objectively, the effect of the rejection is irrevocable doom (II Cor. 2:15; 4:3; II Thess. 2:10). They are not on the verge of perishing but in actuality are perishing. By contrast, the Corinthians are not perishing. They have been called and sanctified (v. 2); they belong to a different class because they have accepted the word of the cross and believe the gospel. Therefore, Paul encourages his readers. He includes himself when he says: But to us who are being saved. Notice that the clause who are being saved serves as an explanation of the personal pronoun us. Paul places himself on the same level as the Corinthians and affirms that they are being saved. But were they not saved when God called them? What precisely does Paul teach concerning the time of salvation? What tense of the verb to save is used?^[51] A few examples illuminate Paul's teaching: Past: For in this hope we were saved (Rom. 8:24) By grace you have been saved (Eph. 2:5, 8) By his mercy he saved us (Titus 3:5). Present: Through which [gospel] you are being saved (I Cor. 15:2) Those who are being saved (II Cor. 2:15). Future: How much more shall we be saved? (Rom. 5:9) Thus all Israel will be saved (Rom. 11:26). Believers, then, are saved in principle during their life on earth. Throughout their earthly sojourn they cherish this blessed assurance, for they are on the way to being saved completely (Heb. 1:14). Complete salvation comes to them when they leave this earthly scene and enter the presence of God. It is the power of God. Paul confidently tells his readers: to us belongs God's power. This language resembles what Paul uses in his epistle to the Romans: I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes (1:16). God's power becomes effective when Christ's gospel is proclaimed and people accept this message in faith. The word of the cross has power to raise the sinner from spiritual death and to provide newness of life. In essence, God is dynamically providing salvation for his people.^[52] However, Paul's sophisticated contemporaries thought he was proclaiming utter folly by connecting God's power to the weakness of the cross.^[53] Adopting Jesus methodology of turning to the Scriptures for proof, Paul confirms his teaching by citing a passage from the Old Testament. 19. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and the intelligence of the intelligent I will set aside. This is a quotation that Paul takes almost word for word from the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament Scriptures (Isa. 29:14; see also Ps. 33:10). The Septuagint varies from the Hebrew text, which reads, The wisdom of the wise will perish and the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish. The context of this Old Testament passage refers to the people of Israel who honor God with their lips but not with their hearts (Isa. 29:13; Matt. 15:8–9). God nullifies the wisdom of Israel's pundits and causes human intelligence to dissipate. He opposes wisdom that originates in a heart which is far removed from serving God. In the New Testament, James calls earthly wisdom as opposed to heavenly wisdom unspiritual and of the devil (James 3:15). God is not dependent on our wisdom; on the contrary, we are urged to ask God for wisdom (James 1:5), and he will liberally give it to anyone who comes to him in faith. Gordon D. Fee rightly observes: Yet it is the folly of our human machinations that we think we can outwit God, or that lets us think that God ought to be as smart as we are. ^[54] 20. Where is the wise? Where is the expert in the law? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? a. Allusions. In I Corinthians, Paul appears to have a predilection for quoting from and alluding to Isaiah's prophecy.^[55] Two of the questions in this verse Where is the wise? Where is the expert in the law? are explicitly from Isaiah, and Paul relies implicitly on Isaiah for a third question, Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? In the prophet's oracle against Egypt, Isaiah queries where Pharaoh's wise men are (Isa. 19:12). Next, in the context of the misery pronounced on the Assyrians, Isaiah asks where the scribe IsaiahIsa. 33:18, NKJV . He reflects on the siege of Jerusalem by the forces of Sennacherib, king of Assyria (Isa. 36 37). As the Assyrian army surrounded Jerusalem, King Hezekiah put his trust in Israel's God, who delivered him from oppression. An angel of the Lord put to death 185,000 Assyrian soldiers (Isa. 37:36). Isaiah, reflecting on all this, pictures the people in astonishment saying: Where is the scribe who (was to have counted the tribute (collected from the Jews)? Where is he who (was to have) weighed the tribute? Where is he who (was to have) counted the towers (which the Assyrians had figured on destroying)? [Isa. 33:18]. ^[56] For Paul's purpose, however, the scribe is the expert in the Old Testament Scriptures. Promising redemption for Israel, God says that he will overthrow the learning of the wise (Isa. 44:25). With a rhetorical question that expects an affirmative answer, Paul relates that God has made the wisdom of this world look foolish. b. Questions. Where is the wise? With four questions, Paul summarizes what he stated in verse 18 and proved from Scripture in verse 19. The emphasis falls on God, who is at work in salvation and who destroys the wisdom of the wise. Should anyone with worldly wisdom intend to confront God, he would be the loser. As in Moses time the wise men of Egypt disappeared from the scene at God's command, so likewise wisdom vanishes from the earth when teachers who are opposed to God proclaim human wisdom. Paul implies not that all the wise men have left the Corinthian scene but that their attempt to frustrate God's work is futile (see 3:19). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 2. Divisions in the Church, part 2 (2:1–16) Outline (continued) 2:1–5 d. Power and Faith 2:6–16 3. Wisdom Of the Spirit 2:6–8 a. Wisdom and the Mature 2:9 10a b. God and Revelation 2:10b 13 c. The Holy Spirit and Human Wisdom 2:14–16 d. The Unspiritual and the Spiritual Man d. Power and Faith 2:1–5 2 1 When I came to you, brothers, I did not come proclaiming to you the testimony about God with incomparable eloquence or surpassing wisdom. 2 I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3 I came to you in weakness and in fear and with much trembling. 4 My speech and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power 5 that your faith might not rest on the wisdom of men but on the power of God. The chapter division at this juncture is infelicitous, for Paul has not yet completed his discourse on the folly of the cross. In this last segment of the discussion he reminds his readers of his first visit to them when he came to proclaim the gospel. He came not with persuasive speech but in the power of the Holy Spirit. He brought nothing but the message of the crucified Christ to the Corinthians, so that their faith might be based on God's power. 1. When I came to you, brothers, I did not come proclaiming to you the testimony about God with incomparable eloquence or surpassing wisdom. After Paul visited Athens during his second missionary journey, presumably in the summer of a.d. 50, he continued his travels to Corinth (Acts 18:1). As was his custom, he preferred to visit capitals from which the gospel might radiate forth to the surrounding countryside. Corinth, the capital of Achaia in southern and central Greece, had two harbors, one to the east southeast (Cenchrea) and another to the north (Lechaeum). From these harbors, mariners could take the good news to countries and cities throughout the Mediterranean basin. Indeed, Corinth was strategically located for the spread of the gospel. a. When I came to you, brothers. Paul arrived in Corinth in a downcast mood that resulted from his encounter with philosophers and the unfavorable response to his message in Athens (Acts 17:16 34). Soon after his arrival he found lodging in the home of Aquila and Priscilla, Jewish Christians and tentmakers who befriended Paul (Acts 18:2 3). In view of Paul's remark that the members of Stephana's household were the first converts in the province of Achaia (16:15), we assume that Aquila and Priscilla were already Christans. Paul and his host and hostess formed the nucleus of the Christian church in Corinth. By preaching to Jews and Greeks in the local synagogue, Paul persuaded Titius Justus, Crispus, Gaius, and Stephanas with their respective families to believe in Jesus. The Corinthian church then continued to flourish and increase numerically. When Paul left Corinth eighteen months later (Acts 18:11), Timothy and Silas continued the work of preaching the gospel. Once again, Paul addresses the Corinthians as brothers. With this general term of affection, he appeals to all the members (male and female) of that church. In addition, he reveals his pastoral heart when he touches sensitive issues in the Corinthian church. b. I did not come proclaiming to you the testimony about God. Greek manuscripts have either the word testimony or the word mystery. In the Greek text, the words show some similarities in spelling that may account for the difference. The manuscript evidence for the reading mystery is early but limited while that for testimony is extensive. Numerous editors, translators, and teachers of the Greek New Testament prefer the latter term.^[1] They do so on the basis of internal evidence, that is, the meaning of the context in which the term appears (compare 1:6). Paul proclaimed to the Corinthians the gospel, which is God's testimony revealed through Jesus Christ. Some scholars understand verse 7, which has the word mystery, to be an explanation of verse 1. Other scholars contend that scribes were influenced by the reading of verse 7 and then introduced the word into verse 1. But when Paul came to Corinth, he presented not a mystery but the gospel of Christ, which here is embodied in the expression testimony. Many translations have the reading the testimony of God, but others read the testimony about God (NIV, Cassirer). The difference is a matter of interpreting the genitive case. A subjective genitive means that God is the author of this testimony; the objective genitive makes Paul the proclaimer of this testimony about God. In view of a similar construction (1:6), we interpret the genitive as both subjective and objective: God is the originator of the testimony and Paul proclaims it and teaches the Corinthians about God.^[2] c. With incomparable eloquence or surpassing wisdom. Paul openly declares that he did not come to Corinth with a message delivered in sublime eloquence and wisdom. His debates with erudite Epicurean and Stoic philosophers in Athens had been to no avail, and in Corinth he had preached the gospel neither as an orator nor as a philosopher. Instead, Paul had brought the message of salvation in simple terms that everyone in his audience could understand. This approach was unusual in a Hellenistic setting, where skillful orators were admired. The nouns eloquence and wisdom describe the verbal skills and the mental acumen of a speaker. The two expressions refer to the words that come from a speaker's lips and the thoughts that formulate words into sentences. Of course, Paul often demonstrates in his epistle that he possesses both eloquence and wisdom. In this context, Paul refers not to a deficiency in his own abilities but to the excesses of Greek orators and philosophers. He refuses to adopt their practices; instead he plainly preaches the message of Christ's cross.^[3] In conclusion, Paul begins this verse with the personal pronoun I (the first word in the Greek text is in the combined form and I) to express intimacy with his audience. In the Greek, he ends verse 1 with the word God to indicate that his purpose is not to exalt himself but to point his audience to God and Jesus Christ. 2. I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. a. I decided to know nothing. On the surface, Paul appears to be anti-intellectual. But that is hardly the case, for he had received lengthy and intensive training in Jerusalem. Moreover, Paul was acquainted with the Greek quest for knowledge and wisdom (Acts 17:17). But he was not interested in teaching the Corinthians methodologies which the Athenian thinkers had adopted and humanistic philosophers had espoused. Paul says that he came to preach the good news of the crucified Christ (Gal. 6:14). Jesus Christ had chosen him to carry Christ's name before Jews and Gentiles (Acts 9:15; 26:16). He did not appoint Paul to any other task. When Paul arrived in Corinth, he continued to fulfill the responsibility which Jesus had entrusted to him, namely, to preach the gospel of Christ's cross. As an ambassador in the full sense of the word, he knew no other task than to proclaim the message of his crucified Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. b. Among you. These words refer to the year and a half Paul spent with the Corinthians while he taught them the Word of God (Acts 18:11). In a broader sense, the expression among you reveals Paul's way of life as he went preaching the gospel from area to area, synagogue to synagogue, and church to church. c. Except Jesus Christ and him crucified. This is a more elaborate rewording of an earlier phrase, Christ crucified (1:23). The message of Christ's crucifixion appears to be straightforward and simple, but both Jews and Gentiles rejected Paul's appeal to believe in a crucified Christ as an offense or as foolishness. Therefore, Paul had to go beyond the historical details of the crucifixion and teach his audience the theological implications of this redemptive event in human history. He taught not only the reason for Christ's death on the cross but also the eternal benefits for every believer: forgiveness of sin, eternal life, and the resurrection of the body. Practical Consideration in 2:2 Ordained ministers of the gospel are expected to make proclaiming and teaching Christ's gospel their full-time calling. Ordination means that God has set them aside to preach, in the words of Paul, in season and out of season (II Tim. 4:2). The apostles set the example when they appointed seven men filled with the Spirit and wisdom to minister to the physical needs of the wisdom in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1 6). Thus, the apostles dedicated themselves to the proclamation of the Word and prayer. At times, however, Paul performed manual labor as a tentmaker to supply in his daily needs. But whenever he had sufficient material supplies, he spent all his time in the ministry of the Word. When Christ calls someone to proclaim the gospel, this person must do so with full dedication to his call to the ministry; he must reject offers to be involved in other areas of life. He should be first and foremost a minister of God's Word. In earlier centuries, a preacher usually placed these initials after his name: V. D. M. (Verbi Domini Minister, minister of the Word of the Lord). A preacher does well to repeat and apply Paul's maxim I &know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3. I came to you in weakness and in fear and with much trembling. What a confession from the lips of one of Christ's apostles! What honesty! What humility! Once more (see v. 1) Paul relates personal history as an example. He bares his soul and reveals his inner thoughts. He had nothing to offer except the message of Christ's death on the cross. The reception he received from the Jews in Corinth soon turned hostile, so he had to leave the local synagogue to continue his ministry in the house of Titius Justus. When discouragement overpowered Paul, Jesus appeared to him in a vision and told him not to be afraid, to keep on preaching, and not to be silent. Jesus revealed that he had many people in the city of Corinth (Acts 18:7 11). I came to you in weakness and in fear (compare 4:10). From his other epistles, we learn that Paul had to cope with physical ailments; he frequently endured punishment and affliction (II Cor. 11:23–28; 12:7) and he was ill during his visit to the Galatians (Gal. 4:13–14). We assume that Paul was a rather unattractive man, perhaps small of stature (II Cor. 10:10) and plagued with poor eyesight (Gal. 4:15; 6:11). Nevertheless, he proved to be a fearless proponent of the gospel when he preached in the synagogues and marketplaces of Damascus, Jerusalem, Antioch, Cyprus, Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Achaia. Paul refers to his eighteen-month stay in Corinth (Acts 18:11) when he writes that he spent his time in Corinth in fear and with much trembling. His was the arduous task of establishing a church in cosmopolitan Corinth. In the eyes of influential Corinthians, Paul was a person without strength, means, or privilege. Because of his trade, they considered him no better than a slave and had no respect for him. The Jews constantly plotted against him and eventually had him stand trial before Proconsul Gallio (Acts 18:12). The terms fear and trembling occur often in Paul's epistles as an expression of anxiety.^[4] Fear is a debilitating force used by Satan to hinder Christ's servants and to distort their perception. Paul gives no details but confesses that during his stay in Corinth, he experienced fear and trembling. Here these terms relate to numerous social and political threats Paul had to face. Moreover, we suggest that Paul harbored innate fear and trembling because he knew his human limitations in the tremendous task of preaching the gospel and founding a church in Corinth. He knew that while denying himself he had to trust in God to provide the necessary strength to accomplish the task.^[5] This is evident from the message conveyed in the next verse. 4. My speech and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power. a. Negative. Jesus gives the preacher the demanding task and obligation of preaching the gospel. No preacher can rely on his own insights and skills. If he does, he will be like the confident evangelist who during a worship service preached without the supporting power of the Holy Spirit. He consequently faced failure in the pulpit and humiliation before the congregation. Following the service, an elder gave him this sobering advice: If you had entered the pulpit the way you left it, you would have left the pulpit the way you entered it. Humility ought to characterize every pastor who leads a congregation in worship. Paul says that his speech and preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom. He repeats what he has stated in a previous verse (v. 1) and now personalizes the words speech and preaching with the pronoun my. He uses these two terms to describe the message of the gospel (1:18) and the work of preaching. However, Paul refrains from identifying the speakers who persuasively speak and preach in words of wisdom.^[6] What is Paul conveying? He was able to present the gospel persuasively in carefully chosen words, as he proved in his speech before King Agrippa II (Acts 26:27 28). However, in this text Paul refuses to phrase his message in persuasive words of wisdom; he thereby implies that his wisdom originates not in man but in God. b. Text. Not in persuasive words of wisdom. The Greek text of this part of verse 4 has a few variants. In translations, these variants hardly appear expect for the reading, Not with persuasive words of human wisdom (NKJV, italics added). This italicized adjective seems to be an addition that scribes have inserted to explain the concept wisdom and therefore is a secondary reading. The difficulty translators face, however, is with adjective persuasive. This adjective occurs nowhere else in all Greek literature. It appears that Paul himself has coined that word. This reading has support from one of the earliest manuscripts, P46, and is the accepted text for most translators.^[7] Other scholars hold that this adjective should be translated as the singular noun persuasion. They suggest the adoption of a shorter Greek text which deletes the term words, with the resultant reading not with the persuasion of wisdom.^[8] Although strong arguments have been advanced in support of this translation, the reading persuasion lacks substantive manuscript support. Not in persuasive words of wisdom still seems to be the preferred translation. Regardless of the choice that the translator makes, difficulties remain. c. Positive. But in demonstration of the Spirit and Power. Paul chooses three key words to display the spiritual power available to those who preach the Word of God. The first word is demonstration, which is a term used in a court of law for testimony. The term signifies that no one is able to refute the proof that is presented. The second word is Spirit, which appears here in this epistle for the first time. The Corinthians ought to know that their spiritual birth is the work of the Holy Spirit (v. 13), that their body is a temple of the Holy Spirit (6:19), and that their spiritual gifts are the work of the Spirit (12:11). They have the evidence in themselves. The last word is power. In the New Testament, this word is closely associated with the Holy Spirit. For example, Jesus told the apostles that they would receive power when the Holy Spirit descended on them at Pentecost (Acts 1:8; see also Luke 24:49). In one of his epistles Paul writes, Our gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power, with the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction (I Thess. 1:5). Even though the expression power often signifies wonders, here it has a meaning broader than miracles. The term denotes the hand of God stretching itself out to act powerfully through the apostle in every way. ^[9] Paul exhorts the Corinthians to open their spiritual eyes and observe for themselves that God is at work through his power and his Spirit. They possess visible and incontrovertible proof through the power of the gospel and the presence of the Holy Spirit. 5. That your faith might not rest on the wisdom of men but on the power of God. In the last verse of this section, Paul states his purpose for rejecting persuasive words and superior wisdom. He has come to the Corinthians to preach the gospel. And his preaching has resulted in their personal faith in God. Paul informs them that this gift of faith neither originates in nor is supported by human wisdom. If faith were of human origin, it would utterly fail and disappear. But faith rests on God's power that shields the believer and strengthens him to persevere (I Peter 1:5). God works faith in the hearts of the Corinthians through the preaching of Christ's gospel. He not only has given them the gift of faith but also has brought them to conversion. God commissions Paul to strengthen their faith by instructing them in the truths of God's Word. In brief, the Corinthians must know that faith rests not on human wisdom but on God's power. Wisdom of men. Notice that Paul uses the plural noun men to illustrate that in Corinth many people are dispensing their own insight and wisdom. Man's discernment is temporal, faulty, and subject to change; God's wisdom is eternal, perfect, and unchangeable. When a Christian in faith asks God's for wisdom (James 1:5), he experiences the working of God's power. He rejoices in the salvation God has provided for him. Practical Considerations in 2:4 Churches that originated in the sixteenth-century Reformation have always championed the cause of an educated ministry. The origin of many universities lies in the church's desire to train future preachers. When these schools expanded and eventually became universities, theological training was and continues to be offered in affiliated divinity schools or theological seminaries. The objective has always been to equip pastoral students so that they will be able to handle the Word of God correctly (II Tim. 2:15). Paul himself had thoroughly studied the Scriptures. In his pastoral epistles, he exhorted Timothy to continue in what he has learned from Paul and others. He charged Timothy to preach the Word with great patience and careful instruction, and to do the work of an evangelist (II Tim. 4:2, 5). Preachers should be trained to deliver sermons that are faithful expositions of the Scriptures. Moreover, sermons must be free from verbosity and from anecdotes unrelated to the biblical passage at hand. And last, preachers must be able to communicate and relate effectively to the people to whom they minister the Word of God. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 2:1–5 Verse 1 [Greek] &[Greek] the verb in the aorist active and the participle in the present active should be taken together as a verbal unit. Paul came to Corinth with the express purpose of preaching the gospel, and after his arrival he continued to preach. [Greek] this negative particle is placed immediately after the verb [Greek] to show that the usual negative particle [Greek] with the participle would mean not proclaiming. ^[10] With this word order, the concept I came proclaiming is placed in the negative. Verse 2 [Greek] J. B. Lightfoot takes the negative with the verb [Greek] (I decided) and translates the entire clause as follows: I had no intent, no mind to know anything. ^[11] The negative for the infinitive [Greek] (to know) should be [Greek]. C. F. D. Moule, however, provides numerous examples of a displacement and changing of the negative particles [Greek] and [Greek], and calls attention to the Greek text of II Corinthians 2:2, which is a similar but normal construction.^[12] Verse 4 [Greek] Paul repeatedly uses the singular and plural of [Greek] in the first two chapters of this epistle (1:5, 17, 18; 2:1, 4, 13). Here the word is a synonym for the message of the gospel, especially with the twice-occurring pronoun my that modifies message and preaching. [Greek] persuasive words of wisdom. This reading is supported by codices Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Bezae. But textual evidence is nonexistent for the presence of the adjective [Greek] (persuasive). The noun [Greek] (persuasion), which in the dative singular is [Greek], occurs in other Greek literature. Its manuscript support in this verse is extremely weak, especially in the shorter reading that omits the noun [Greek] Verse 5 [Greek] the negative purpose clause with [Greek] depends on the main subject [Greek] and the verb [Greek] (I came) in verse 3. [Greek] with the dative in both occurrences, this preposition on. 3. Wisdom of the Spirit 2:6–16 6 We speak wisdom, however, among those who are mature, the wisdom not of this age or of the rulers of this age who are doomed to perish. 7 But we speak God's wisdom in a mystery hidden wisdom, which God predestined before all time for our glory, 8 and which none of the rulers of this age understood. For if they had understood this wisdom, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 However, just as it is written, Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard And have not entered into the heart of man, These things God has prepared for those who love him, 10 because God has revealed them to us through the Spirit. Indeed, the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. 11 For who among men knows the things of man except the spirit of man is within him? Thus also no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received not the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may know the things freely given to us by God. 13 And the thing we speak are not words imparted by human wisdom but those imparted by the Spirit as we interpret spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14 The unspiritual man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him and he is unable to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But the spiritual man judges all things, yet he is judged by no one. 16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. In the second part of this chapter, Paul addresses all believers who are wise in regard to salvation. They received God's secret wisdom which he reveals to his people. Indeed, these people are led by the Holy Spirit. a. Wisdom and the Mature 2:6–8 6. We speak wisdom, however, among those who are mature, the wisdom not of this age or of the rulers of this age who are doomed to perish. a. We speak wisdom, however. In the Greek sentence, the first word is wisdom, which because of its position is emphatic. A literal translation reads, Wisdom we speak. Paul here does not define or describe this word (see v. 7), but implies that he means God's wisdom (1:21, 24, 30). He understandably continues to build on these earlier remarks on wisdom; in subsequent verses, he unites the concepts wisdom and Spirit. Paul contrasts divine wisdom with the wisdom of the world which has entranced some Corinthian Christians. They think that Paul's message of Christ's cross is simplistic and fails to measure up to the standards of worldly wisdom. By sharply differentiating two concepts of wisdom, Paul emphatically and confidently states that he and his fellow ministers have God's wisdom which, as he already has explained (1:18–30), is eminently superior to the wisdom of the world. With the aid of the adversative however, Paul switches from the singular to the plural. In this epistle Paul frequently shifts from the singular to the plural and back again (e.g., 3:1, 2, 6, 9, 10). Here he resumes the plural of 1:23, We preach Christ crucified. Some translators interpret the plural pronoun in verse 6 and 7 as the singular I (see GNB, NEB), but that is a departure from the Greek text. Paul has in mind all those who belong to the apostolic circle, among whom are his fellow workers Timothy and Silas. He wants to say that his preaching, and that of his associates, is certainly marked by wisdom. With the Greek verb lalein (to speak) he denotes not the content of speech but the act of speaking. But among whom do Paul and his fellow ministers speak wisdom? b. [We speak] wisdom &among those who are mature. The literature on verse 6 is indeed phenomenal; in respect to this clause, scholars raise numerous questions. For example, who are these mature people? Are there also immature Christians? Do Paul and other New Testament writers group Christians in categories? Is Paul resorting to irony when he uses the word mature even though he knows that the Corinthians fail to meet the standard of perfection? Are Paul and his associates speaking directly to the mature or are they with (among) the mature discussing wisdom? Is he borrowing words that belong to settings other than the Christian community of Corinth?^[14] These and many other questions deserve an answer. In the interest of space, we limit ourselves to a few of them and supply the following comments: First, New Testament writers present no evidence that distinguishes between two types of Christians: mature and immature, spiritual and natural, superior and inferior. New Testament writers do not make this distinction; instead they exhort all Christians to press on toward maturity (Heb. 6:1). Among God's people we acknowledge levels of development, for no one can claim to have reached perfection. Even the holiest man, among whom we place Job of the Old Testament and Paul of the New Testament, will have to admit that they have attained only a small beginning. Paul addresses the Corinthians as babes in Christ (3:1) and tells them that they think like children (14:20). Nevertheless, he regards all believers in whom the Holy Spirit effectively works as mature Christians. In other words, with the word mature Paul includes all the Corinthians who have received the Spirit (3:16; 12:3, 13) and who respond to Christ's gospel. Next, in context Paul contrasts not the mature Christians and the immature Christians. Rather, he distinguishes between mature Christians who accept the message of the cross and unbelievers who consider God's wisdom foolishness. He delineates faith and unbelief, divine wisdom and worldly wisdom, the believer and the unbeliever. Last, the Greek word that is translated mature or perfect occurs elsewhere in Paul's epistles and usually is equivalent to adult. ^[15] Adults are those people who accept the gospel of Christ's cross, experience God's power in their lives, and expect the renewal of all things as a result of Jesus resurrection. They are the recipients of divine wisdom and rejoice in it with fellow believers. c. The wisdom not of this age or of the rulers of this age. Paul continues to describe the meaning of wisdom in negative terms. The wisdom of this age is identical with worldly wisdom (1:20) that is characterized by a fleeting and changeable nature. Who are these rulers of this age? Some scholars interpret the phrase to refer to demonic powers and allude to many New Testament passages (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; Eph. 6:12).^[16] But this interpretation runs into difficulty in verse 8. There Paul writes that if the rulers of this world had known divine wisdom, they would not have crucified Jesus. Not demons but rulers crucified Jesus. Moreover, the demons knew Jesus, as the Gospels clearly show. The context does not allude to evil angels but rather to human beings who are considered strong (1:27). In addition, the context shows a contrast between human wisdom and divine wisdom without reference to demonic powers.^[17] Other scholars, therefore, judge that the wording refers to earthly rulers who include all the political and intellectual leaders of the world. Among them are the rulers Caiaphas and Pilate, who crucified Jesus (Acts 3:17; 4:26–27).^[18] d. Who are doomed to perish. In the Greek, Paul uses the verb doomed to perish, which is the same as the translation nullified in 1:28 (see also 15:24, 26). He shows that God, who controls world history, causes the sudden demise of leaders, officials, teachers and their philosophies. Paul uses the present tense of the verb doomed to perish to indicate the continuous control that God exercises in this world. Throughout the centuries, God causes his Word to triumph and worldly wisdom and its proponents to fail. 7. But we speak God's wisdom in a mystery hidden wisdom, which God predestined before all time for our glory, 8. and which none of the rulers of this age understood. For if they had understood this wisdom, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. a. Divine wisdom. The dissimilarity between the world's wisdom and God's wisdom is clear. In the preceding verse (v. 6), Paul mentions wisdom in negative terms; human wisdom is time-bound and leads people to frustration and eventual destruction. Here he gives a positive description: God's wisdom is eternal and limitless. It leads people from darkness to light, salvation, and glory. Paul informs the Corinthians that he and fellow preachers declare God's wisdom in a mystery. This is the first time the word mystery occurs in connection with wisdom. (The variant reading in verse 1 is an exception.) b. Mystery. What does Paul mean by the clause, We speak God's wisdom in a mystery? The Greek verb lalein (to speak) denotes not the substance of Paul's speech but the manner of speaking (see v. 6). The genitive case of wisdom points to possession, origin, and character; Paul refers to God's wisdom. And wisdom is qualified by the expression in a mystery. That is, Paul does not speak a mystery; God's wisdom is mysterious. Wisdom is a mystery and unintelligible to the unbeliever. To the believer wisdom becomes plain, for God communicates it through the gospel which the apostles preach. Paul has stated earlier that Christ is wisdom from God and thus Christ has become our wisdom (1:30). Wisdom and salvation through Christ are intimately related, for the word wisdom signifies the wise acts of God in the salvation of man. ^[19] The process of salvation is a miracle to believers but a mystery to people who lack the Spirit of God (compare vv. 11 15). Wherever the term mystery appears in the New Testament, it usually is preceded by verbs meaning either to reveal or to proclaim. This mystery was predestined by God before the creation of this world, but he now reveals it to his people through the preaching of the gospel (Eph. 3:3; Col. 1:26).^[20] c. Predestined. Paul next refers to hidden wisdom, which God predestined before all time for our glory. Wisdom that has been hidden until the present time is now revealed through the person and work of Christ. Peter discloses that the prophets were intently searching for the time and circumstances of Christ's coming. He says that those things eventually were revealed to the believers through the preaching of the gospel and the work of the Holy Spirit (I Peter 1:10–12). Even though this mystery of salvation is no longer hidden, it nevertheless remains something that the human mind cannot fully grasp. This mystery relates to the love of God, which is so profound that man is unable to comprehend it completely (Eph. 3:17–19). God in his wisdom predestined this salvation for our glory before the human race was even created. He foreordained to save the Corinthians for their own glory, a truth Paul states in a related discourse: What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory? (Rom. 9:23). God is sovereign and demonstrates his grace and mercy to his people, whom he predestined to glory. Paul could not have put the difference between worldly wisdom and divine wisdom in clearer terms. The contrast between the glory of believers and the glory of earthly rulers is telling. Writes J. B. Lightfoot, Our glory increases, while their glory wanes. ^[21] We reflect God's virtues and glory already in this life, but in the life to come we shall shine like jewels in his crownPhilippians 3:21; Zech. 9:16, for the metaphor . d. Ignorance. And which none of the rulers of this age understood. Paul repeats the phrase the rulers of this age (v. 6). These rulers are devoid of spiritual knowledge and fail to see the significance of Christ's kingdom on earth, which comes in answer to the believer's petition: Your kingdom come (Matt. 6:10). They are unable to understand God's rule on earth because God has not revealed to them his divine wisdom. Paul refrains from explaining the resistance of Jew and Gentile to God's revelation in Jesus Christ. Instead he explains the ignorance of these rulers in negative terms: For if they had understood this wisdom, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. Is Paul speaking only of Caiaphas, Herod Antipas, and Pilate, or is he alluding to every leader who rules without giving God the glory? The Jewish and Gentile leaders who crucified Jesus are representative of all the rulers in the world.^[22] Whoever ignores the cause of Christ takes his place with the rulers who put Jesus to death. Jesus, the Lord of glory, is the answer to the question of the psalmist: Who is this King of glory? (Ps. 24:8; see also Acts 7:2). He rules not only in heaven but also on earth and makes himself known through the preaching of the gospel. If the rulers of this world submit themselves to him, he blesses them and causes them to proper (Ps. 2:10–12). Doctrinal Considerations in 2:7 God is sovereign in executing his plan to create the universe and to save mankind from sin. He destines his people for eternal glory. When Paul writes that before this earth was created, God already had formed a plan to save mankind for the glory of those whom he redeems, we stand in awe and wonder. Paul speaks of God's wisdom that appears in a mystery. Our human minds are unable to grasp fully the importance of God's love for sinners, because the concept before all time is too profound for us. And the glory which we receive partially in this but wholly in eternity is too wonderful for us. We confess that we cannot adequately appropriate this truth in our minds. Indeed, the doctrine of salvation, simple yet profound, can be understood only because God reveals it to us. God reveals salvation in terms of his electing grace as a truth that must be taught wisely and carefully. ^[23] Greek Words, Phrases, and Construction in 2:6–8 Verse 6 [Greek] this preposition followed by a noun in the dative case means neither to nor in, but among. [Greek] the second [Greek] in the verse is sometimes translated that is or is replaced by a punctuation mark. Verse 7 [Greek] the word order in this phrase is significant because it emphasizes that wisdom originates with and belong to God. [Greek] the preposition conveys in the form of or consisting of. [Greek] the perfect passive participle from the verb to hide should be translated as a pluperfect to indicate that God's wisdom had been hidden for a long period but at present is revealed.^[24] Verse 8 [Greek] the relative pronoun in the feminine relates not to its nearest antecedent, glory, but to the term wisdom.^[25] [Greek] followed by the indicative in the protasis and with [Greek] in the apodosis, this is a contrary-to-fact conditional sentence. b. God and Revelation 2:9 10a 9. However, just as it is written, Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard And have not entered into the heart of man, These things God has prepared for those who love him. a. Adversative. As he does in many other places in this epistle, Paul substantiates his teaching with an appeal to the Scriptures. He introduces the passage with the adversative however followed by the formula just as it is written. The sentence as it stands is incomplete because it lacks a verb. We suggest the insertion of the plural verb we understand to balance the verb understand in the preceding verse (v. 8). The contrast, then, is between the rulers of this age (Pontius Pilate and Herod Antipas) who failed to understand God's wisdom and the Corinthians who know his wisdom, A possible translation is: For if [these rulers] had understood this wisdom, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. However just as it is written [we do understand the] things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard. ^[26] The contrast between verses 8 and 9 is clear. At the same time, the suggested introduction of the pronoun we serves both as a clarification of verses 8 and 9 and as a bridge to the pronoun us of the next verse (v. 10). b. Prophecy. Paul loosely quotes the prophecy of Isaiah written seven centuries before Paul wrote his epistle. Yet the verb it is written connotes that the significance of these words remains valid even for the present. The quotation comes from Isaiah 64:4but differs considerably from the Hebrew text: Since ancient times no one has heard, no ear has perceived, no eye has seen any God besided you, who acts on behalf on those who wait for him. Paul apparently quotes from memory, because even the Greek translation of Isaiah varies: From eternity we have not heard, and our eyes have seen no God except you and your works which you will do for those who wait for mercyIsa. 64:3, LXX . In view of the divergency, some scholars think that Paul also took words from other passages (Isa. 52:15; 65:17; Jer. 3:16). We presume that Paul relies on memory instead of having the Scriptures in front of him. He formulates a text that agrees with passages taken from the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah.^[27] c. Meaning. What is Paul trying to say in this passage? Because he alludes to four different verses from the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah, we have to interpret the passage as it stands. Paul cites three parts of the human body and presents them in negative terms: Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard, and have not entered into the heart [that is, the mind] of man. He concludes the quotation with a positive line: These things God has prepared for those who love him. We take the negative terms first. The noun things, omitted in some translations,^[28] signifies God's wisdom that is disclosed for the purpose of man's salvation. But knowledge of salvation does not originate with man when he opens his eyes to see, or listens to what others tell him, or formulates thoughts. Paul rules out all avenues of sense perception and leaves the reader to draw the conclusion that wisdom can emanate only from God.^[29] By mentioning the physical organs of eye, ear, and mind, Paul emphasizes the process of perception, analysis, and assimilation of facts. These organs by themselves cannot provide man with wisdom to understand God's divine work of salvation. In positive terms, Paul informs the Corinthians that God has prepared [salvation] for those who love him. In another epistle Paul writes, God works for the good of those who love him (Rom. 8:28).^[30] Concerning God's wisdom, the author of Ecclesiasticus says, He supplied [wisdom] to those who love him (Sir. 1:10, RSV). The last line of the quotation teaches two things: God is the author of our salvation, and we love him. The text teaches that God prepared the things that pertain to salvation and provides this gift regardless of our merit. Through his Word and in the fullness of time by Christ's coming, he reveals it. Consequently, when we realize this truth, we demonstrate our love to God for this marvelous gift. 10a. Because God has revealed them to us through the Spirit. Translations differ on the first word in this clause. Some have the adversative but, others have the conjunction and, and still others favor the causal for or because. The differences stem from the reading of the Greek text and the interpretation of the preceding verse (v. 9). I prefer the causal reading for the following reasons: First, if we supply a verb in verse 9, we eliminate the need for an adversative or conjunction at the beginning of verse 10. Joining the texts with a causal conjunction clarifies the reason that we possess knowledge concerning our salvation: God revealed it to us. Next, the causal conjunction links this verse (v. 10a) to the immediately preceding quotation. And third, it does justice to the pronoun to us by strengthening it.^[31] In the Greek, the pronoun stands first in the sentence for emphasis; that is, To us God has revealed them. The pronoun is not limited to the apostles and their helpers but includes all believers. Through the Holy Spirit, God makes his wisdom known to believers. (Matt. 11:25; 16:17). The Spirit prepares a person to receive the truth of the gospel and leads him to Christ. God reveals his wisdom through the Spirit, so that salvation is the work of the Trinity. God originates salvation, works through his Spirit, and grants us his glory. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 2:9 10a Verse 9 [Greek] the preposition [Greek] might be expected, but Paul is using Septuagintal Greek that in this case literally translates the Hebrew (Jer. 3:16; 28:50; see also Luke 24:38; Acts 7:23).^[32] Verse 10a [Greek] this conjunction is supported by P46, Codex B, 1739, and other manuscripts. In light of the context, [Greek] instead of [Greek] is the more difficult reading and thus is preferred; it occurs three times in as many sentences. Any scribe would be tempted to vary the sequence with the conjunction [Greek]. [Greek] the verb to reveal relates to the word mystery and the perfect passive participle hidden (v. 7). This verb connotes special revelation in place of general revelation.^[33] c. The Holy Spirit and Human Wisdom 2:10b 13 Translators often differ on paragraph divisions. At this point (v. 10), many prefer to begin a new paragraph instead of breaking this verse into parts. But we take the first part of verse 10 as a conclusion to verse 9 and the second part as the beginning of a paragraph.^[34] 10b. Indeed, the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. This affirmative statement serves as an opening remark in a section on the work of the Holy Spirit. Although brief, the statement is profound in revealing to us the interpersonal relationship within the Godhead. We admit that the human mind is unable to fathom the depth of Paul's words. In a doxology, Paul acknowledges this same inability when he asks: Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor? (Rom. 11:34; see also Job 11:7). No human being is invited to have a share in the councils of God.^[35] The Spirit searches everything and nothing escapes his attention. Paul writes the verb to search in the present tense to indicate that for the Spirit the work of searching never ceases; in the presence of God all things are uncovered and open (Heb. 4:13). God knows everything and his eyes are everywhere (Prov. 15:3). The extent of the Spirit's work reaches to the deep things of God. What are these deep things? They are the incomprehensible ways of God, which to the changeable and shallow human mind always will remain mysteries. Among these deep things are the inexhaustible richness of God's wisdom and knowledge (Rom. 11:33), God's gift of salvation to man, the spread of the gospel in every age and generation, and the coming of God's kingdom. God moves in a mysterious way His wonders to perform; He plants His footsteps in the sea, And rides upon the storm. Deep in unfathomable mines Of never-failing skill, He treasures up His bright designs And works His sovereign will. William Cowper 11. For who among men knows the things of man except the spirit of man that is within him? Thus also no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. a. Analogy. Employing an analogy from human life, Paul parallels the spirit of man and the Spirit of God. He asks if anyone can know what motivates a person. He answers this question by saying that only the spirit of man is able to know one's own incentives. The spirit in man is able to keep secrets from the prying eyes and ears of others. Conversely, we must confess that even though we have been created with basic inherent knowledge about ourselves, we encounter numerous difficulties in knowing our inner motives. Our innate knowledge guides us in making decisions pertaining to the environment in which we live. We try to analyze the reasons that cause us to do and say things in an effort to know ourselves. We attempt to gain a basic understanding of our subconscious being by analyzing our mind. b. Difference. Should we go beyond the basic point Paul is trying to teach, we would falter. As God told the people of Israel, My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways (Isa. 55:8). God is the creator of man's spirit (Zech. 12:1); he breathed into man's nostrils the breath of life (Gen. 2:7). But God's uncreated Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (John 14:26). The repetition of the expression man in this verse is meant to heighten the immeasurable difference between the human spirit and God's Spirit. God knows the mind of man, but man is incapable of knowing the mind of God. In the Greek text of this verse, Paul writes two different verbs for knowing (oida and ginMskM). The first verb conveys the idea of having basic inherent knowledge that is, the spirit within man knows his own thought. The second verb, here in the perfect tense, denotes the process of acquiring knowledge: No man has gained an understanding of the things that belong to God, except God's own Spirit. Paul contrasts the two verbs to explain that the human mind is able to know the things concerning man but not the things concerning God. In other words, Paul is not saying that the Spirit of God is engaged in acquiring knowledge concerning the thoughts of God. The Spirit has inherent knowledge. This change of phraseology may be regarded as a caution to us not to press the analogy. ^[36] 12. Now we have received not the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may know the things freely given to us by God. a. Now we have received. In the previous verse, Paul spoke in generalities that involved man's spirit. But here he specifies the Corinthians and himself by using the plural personal pronoun we. This pronoun takes the first place in the Greek sentence and so receives emphasis. With this inclusive pronoun, Paul has come to the heart of the paragraph on God's Spirit versus man's spirit. He offers the comforting assurance that we have received the Spirit, whom God has given us. b. Not the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God. The negative clause not the spirit of the world has been interpreted in various ways: it describes the rulers of the world who crucified Jesus (v. 8); it denotes evil that has established its own rules and objectives (II Cor. 4:4; I John 4:4; 5:19); it is equivalent to the wisdom of this world (1:20); it is the spirit in man that is worldly. We say that the spirit of the world is the spirit that makes the world secular.^[37] From the time Adam and Eve fell into sin, the spirit of this world has revealed itself in opposition to God's Spirit: for example, in the lawlessness prior to the flood, in the building of the tower of Babel, and in the false teachers who sought to destroy the church in apostolic days (II Peter 2; I John 4:1 3; Jude 4 19). It is the spirit that rules a person in whom God's Spirit does not live. It is a power that determines all the thinking and doing of men, which places itself over against the Spirit who is of God. ^[38] By contrast, as Paul expresses in eloquent Greek, believers have received the Spirit that proceeds from God (John 15:26; Gal. 4:6). God's Spirit comes to the believers from a sphere other than this world and conveys knowledge of God, creation, redemption, and restoration. Since Pentecost, God's Spirit dwells in the hearts of all believers (6:19). c. That we may know the things freely given to us by God. Why does God grant us the gift of his Spirit? The answer is that we may know innately the things that pertain to our salvation. The Spirit teaches us the treasures we have in Christ Jesus, whom God handed over to die on a cross so that we have eternal life (I John 5:13). If God delivered up his Son, he certainly will graciously give us in him all things (Rom. 8:32). Believers appropriate the gift of salvation through the work of the Holy Spirit. They realize through faith that in Christ sin and guilt have been removed from them, that God is reconciled to them, and that the way to heaven has been opened for them. 13. And the things we speak are not words imparted by human wisdom but those imparted by the Spirit as we interpret spiritual truths in spiritual words. a. Interpreter. At this point in his discourse, Paul refers to himself and fellow preachers. He reveals that the words they proclaim are not based on human wisdom. We make the following observations: First, Paul uses a Greek verb that signifies the act of speaking but not the content of speech (see vv. 6, 7). Next, he purposely places the negative in the sentence before the term words to contrast human wisdom and divine wisdom. And third, he points out that the agent who teaches the apostles and their helpers what to preach is not a person filled with human wisdom. Instead, this person is none other than the Spirit of God. The Spirit, then, enables them to proclaim the gospel (Matt. 10:20). Further, the gospel itself is inspired by the Spirit. This should not be understood as if the apostles were mere tools which the Holy Spirit employed to achieve his objectives. Certainly not! The authors of Scripture used their talents and skills, their training and culture, and their characteristics and peculiarities in the task of writing. Nevertheless, the Spirit taught them how to verbalize God's truths. As Paul emphatically states: We speak &not words imparted by human wisdom but those imparted by the Spirit (italics added). For Paul, then, inspiration is based not on human thinking or man's wisdom, but on the teaching which the Holy Spirit gives. Paul's style, vocabulary, diction, and syntax were the vehicles of the truth that the Spirit taught him.^[39] b. Variation. The translations of the last part of verse 13 differ, as a few examples illustrate: Expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words (NIV) Interpreting spiritual truths to spiritual men (NIV margin) Comparing spiritual things with spiritual (KJV, NKJV) Interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit (RSV) or, who are spiritual (NRSV) Fitting spiritual language to spiritual things (NJB) The exact meaning of this last part of the sentence is obscure. A literal translation of this clause does not communicate: Interpreting spiritual in spiritual. Therefore, the reader must look to the context of this verse for guidance to choose and supply two nouns that complete the clause. If we look at Paul's explicit references to mature Christians (v. 6) and to the spiritual man (v. 15), we can understand that the writer has in mind spiritual men. If we apply the rules of grammar, however, we face a subtle objection to this interpretation. The second adjective spiritual is not preceded by a definite article that designates a particular group of people (grammatically, a masculine word); hence, the possibility exists that Paul meant spiritual words. We do not carelessly reject this interpretation^[40] but we intend to give equal weight to a second interpretation, that the adjective refers to the noun words (grammatically, neuter). That is, Paul and his associates are interpreting spiritual truths in spiritual words (implicitly to spiritual men). Therefore, for the one adjective we supply the word truths and for the other the term words; so the clause reads: interpreting spiritual truths in spiritual words. c. Explanation. The Greek verb synkrinM can be translated either combining, comparing, or interpreting. ^[41] The first of these three meanings fits the context and has been the choice of many commentators.^[42] Modern translators, however, are reluctant to adopt the word combining because they question whether this is the meaning Paul wanted to convey. Other scholars embrace the second choice and observe that the same Greek verb occurs in II Corinthians 10:12, where it means to compare. But the respective contexts differ, which makes a similar translation for both passages difficult and unlikely. Conclusively, then, the context seems to support the reading to interpret. Friedrich Büchsel notes that the translation combine is too weak while compare introduces a view that is incompatible with the context. Hence it is best to accept the meaning to interpret, to expound, which is predominant in the [Septuagint] expounding revelations of the Spirit. ^[43] Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 2:12–13 [Greek] a number of manuscripts add the demonstrative pronoun [Greek] to display contrast, but the shorter reading has the support of earlier and stronger witnesses. [Greek] this verbal adjective has a passive meaning. It occurs twice and is followed both times by a subjective genitive.^[44] [Greek] the first adjective lacks the definite article [Greek], which weakens the likelihood that it is masculine (i.e., spiritual men). I prefer to keep both adjectives in the same neuter gender. The presence of [Greek] (words) in this verse suggests that Paul means that spiritual thoughts are interpreted in spiritual words.^[45] d. The Unspiritual and the Spiritual Man 2:14–16 Paul concludes with a last contrast in this chapter by first stating negatively what the unspiritual person fails to do. Next, he speaks positively about the spiritual man and, last, he concludes that he and the readers of his epistle have the mind of Christ. 14. The unspiritual man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him and he is unable to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. a. The unspiritual man. The Greek word which I have translated unspiritual occurs here and in four other places in the New Testament.^[46] The translation declares what the man is not, namely, spiritual. This is exactly what Paul means by contrasting an unspiritual person with a spiritual person. The former is animate man, filled with soul in the sense of life-force, the natural man, in contrast to the spiritual man. ^[47] The natural man belongs to the world, while the spiritual man belongs to God. The one is an unbeliever and the other a believer; the one lacks the Spirit while the other has the Spirit; the one follows natural instincts (Jude 19), the other follows the Lord. b. [The unspiritual man] does not accept the things of the Spirit of God. Although the verb to accept is synonymous with to receive (see v. 12), the difference is noteworthy. The first verb, which is active, refers to the object that is accepted. The second verb, which is passive, describes the manner in which the object is received. Here the translation to not accept is the same as to reject. The unspiritual man repudiates the things of the Spirit of God because he does not understand them nor does he desire them. He accepts only the things of the world. c. For they are foolishness to him. The spiritual things relate to sin, guilt, forgiveness, redemption, salvation, righteousness, and eternal life. To the unspiritual person, these things are meaningless, irrelevant, and even foolish. They have no place in a life that is limited to the present world.^[48] d. And he is unable to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. Paul speaks about an inability that is caused by the absence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the unbeliever. Granted the unbeliever can excel the Christian in various ways: intellectually, educationally, philosophically, or even morally. He may be a worthy citizen and a leader in society who shuns the sensuous excesses that characterize other people. Yet, the non-Christian is unable to understand spiritual matters. He lacks the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit to enlighten his understanding. Paul states that the unbeliever is unable to comprehend spiritual truths because they are spiritually discerned. The verb discerned is significant. First, it points to a continual process of evaluating the spiritual context in which we live. Next, the passive voice denotes that the believer guided by the Holy Spirit is able to test the spirits to ascertain whether they come from God (I John 4:1). Submissive to God, the Christian should judge all things spiritually. The agnostic or atheist is unable to judge spiritually because he himself is dead in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1). With respect to spiritual matters, he is like a man who flips the switch during an electrical power failure and receives no light. Worse, he has no idea what caused the failure and is unable to predict the duration of the blackout. He is powerless to alter the situation but must wait until the electrical supply is restored. Similarly, unless the Spirit's power enters his life and enlightens him spiritually, he remains in spiritual darkness. The Holy Spirit enables man to see clearly the path that leads to life and to evaluate accurately the circumstances in which he finds himself. 15. But the spiritual man judges all things, yet he is judged by no one. a. But the spiritual man judges all things. What a delight for a spiritual person to go directly to God himself, the source of wisdom (James 1:5)! From God he receives wisdom without limitations. Consequently he is able to examine all things judiciously and give leadership in a sin-darkened world. It is the spiritual man alone who has such a firm and sound knowledge of the mysteries of God, that he really distinguishes truth from falsehood, the teaching of God from the fabrications of men, and he is deluded very little. ^[49] For the believer, the Scriptures are a light on his path and a lamp before his feet (Ps. 119:105). He knows that in God's light he sees light (Ps. 36:9). In view of the spiritual person's anointing with the Holy Spirit, he has a knowledge of the truth (I John 2:20). Thus he is able to distinguish truth from error, fact from fiction, and authenticity from pretense. Paul writes that the spiritual man judges all things. By implication, this person receives the guidance of the Holy Spirit and uses the Scriptures as his compass for the voyage of his life. The expression all things signifies the broad spectrum of human existence. This does not mean that the spiritual man is an expect in every area of life. Rather, with respect to the community in which God has placed him, he is able to appraise all things spiritually. b. Yet he is judged by no one. This is a bold statement from Paul. However, he does not wish to say that Christians are never judged (compare 14:29) but rather that the believer cannot be judged by unbelievers; they are incapable of judging a believer spiritually. The believer is judged on the basis of God's Word. The Scriptures and not manmade rules and regulations ultimately judge the spiritual man in regard to his eternal destiny. 16. For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. a. Source. This verse is the confirmation of Paul's bold statement in the preceding passage (v. 15). In harmony with custom, Paul proves his teachings by quoting from the Scriptures, which he considers his court of appeal. He now quotes two separate lines from Isaiah 40:13in the Greek translation of the Hebrew textJer. 23:18; Wis. 9:13 . Elsewhere Paul cites the entire Old Testament passage in consecutive order (Rom. 11:34). But now he deletes a line from the Septuagint text, namely, Who has been his counselor? The two lines who has known the mind of the Lord and that he will instruct him differ slightly from the Hebrew text: Who has understood the mind of the Lord and Whom did the Lord consult to enlighten him? b. Meaning. In what way does the Old Testament passage prove Paul's point? The keyword in this quote is the term mind, which refers both to God and to Christ. Paul implies that the mind of a spiritual person must be in harmony with God's mind. When man is controlled by God's Spirit, he desires to fulfill God's law, to do God's will, and to reflect God's glory. God knows man and instructs him, but it would be absurd to think that man is able to know God and instruct him. Who has the authority to pass judgment on God's law? In his epistle, James writes that anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him, speaks against the law and judges it (4:11). He continues and says God's is the only Lawgiver and Judge (4:12). Nevertheless, the person in whom God's Spirit resides possesses spiritual knowledge to guide and direct him in this earthly life. Paul states that we, as believers, have the mind of Christ. In preceding verses, he gives the personal pronoun we an inclusive meaning. Therefore, here also the pronoun refers to Paul and fellow apostles and to the believers who heard the gospel from them. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews succinctly declares, This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him (2:3). The expression mind of Christ, then, signifies the believer's knowing Christ through the working of the Spirit and the appropriation of the gospel message.^[50] May the mind of Christ, my Saviour, Live in me from day to day, By His love and pow r controlling All I do and say. Kate B. Wilkinson Practical Considerations in 2:15–16 Does Paul mean to say that the Christian who earnestly prays for the gift of the Spirit is free from falling into error? Hardly, for many Christians can testify that because of a moment's inattentiveness, they have spent years in agonizing grief. Only Jesus life on earth can be characterized as being without error. In all humility, his followers have to confess that their lives are far from flawless. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 3. Divisions in the Church, part 3 (3:1–23) Outline (continued) 3:1–23 4. Workmen for God 3:1–4 a. Mere Men 3:5–9 b. God's Servants 3:10–15 c. Builders for God 3:16–17 d. God's Temple 3:18–23 e. Warning and Conclusion 4. Workmen for God 3:1–23 3 1 And I, brothers, was unable to address you as spiritual men but [address you] as men who are sensual, as babes in Christ. 2 I gave you milk to consume, not solid food, for you were not yet able to consume solid food. Indeed, you are still not able. 3 For you are still natural. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not unspiritually minded and walking in the ways of man? 4 For when someone says, I am of Paul, but someone else says, I am of Apollos, are you not mere men? 5 What then is Apollos and what is Paul? They are servants through whom you became believers as the Lord has given a task to each one. 6 I planted, Apollos supplied the water, but God gave the increase. 7 So then neither the one who plants nor the one who supplies the water is anything, but only God causes the increase. 8 Now he that plants and he that supplies the water are one, but each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor. 9 For we are fellow workers for God; you are God's field, God's building. 10 According to the grace of God given to me, as a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But let each one take care how he builds on it. 11 For no one is able to lay down a foundation other than the one that is already laid, namely, Jesus Christ. 12 Now if anyone builds upon the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, 13 the work of each one will become evident; for the day will bring it to light, because with fire it will be revealed. And the fire will test what kind of work each one has performed. 14 If anyone's work which he has built is to remain, he shall receive a reward. 15 If anyone's work shall be burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, and thus as through fire. 16 Do you not know that you are the temple of God and the Spirit of God lives within you? 17 If anyone destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him; for the temple of God is holy and that is what you are. 18 Let no one deceive himself. If any of you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become foolish that he may become wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, for it is written, He catches the wise in their craftiness. 20 And again, The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are empty. 21 So then let no one boast in men. For all things are yours, 22 whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death, or things present or things to come: all things are yours. 23 And you are of Christ, and Christ is of God. Paul sternly addresses the Corinthians, for they prove to be babes in Christ because of their failure to grow spiritually. (The language he uses is reminiscent of words written by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews [5:12–14].) Paul considers those Christians mature who, filled with the Holy Spirit, are able to give leadership in erecting God's building. a. Mere Men 3:1–4 1. And I, brothers, was unable to address you as spiritual men but [address you] as men who are sensual, as babes in Christ. a. Address. Whenever Paul has to rebuke his readers, he always addresses them personally and as equals. The word brothers, which includes the sisters in the congregation, conveys a message of solidarity. It is a pastoral address that conveys Paul's loving concern. By contrast, the Old Testament prophets never address the readers as brothers but sternly admonish them with the words thus says the Lord. Even though Paul's message in itself is pointed, he expresses unity with the recipients of his epistle (see, e.g., 1:10, 11, 26; 2:1). b. Message. I &was unable to address you as spiritual men but [address you] as men who are sensual. Notice that Paul uses the past tense to indicate when he first came to the Corinthians (2:1). At that time, many of them were Gentiles who had never heard God's revelation in the Scriptures. During his first visit to Corinth, he had approached them with the gospel which they accepted in faith. But now Paul faces people who are unspiritual and sensual in their conduct. He refers to them as mere babes in Christ. He is describing their spiritual condition at the moment he is writing his epistle. He criticizes the Corinthians for their failure to grasp the meaning of the gospel of Christ which earlier he had proclaimed to them. Consequently, he is saying that they had failed to make progress in their spiritual growth.^[1] c. Consequence. Paul implies that he cannot call them spiritual men but regards them as sensual (lit, fleshy).^[2] But if they are not spiritual (see 2:14), are they or are they not Christians? Yes, they are Christians, because Paul addresses the entire church at Corinth, which he describes as sanctified in Christ Jesus (1:2). Next, he declares that he and the Corinthians have received the Spirit (2:13). And last, he calls the recipients brothers to strengthen the bond of unity with them (3:1). Gordon D. Fee observes, One cannot be a Christian and be devoid of [the] Spirit. On the other hand, the Corinthians are involved in a lot of unchristian behavior; in that sense they are unspiritual, not because they lack the Spirit but because they are thinking and living just like those who do. ^[3] Paul writes these words as a scathing rebuke. The Corinthians in general are conducting themselves as sensuous people of the world. Not only does he call them sensuous; he even uses the denigrating term babes. In a sense, Paul utters a contradiction: in an earlier statement he said: We speak wisdom, however, among those who are mature (see the commentary on 2:6), but now he describes the Corinthians as babes, albeit babes in Christ. Maturity is not attained at the end of a probationary period. Paul indicates that maturity is reached at the time of the resurrection of the dead (Phil. 3:11–15). This means that for him, in sharp contrast to modern developmental conceptions influenced by the biological sciences, maturity is an eschatological category. ^[4] Mature Christians are those who are alive in Jesus Christ, are filled with the Holy Spirit, and seek to glorify God the Father. Here, however, the word perfect connotes that the believer both internally and externally lives the Christian life since the time he has fully appropriated the gospel.^[5] Paul differentiates mature people from babes to spur the Corinthians to action. As babes they still consume milk instead of solid food, and thus remain beginners in the faith. They may be compared with a billionaire who lives like a pauper. 2. I gave you milk to consume, not solid food, for you were not yet able to consume solid food. Indeed, you are still not able. In spite of Paul's reference to babes, he continues to deal gently with the readers of his epistle (I Thess. 2:7; I Peter 2:2). He calls them babes in Christ. When a mother notices that her baby fails to grow physically, she becomes concerned and consults a physician. Likewise, Paul, who portrays himself as the father of the Corinthians through the gospel (4:15), is vitally interested in their spiritual growth. The metaphor is interesting. Paul uses the same language as the writer of Hebrews, who also depicts his audience as babes who consume milk instead of solid food (Heb. 5:12–14). The author of Hebrews explains that the metaphor milk signifies the rudimentary doctrines of the Christian's faith. But Paul gives the figure of speech and fails to explain it. He leaves it to the reader's imagination to fill in the meaning of the metaphor. In spiritual terms, solid food consists of advanced Christian doctrine. Paul tells his readers that they were not yet ready for solid food when he was with them. At that time, he could only teach them the elementary doctrines of salvation. But now that time has elapsed, they should have been able to comprehend the advanced teachings of the Christian faith. This does not mean that his letters to the Corinthians are devoid of doctrine. On the contrary, Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians is filled with teaching concerning morality, ecclesiology, and eschatology. Paul's comment in this verse indicates that the food he gives the Corinthians differs in form rather than content. ^[6] 3. For you are still natural. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not unspiritually minded and walking in the ways of man? a. For you are still natural. Without any attempt to temper his sentiments, Paul tells the Corinthians that they are natural, that is, unspiritual in their conduct. Other translations for this italicized word are worldly (NIV) of the flesh (NRSV) natural inclinations (NJB) in a natural condition (NAB) not spiritually-minded (Cassirer) on the merely natural plane (NEB) controlled by your fallen human nature (TNT) In the Greek, Paul uses the adjective sarkinos (fleshy) in verse 1 and the adjective sarkikos (fleshly) in verse 3. Although the difference in both the English and the Greek is only one letter, there is a distinction in meaning. Using another example, one commentator suggests the distinction between leathern and leathery.^[7] An article made out of leather is leathern, but when it has the appearance or feel of leather the article is described as leathery. Thus, the expression fleshy (sarkinos) refers to the essence or substance of flesh while the term fleshly (sarkikos) describes its appearance and characteristics. The first term states an unchangeable substance; the second a characteristic that can be altered. How does the word natural in this phrase differ from the word unspiritual in 2:14? Paul is saying that the Corinthians identify with the people in the world to such a degree that there is no observable difference between them in conduct. An unbeliever is unspiritual and, because the Spirit does not reside in him, has no spiritual insight. However, the believer who is inclined to follow the ways of the world fails to grow spiritually and subsequently must be admonished to repent.^[8] b. For since there is jealousy and strife among you. The reason for Paul's stern rebuke lies in the fact that the Corinthians were filled with jealousy and strife (Rom. 13:13; II Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20). When Clement of Rome wrote his epistle to the Corinthians near the end of the first century, fully aware of their numerous congregational problems, he frequently used the terms jealousy, envy, and strife.^[9] Choosing words that depict the life of the Corinthians, Clement notes the vices that for many decades have plagued them (James 3:14). The Corinthians quarreled among themselves, were devoid of love for one another, and behaved like unspiritual people. c. Are you not unspiritually minded and walking in the ways of man? Here is a rhetorical question that Paul poses to the Corinthians, from whom he expects a positive answer. In effect they are like unspiritual people who heed the ways of the flesh, namely, the world but not the law of God. They have received the Spirit of God (2:12) but they act as if they are people of the world. They seem to indicate that the presence of the Spirit in their lives is of no account. Their daily conduct does not distinguish them from those who are without the Spirit. And their walking in the ways of man is contrary to what the life of a believer should be (Ps. 1:3). 4. For when someone says, I am of Paul, but someone else says, I am of Apollos, are you not mere men? Paul has come full circle by repeating the words he has heard from the members of the household of Chloe (1:12). After his greetings and words of thanksgiving at the beginning of his epistle, he then directly confronted the Corinthians concerning the divisiveness in the church. Now he takes only two of the slogans that the Corinthians uttered: I am of Paul, and I am of Apollos. The other two, I am of Cephas and I am of Christ, are not repeated. Why are these names not included? Paul and Apollos had been ministers of the gospel in the Corinthian church, but not Cephas. And, surely, even believer can claim that he belongs to Christ (Rom. 14:8). Near the end of the chapter, however, Paul mentions three names: Paul, Apollos, and Cephas. The question Are you not mere men? runs parallel to the phrase in the preceding verse (v. 3): walking in the ways of man. Both phrases serve to equate the Corinthian Christians with the unspiritual people of the world. In brief, Paul compares the Christians in Corinth with their worldly counterparts. Doctrinal Considerations in 3:1–4 The Scriptures from Genesis 1through Revelation 22teach that there are two classes of people: believers and unbelievers.^[10] Lately, many people have introduced an extra category and speak of three divisions: the unregenerate person, the spiritual Christian, and the carnal Christian. We know that the Bible is clear on a twofold division of humanity, but can we prove that God's Word refers to a category of born-again believers who are carnal Christians? Often I Corinthians 3:1 4is cited as proof. Although Paul rebukes the Corinthians because they are mere babes in Christ and lack the maturity they should already have attained, he does not say that they are in a separate class from which they must graduate to become spiritual Christians. Paul encourages the Corinthians to grow in grace, knowledge, faith, love, and holiness.^[11] In fact, Peter also stresses the need for spiritual growth in the Christian (I Peter 2:2; II Peter 3:18). Throughout his Corinthian epistles, Paul notes that the readers are spiritual Christians. He addresses them as being sanctified in Christ Jesus (1:2); he tells them that they are in Christ Jesus who is for them wisdom, that is, righteousness, holiness, and redemption (1:30); and he informs them that they have been washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of Jesus Christ (6:11). Last, Paul calls the Corinthians new creations in Christ (II Cor. 5:17).^[12] The Christians in Corinth are spiritual people who are struggling with a behavioral problem. Paul rebukes them for their quarreling and conduct that put them on the same level as worldly people. Yet after his rebuke, he reminds them of the spiritual riches they possess in Jesus Christ (3:21–23). Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 3:1–3 Verses 1 2 [Greek] the aorist of [Greek] (I am able) with the negative particle [Greek] communicates that Paul desires to address the Corinthians as spiritual people but is hindered from doing so by their behavior. [Greek] fleshy. Adjectives ending in [Greek] generally convey the meaning made of. Adjectives with the ending [Greek] (as in verse 3, [Greek] [fleshly]) generally mean like. The first category relates to material substance, the second to ethics. Paul has deliberately chosen the reading [Greek] in verse 1 and [Greek] in verse 3.^[13] [Greek] in context, the adverb is a strong adversative that signifies yes, indeed. Verse 3 [Greek] this particle does not relate to place but to extent or cause and is translated insofar as or since. b. God's Servants 3:5–9 A pastor is not a minister of a particular church but rather a minister of Christ's gospel. It is Christ who sends him forth to minister as a servant to God's people. This is what both Paul and Apollos were doing in the church at Corinth. As Christ's servants (4:1), they waited for God to bless their labors. 5. What then is Apollos and what is Paul? They are servants through whom you became believers as the Lord has given a task to each one. a. Question. What then is Apollos and what is Paul? ^[14] The office and not the person is important to Paul not the who but the what counts. Paul lists the names three times (vv. 4, 5, 22) but always in a different order so as to focus attention on the work which Paul and Apollos are doing and not on their personalities. The conjunction then links the question to the preceding verse (v. 4), where Paul rebuked his readers for the factionalism that prevailed in the Corinthian church. They ought not to focus attention on the persons but rather on the work these persons are performing on behalf of Christ. In rhetorical style, Paul repeatedly asks questions that demand positive replies (see v. 4). He himself will even supply an answer. b. Answer. They are servants through whom you became believers. Notice that Paul calls both himself and Apollos servants to eliminate any incorrect notion that they are rival apostles who were working out their own programs; they are Christ's servants.^[15] Further, W. Harold Mare observes that Paul avoids using the first person plural, we are servants, but says only that they are servants. The point is that no Christian worker is ever to be idolized. ^[16] Next, the objective of Christ's servant is to bring people to faith in Christ. When he faithfully preaches the Word so that people believe the gospel, no one ought to extol the preacher who merely did his work (Luke 17:10). Only Christ should receive the glory and honor (John 3:30). Last, Paul resorts not to using the term slave but servant. The difference is that the first term pertains to the total submission one devotes to Christ. The second term relates to the service given for Christ to his church and its members.^[17] Paul is a servant of Christ's gospel (Eph. 3:7; Col. 1:23) commissioned by the Lord himself. c. Task. As the Lord has given a task to each one. The Lord sends his servants to perform different tasks: Paul served as an exquisite teacher and Apollos as an eloquent preacher. Paul readily admits the differences in ministry, but he objects when the Corinthians show preferences that result in factions. He wants the members of the Corinthian church to avoid jealousy and strife and promote the bond of unity, love, and fellowship. 6. I planted, Apollos supplied the water, but God gave the increase. Here is an illustration taken directly from an agricultural scene, where the farmer plants seeds or seedlings. To make the seeds germinate or the plants take root, the farmer's co-worker supplies the necessary water to the field in one way or another. The farmer is expected to do all the field work in preparation for growth. This includes plowing, fertilizing, sowing or planting, watering, weeding, cultivating, and spraying. But here the activity of man must stop, for he cannot make the plants grow. Man readily admits that he is unable to control the weather. He cannot make the sun to shine, the wind to blow, and the rain to fall. Consequently he is unable to make the plants grow and is completely dependent on God for the harvest yield. Hence, Paul adds the adversative but and says that God alone gives the increase. Similarly, Paul preached the gospel in Corinth. He planted seeds where no one had proclaimed Christ. When he left for Ephesus a year and a half later, Corinth had a fledgling church. When Apollos came to the Corinthians, he supplied the water. He helped them by demonstrating from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ (Acts 18:28). But all the work of both Paul and Apollos would have been in vain if God had not continued to increase the church spiritually and numerically. The Greek verbs in the text indicate that the work of Paul and Apollos was temporary but that of God is continuous. Paul and Apollos eventually left Corinth, yet God continued to enlarge the church. 7. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who supplies the water is anything, but only God causes the increase. Verse 7 supplies the conclusion to the preceding verse (v. 6): not man but God receives the honor and glory for the work performed in the church. Paul continues to use the imagery borrowed from agriculture by referring to the one who plants and the one who supplies the water. These two, however, do not receive credit, even though their labor is vital. God receives his full due. In the Greek, the word Theos (God) stands last in the sentence and thus receives emphasis. Notice that in this conclusion, Paul does not mention any personal names. He is not interested in names but in results. The work of preaching and teaching the gospel that is performed everywhere can succeed only if God grants his blessing. The Corinthians must see the hand of God in the work accomplished by the ministers of the Word. The ministers are nothing in comparison to God. Should God desire to raise up a church without the aid of preachers, he could do so. But he employs ministers to effect the growth of the church (Rom. 10:14). Paul is not deprecating the work to which preachers are called. Not at all! However, he purposely omits personal names to show the readers that not the preacher but God is important. 8. Now he that plants and he that supplies the water are one, but each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor. a. Unity. He that plants and he that supplies the water are one. Consider two agricultural workers busy in a field. One is planting seedlings and the other follows and supplies the seedlings with water. These two have one common objective: to see the plants grow and eventually mature for the harvest. Neither the two laborers nor the people who take notice of their work think of rivalry and contention but rather of unity and cooperation. Paul and Apollos never thought of rivalry; instead as fellow servants of Christ they served the Corinthian church for God's glory. For this reason, Paul is able to say that the two of them are one. The number one appears in the neuter gender in Greek to indicate that both persons belong in the same category of workers in God's field. b. Individuality. In the second half of this verse, Paul notes that individuality is a factor which God does not overlook: Each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor. In the successive verses, Paul does not limit the application of the words each one, so that we may say that it pertains to every worker in God's kingdom. This part of the verse says that the worker toils not for his or her own glory, but for God's glory. To illustrate from a parable, the recipients of the five and the two talents exerted themselves and with hard labor and keen insight doubled the amounts their master had entrusted to their care. When the master returned, the one with five talents gave the master ten and the one with two talents yielded four to his master. Each received individual praise and commendation for the work each had done (Matt. 25:14–23). By committing everything to their master, the two servants exhibited unwavering devotion to him. They worked for him and not for themselves. Rewards, then, are the result of faithfulness. They are not the reason for and goal of the servants labors. 9. For we are fellow workers for God; you are God's field, God's building. a. For we are fellow workers for God. Does the term fellow workers denote the relationship between Paul and Apollos or the relationship between these two workers and God? The first interpretation would be translated fellow workers for God and the second fellow workers with God. In favor of the first interpretation is the conjunction for that links the preceding verse (v. 8) to the first part of this verse. Paul is saying that Apollos and he are not working for themselves but work for God.^[18] They are workers in the service of God, and are God's paid servants, rather than his colleagues. ^[19] From another perspective, the expression fellow worker is linked in other passages to nouns that convey the objective idea. For instance, Paul writes, but we are fellow workers for your joy (II Cor. 1:24) and Titus is my partner and a fellow worker for you (II Cor. 8:23; and see I Thess. 3:2). The second interpretation is, We also work together with God. ^[20] This translation is acceptable as long as the concept of equal partnership is ruled out. God and man are never equals in the proclamation of the gospel, for man is merely an instrument in God's hand and works not next to him but for him (Acts 9:15). Many translators present the genitive case in the possessive form (we are God's fellow workers) and leave unanswered the question of interpretation. Gordon D. Fee observes that the emphatic position of the form God's, which occurs three times in this verse, suggests the possessive idea. He concludes that the argument of the whole paragraph emphasizes their unity in fellow labor under God. ^[21] Nonetheless, the threefold repetition of the word God in verse 9 does not exclude the possibility that the first use is the objective. This possibility is buttressed by two factors: the shift from the first person plural we to the second person plural you makes it probable; the preceding verses (vv. 7 and 8) make it plausible because God is the agent. b. You are God's field, God's building. Paul switches from the ministers to the people, from the we to the you. In the Greek, he places the pronoun you at the end of the sentence for emphasis. Also, he continues to use the imagery of a field.^[22] Is this field to be considered active in the sense that it produces a crop? Or is it considered passive as, for instance, when it is being cultivated? The second interpretation seems to fit the context better than the first. That is, by preaching the gospel Paul and Apollos cultivated the Corinthians, whom Paul calls God's field. The Corinthians have to understand that ministers labor in the church not for themselves but for the Lord. From this it follows that the Corinthians were wrong in yielding themselves to men, when, by right, they belong to God alone. ^[23] From agricultural imagery, Paul turns to an architectural metaphor. [You are] God's building. Just as a field is being cultivated, so a building is in the process of being erected. The builders do their work for the Lord (Eph. 2:19–22; I Peter 2:5). Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 3:5–9 Verse 5 [Greek] &[Greek] the Majority Text opts for the masculine [Greek] (who?) in both instances instead of the neuter [Greek] (what?). Despite the early manuscript attestation for the masculine, the context demands the neuter interrogative pronoun. Moreover, the implication of the neuter [Greek] in ver[se] 7 is decisive for [Greek] in ver[se] 5. ^[24] [Greek] &[Greek] the Textus Receptus (KJV, NKJV) has reversed the order of these two names, probably to follow the sequence in the preceding verse (v. 4). The better witnesses, however, support the sequence given here. [Greek] the conjunction should be understood as an explanation, in the sense of that is to say. ^[25] Verses 6 7 [Greek] the imperfect of the verb [Greek] (I cause to grow) differs in tense from the other two verbs (to plant and to water) in verse 6. These two verbs are in the aorist. Man's work (planting and watering) is a single occurrence, but God's work (causing the increase) continues unabated. [Greek] this inferential particle signifies and so, accordingly (see v. 21).^[26] Verses 8 9 [Greek] &[Greek] the adjective depicts the particularity or individuality of the person. [Greek] &[Greek] the genitive case in this particular phrase is objective.^[27] [Greek] this noun refers to a field that is being tilled or cultivated. c. Builders for God 3:10–15 Paul repeatedly uses the image of the building trade in his epistles. He presents Christians as God's building (vv. 9, 16) and notes that Christ is their one foundation (Eph. 2:20). He describes the spiritual life of believers as a building process (Eph. 4:29; I Thess. 5:11). And he reveals that Christians are being built together in Christ (Eph. 2:22; Col. 2:7). 10. According to the grace of God given to me, as a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But let each one take care how he builds on it. a. According to the grace of God given to me. Before Paul continues with his building motif, he acknowledges the grace he received from God. He did not claim to belong to the closed group of the twelve apostles, and he had not received the daily teaching Jesus gave them. Paul was called sometime after Jesus ascension and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. He knew himself to be the last person to whom Jesus appeared, as to one abnormally born (15:8). Yet he was called to be an apostle. And this calling Paul considered a divine act of grace for which he repeatedly gave thanks in his epistles (Rom. 15:15; Gal. 2:9; Eph. 3:2, 7 8). In all humility, Paul attributes his position as an apostle to the grace God had given him. Hence, before he even states that he is the master builder of the Corinthian church, he precludes any hint of arrogance on his part when he calls himself wise.^[28] He mentions that he is a builder by the grace of God. b. As a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. Paul employs terms which were familiar to those Corinthians who knew the building trade, especially the construction of temples. He gives himself the title master builder, which pertained to the contractor who supervised the work of numerous subcontractors. The master builder was responsible for the daily supervision of the individual builders. Likewise, Paul had the task of overseeing the work performed by his fellow laborers who were building a spiritual temple in Corinth.^[29] Paul presents himself as a wise, skillful master builder. Before his helpers Silas and Timothy arrived (Acts 18:4 5), Paul had worked out a building plan to lay the foundation for the structure. Paul, then, is not only the architect but also the contractor who with his subcontractors builds the edifice. Further, Paul refers not to individual Christians who constitute the church but to the spiritual church itself. The clause and another is building on it should not be understood negatively, as if Apollos received undue praise and approbation in Corinth. By no means! Paul laid the foundation, while the superstructure was built by others including Apollos. Indeed the term master builder precludes all negative criticism relative to the formation of the Corinthian church, for Paul is in charge. Paul and his fellow workers serve only one purpose, namely, the spiritual building of the church. When Paul writes the verb to build, he discloses the continual work of edifying the body of Christ. The Christian community is built up together in the co-operation of all the participants (1 Cor. 3:10–15), and in the unity with apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:20), to become the one holy community of the Lord. ^[30] c. But let each one take care how he builds on it. In Romans 15:20Paul says, It has always been my ambition to preach the gospel where Christ was not known, so that I would not be building on someone else's foundation. In his epistle to the Romans Paul notes his own practice (not to build on someone's foundation), but here in Corinth he is the master builder who employs many people to erect a structure on the foundation he himself laid down. In the last part of this verse, Paul exhorts the builders to produce quality craftsmanship. He wants the best performance from every worker. As he himself set the example, so he expects that all those who build on his foundation will adopt his work ethic. Their task is to edify the individual members of the church through the faithful teaching and preaching of Christ's gospel. 11. For no one is able to lay down a foundation other than the one that is already laid, namely, Jesus Christ. a. Proper foundation. For emphasis the word foundation is first in this verse. Every house and every building needs a solid foundation. Should significant rifts and cracks occur in walls constructed on a solid base, they can never be traced to a faulty substructure. The blame then must be attributed to careless work performed by the builders of the superstructure. What was the foundation that Paul through the grace of God laid down in Corinth? It was Christ's gospel. With divine assistance, Paul performed yeoman's work when he brought the gospel to a pagan city known everywhere for its immorality. The Corinthians heard the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ: the coming in the flesh of the Son of God; the suffering, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus; and the reality of forgiveness and restoration for everyone who accepts Christ in true faith. The person and work of Jesus Christ revealed in the Scriptures is the true foundation on which the church is built. Paul expects the ministers of Christ's gospel to build the church and to do so faithfully in harmony with that gospel. b. False basis. Paul warns the Corinthians that no one is able to lay down a foundation other than the one that is already laid. With his warning, let each one take care how he builds on it (v. 10b), he alerts the builders that their work will be judged.^[31] No worker in the service of the Lord can teach and preach with impunity a gospel that is contrary to Christ's gospel. No one can lay down another foundation to replace the one God himself has put in place, for he will utterly fail. No theologian can change the gospel without incurring God's wrath (compare v. 17). The apostles received this gospel from Jesus, proclaimed it to both Jew and Gentile, and then handed it down to posterity as a sacred deposit. Conclusively, the church rests on no other basis than Christ's revelation. Paul undoubtedly was opposing some people who were actively trying to change the foundation on which the congregation in Corinth was built. 12. Now if anyone builds upon the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay or straw, 13. the work of each one will become evident; for the day will bring it to light, because with fire it will be revealed. And the fire will test what kind of work each one has performed. a. Now if anyone builds upon the foundation. Paul is not speaking of the substructure but of the superstructure, the building that is being erected by workers in God's church. The phrase now if anyone is sufficiently broad to include every person who is actively working on behalf of the Lord. In other words, the term anyone is not restricted to preachers and teachers of the gospel. Every believer ought to build a structure on the foundation of God's Word. b. With gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw. Paul's figure of speech should not be either interpreted literally, understood allegorically, or applied incorrectly. With the metaphor he intends to say that the superstructure must correspond to the substructure. The materials used to build the structure must match the preciousness and durability of the foundation. If the foundation that God has laid is his revelation in Jesus Christ, then the edifice should reflect that revelation in every phase of its construction. Paul mentions six commodities, which he presents in descending order of significance. Of the six, gold is the most precious and straw the least. Temples in the ancient world were constructed with marble and adorned with gold and silver. Ordinary houses were built with wood and bricks mixed with hay or straw. Obviously, no one builds an entire house of gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw. These materials alone do not lend themselves to building a complete house. However, Paul uses the imagery to show what people do with God's revelation in Jesus Christ. Some live by that Word, apply it to their daily lives, and develop spiritually as they seek to edify themselves and fellow believers. These people are vitally interested in sound doctrine and the pure preaching of [God's] Word. ^[32] They build their spiritual houses with the precious metals and stones of the living Word. Others lead shallow lives with a veneer of Christianity; they seem to be satisfied with living in ordinary houses made of wood, hay, and straw.^[33] c. The work of each one will become evident. Here is the conclusion to the first clause of the conditional sentence that Paul began in verse 12. He interrupts the metaphor of building to call attention not to the collective work of the church but to the work of each believer. Each person will have to give an account of what he or she has done with God's revelation in his Son. As in the parable of the talents or the pounds each servant had to appear before the master (Matt. 25:14–30; Luke 19:11 27), so everyone individually will stand before the Lord at the time of judgment (Rev. 20:11–15). With the future tense, Paul warns the Corinthians of a time when the work of each one of them will be made visible. The books will be opened and everyone will be judged according to the works that have been recorded (Rev. 20:12). Man's work may be concealed at present but, according to Paul, the day of an open display will come soon. This display will reveal everything one has done or failed to do for Christ. d. For the day will bring it to light. The reference is to the day of judgment, to which Paul repeatedly alludes.^[34] The direct object of the verb to bring to light is the noun work in the previous clause. The final judgment day^[35] will reveal the works of everyone. e. Because with fire it will be revealed. The wording of this particular clause causes exegetical problems, for the verb will be revealed does not have a subject. In translation we supply a subject, it, but do not indicate whether it alludes to either the day of judgment or the work of persons. If translators choose the first term, the text reads, That day will make its appearance with fire (NAB). If they choose the second term, we have this reading: For on that Day fire will reveal everyone's work (GNB). Both translations are appealing, but scholars favor the first choice in view of evidence from parallel texts. For instance, Paul writes about the second coming of Christ and states that this will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire (II Thess. 1:7; see also Mal. 4:1). In addition, if the second choice is adopted, the next clause is practically identical. And last, if the term work is the subject, it seems incongruous to say that fire will reveal everyone's work and then read that anyone's work shall be burned up (v. 15). Revealing someone's work is not quite the same as destroying it by fire. The better choice is to regard the expression day as the subject and to understand the verb to be revealed as a reflexive: the day will reveal itself with fire. f. And the fire will test what kind of work each one has performed. Paul does not necessarily equate work with a building. From a spiritual point of view, the testing by fire does not determine the eternal destiny of the Corinthians (compare v. 15); rather, it determines whether or not they shall receive rewards within the context of salvation. ^[36] What are the determining factors in this testing process? They are faith in Jesus Christ (see v. 5) and the presence of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the believers (v. 16; 6:19).^[37] Rewards are based on active obedience to Christ and realized in a humble spirit of thankfulness. 14. If anyone's work which he has built is to remain, he shall receive a reward. 15. If anyone's work shall be burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, and thus as through fire. a. First condition. Paul concludes this part of the discourse and he does so with two conditional sentences. We begin with the first one: If anyone's work which he has built is to remain. This part of the statement introduces the concept permanency. Listening carefully to Paul's discussion on building a structure, we notice that he equates the foundation of the structure to Jesus Christ (vv. 10 11). He urges the Corinthians to take care how they build on this foundation. If the foundation is priceless, so he reasons, the building also should be invaluable. The durable materials in the building (gold, silver, and precious stones) are a suitable complement to the costly foundation in Jesus Christ. The faithful worker in the church sets far-reaching goals, uses expensive materials, and takes pride in quality workmanship. The age-old anecdote of the bricklayer is fitting: A passerby saw two masons laying bricks. He asked the one what he was doing and received the curt reply, Can t you see, I am laying bricks! The other, when asked what he was doing, looked up and with pride in his voice exclaimed, Sir, I am building a cathedral! The conclusion to the first conditional statement is that a diligent worker shall receive a reward. Here Paul repeats what he wrote in verse 8, each one will receive his own reward. How does Paul use the word reward in this epistle? Paul says that he preaches the gospel but refuses to accept remuneration for his work, even though the Lord directed those who preach the gospel to get their living from the gospel (9:14). Paul refuses to be obliged to anyone; he reasons that a reward must be given for something that is done on a voluntary basis.^[38] Rewards are given only for work we are not obliged to do, else they are earned as payment for good works. Paul is not telling the Corinthians to earn credit for work accomplished for the Lord. On the contrary, he himself joyfully exclaims that his work is performed by the grace of God given to [him] (v. 10). The Christian ought not to live for recompense but for grace and mercy (Luke 17:10). Then the Lord will crown the toil of the believer with indispensable blessings and even praise the diligent worker (4:5). Thus the faithful Christian will receive his rewards. b. Second condition. If anyone's work shall be burned up, he will suffer loss. This is the other side of the proverbial coin. A raging fire destroys all combustible material, including wood, hay, and straw. When the fire burns out, the loss of possessions is evident. It is easy to limit the verse (v. 15) to those preachers of the gospel who are negligent in their task and see their work vanish. But the text applies to every believer and thus serves as a warning never to become negligent but to labor diligently for the cause of the Lord.^[39] But he himself shall be saved, and thus as through fire. In spite of the loss which the neglectful believer sustains, God graciously grants him the gift of salvation. John Albert Bengel graphically describes the concept salvation by comparing the sinner who is saved through fire with a shipwrecked merchant [who], at the loss of merchandise and gain, is saved through the waves. ^[40] This is not to say that everyone who performs the work that Christ assigns to him will be saved (Matt. 7:21–23). Salvation is God's gracious act through Christ's atoning work on the cross. No one enters heaven on the basis of good works, for the Lord says that the high priest Joshua who is accused by Satan is a burning stick snatched from the fire (Zech. 3:2; Jude 23). Practical Considerations in 3:10–12 When a person who practices medicine or law opens an office in a given location, more often than not he or she will stay in that place until retirement. The doctor or lawyer serves the community and generally feels no need to move to other areas. On the average, a pastor moves every four or five years. When he reaches retirement, he has usually served in half a dozen churches. During his earlier years in the ministry, he normally relocates once every four years and in his later ministry he usually stays a decade or more in a given congregation. Few are the pastors who fill a single pulpit for twenty-five, thirty, or even forty years. When a minister stays in one church longer than two decades, people begin to identify the congregation by his name. Then the preacher tends to become the only driving force in his congregation with the result that the congregation may splinter when the pastor retires or dies. Some churches have flourished during long pastorates while others have enjoyed a variety of gifts and talents of pastors who served for shorter durations. All churches, however, should be built not on the name and talents of a single pastor but on the solid foundation of Jesus Christ. When this happens, the church remains strong and continues to flourish. As pastors come and pastors go, the church built on Jesus Christ endures to the end of time. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 3:10–15 Verses 10 11 [Greek] some manuscripts lack the words of God, which probably were eliminated because they also occur in the preceding verse (v. 9). Their absence can be explained more easily than their presence. Applying the rule that the harder reading is the more original, we accept the words as genuine. [Greek] this preposition can mean contrary to, other than, or beyond (Luke 13:2, 4; Rom. 14:5).^[41] Verses 12 13 [Greek] the particle introduces a simple fact condition, which has its first part in verse 12 and its concluding part in the first clause of verse 13. Paul is observing conditions in the Corinthian church and is stating fact, not probability. [Greek] Paul stresses individual responsibility by using the adjective each four times in six verses (vv. 8, 10, 13 [twice]). [Greek] the present tense of the verb [Greek] (I reveal) can be either passive or middle. Here the middle is an appropriate translation with the noun day as its subject. Verses 14 5 [Greek] these two phrases in verses 14 and 15 are identical, but the verbs will remain and shall be burned are opposites. The conditional clauses express reality with their conclusions denoting reward and loss. [Greek] the future passive from the verb [Greek] (I suffer loss, forfeit) relates to someone who experiences a loss or is punished by a fine. The concept loss is the better of the two interpretations. [Greek] the preposition with the genitive conveys the idea of passing between, through. ^[42] d. God's Temple 3:16–17 Paul continues the imagery of buildings, but now reveals that he is not speaking of an ordinary structure that serves the workmen who construct it. He calls attention to God's temple (compare v. 9), which is holy. If anyone contemplates destroying that temple, he encounters God as his enemy and will face utter destruction. 16. Do you not know that you are the temple of God and the Spirit of God lives within you? a. Do you not know? The question Paul poses is a rebuke to the Corinthians. He scolds them for not knowing their own status and place in relation to God. They should have realized when they became Christians that the Holy Spirit dwelled within them and stayed with them. Elsewhere in his writings, Paul states pointedly, We are the temple of the living God (II Cor. 6:16), and The whole building &develops into a holy temple in the Lord (Eph. 2:21). Now he chides the Corinthians for their negligence and slothfulness in not using the knowledge they possess (1:5; 8:1). The verb to know in Greek signifies inherent knowledge the believers ought to possess. They know that they are the temple of God. Yet Paul does not reveal how they came to develop this knowledge. He takes for granted that they are able to marshal this information.^[43] b. That you are the temple of God. The wording in this clause is unique for two reasons: first, the expression temple is in the singular (see 6:19) and, second, in the Greek this noun is not preceded by a definite article. The Greek word for temple is naos, which refers to the actual temple and not to the temple complex (known in Greek as hieron). In his epistles, Paul nearly always writes naos, the word for the actual temple, to indicate that God caused the divine name to dwell there (I Kings 8:16–20).^[44] For Paul and the Corinthians, the temple of God is the church, that is, the body of believers. Even though Paul himself fulfilled a vow (Acts 18:18) and presented offerings at the temple in Jerusalem (Acts 21:23 26), for him the spiritual temple was the universal church. He also knew that when the church fails to listen to God's Word, the evil one gradually takes control and seeks to fulfill his desire to reside in that temple (II Thess. 2:4). However, that temple belongs not to Satan but to God. Paul purposely omits the definite article before the noun naos to indicate the absolute use of that word. In his mind, there is no other temple than the church of Jesus Christ where the Godhead is pleased to dwell. If there is no other temple, there is no need to use the definite article. c. The Spirit of God lives within you. The church is holy because God's Spirit dwells in the hearts and lives of the believers. In 6:19 Paul indicates that the Holy Spirit lives in the physical bodies of the believers. But now he tells the Corinthians that the presence of the Spirit is within them and they are the temple of God. The Corinthians should know that they have received the gift of God's Spirit. Paul had already called attention to the fact that they had not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit of God (2:12). He teaches that Christians are controlled not by sinful human nature but by the Spirit of God, who is dwelling within them (Rom. 8:9). The behavior strife, jealousy, immorality, and permissiveness of the Christians in Corinth was reprehensible. By their conduct the Corinthians were desecrating God's temple and, as Paul writes in another epistle, were grieving the Holy Spirit (Eph. 4:30; compare I Thess. 5:19). 17. If anyone destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him; for the temple of God is holy and that is what you are. a. Condition. If anyone destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him. In fact, Paul is saying that the factors that can destroy God's temple are present when he is writing his epistle to the Corinthians. Without identifying them by name, he points to those who are devoid of God's Spirit. They are purposely ruining, corrupting, and destroying the church. They influence the members as they model their worldly way of life. In the Greek, the verb destroy appears twice: it is the last word of the first clause and the first word of the second clause. An English translation cannot convey the emphasis of the original construction, but Paul emphasizes that the church is God's temple; whoever seeks to destroy that temple either by doctrine or by way of life will incur God's wrath. In short, God will destroy him. This is not only the law of retribution a person gets what he deserves but also the implied notice that the church is the apple of God's eye (Zech. 2:8). Whoever touches the church touches God. b. Reason. For the temple of God is holy and that is what you are. Why does God protect his church and destroy his enemies? The church belongs to God and is separated from the world (II Cor 6:14–16). In Jesus Christ, the church is holy and as such stands before God without wrinkle or spot (Eph. 5:27). Paul becomes personal with the Corinthians and firmly states that they are indeed the holy temple of God. Despite their sins, these believers have been sanctified in Christ and have been called to be holy (1:2). The church is holy because God is holy. A seventeenth-century confession of faith declares: This church has existed from the beginning of the world and will last until the end. That appears from the fact that Christ is the eternal King, from which it follows that he cannot be without subjects. And this holy church is preserved by God against the rage of the whole world. It shall never be destroyed even though for a while it may appear very small and may even seem to be snuffed out.^[45] Practical Considerations in 3:16–17 When the Israelites constructed a tabernacle in the desert and in later years a temple in Jerusalem, they were the laughingstock of the nations. They were asked: Where is your God? They had to tell the scoffers that the structure contained no idols. In the temple dwelled the Name of God. By contrast, the temples of the Gentiles had idols that represented their gods. When Paul taught the Corinthian believers that they were the temple of God, the unbelievers in Corinth were perplexed; they were unable to understand that a group of Christians could call themselves a temple and claim that the Spirit of God was dwelling within them. The Gentiles had difficulty perceiving a temple without a building. They were unable to comprehend how the Christian's invisible God could inhabit a visible human body. Churches whose spiritual and historical roots are in the Reformation period of the sixteenth century have edifices for worship that are simple and seemingly empty. Apart from pulpit, pews, a baptismal font or baptistry, and a communion table, the building is empty. True, but on the pulpit in full view of any worshiper is the open Bible. The people worship God by receiving and responding to the proclamation of the Word. They worship not the Word but God who is addressing them through the Scriptures. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 3:16–17 [Greek] the temple. The noun is without a definite article; it is the only one of its kind^[46] and used in the absolute sense of the word. In verse 17, the noun appears twice with the article, but here the article has the connotation this or the previously mentioned. [Greek] the future indicative of the verb [Greek] (I destroy) has a variant reading in the present tense [Greek], which probably became present indicative because of the same word immediately preceding it. e. Warning and Conclusion 3:18–23 Paul has come to the conclusion of his discourse on the tension in the Corinthian church. He has reminded the believers of the spiritual riches they possess, especially those in Christ and in the Holy Spirit. Now he issues them a stern warning not to become wise in their own eyes, for that is foolishness to God. Rather, they should become fully aware of their possessions, for all things are theirs in Christ. 18. Let no one deceive himself. If any of you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become foolish that he may become wise. a. Let no one deceive himself. We would have expected Paul to formulate a conclusion to the immediately preceding discussion on the foundation, building, and temple of God. Instead he warns his readers of self-deception, which Paul says is actually occurring in the Corinthian church. Paul intends to alert readers to the danger of falling away from the true teaching of God's Word. Both Paul and James repeatedly utter the admonition: Do not be deceived. ^[47] Self-deception occurs when a person tries to justify his thoughts, words, and actions and refuses to admit that he is wrong. What, then, is this self-deception? Paul explains in the next sentence. b. If any of you thinks that he is wise in this age. First, Paul addresses everyone in the Corinthian church, teachers and learners, leaders and laity, members and adherents. Notice that he once again resorts to using the phrase if any of you (see vv. 12, 17) in his address to the readers. Next, instead of referring to the imagery borrowed from agriculture and the building trade, Paul reverts to an earlier discussion on wisdom (1:20–25; 2:6; see also 4:10). Although he seems to perplex the readers by going back to earlier remarks, he makes these comments on wisdom fundamental to everything else. The Corinthians were deceiving themselves because they were enthralled by worldly wisdom. Third, Paul specifies that the wisdom that seduces the believers has its origin in this age. The wisdom of the world manifests itself in people who want to be independent, govern their own lives, and manage their own affairs rather than submit to the lordship of Christ.^[48] c. Let him become foolish that he may become wise. This statement tells the Corinthian Christians that they must take a one-hundred-eighty-degree turn. They should reject worldly wisdom and become fools in the eyes of the world. The Corinthians must see the contrast between Christianity and the world and then accept the label fool. Here are one or two examples of Christian foolishness. Christians obey Jesus command to love their enemies (Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:27). The world, however, prescribes the motto get even. Jesus teaches his followers to give liberally to anyone in need (Luke 6:30, 38). The world, however, suggests the implementation of the rules of individuality: what is mine is mine. To the world, Jesus teachings are foolish. But Paul tells his readers that if they become foolish in the eyes of the world, they will become wise in the sight of God. Paul's objective is to have the Corinthians follow the precepts of Christ's gospel. They must be led by the Lord and be completely dependent on him for heavenly wisdom (James 1:5). The Christian who listens obediently to the voice of the Lord humbly performs deeds that emanate from a wise and understanding heart. Such a person possesses heavenly wisdom that is pure, &peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere (James 3:17). 19. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, for it is written, He catches the wise in their craftiness. 20. And again, The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are empty. In this summary, Paul repeats the thoughts he expressed earlier when he asked: Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? (1:20). The phrase of this world parallels the phrase in this age (v. 18), and these two expressions also appear in Paul's discourse on wisdom and folly (1:20). Because the contrast between the world and the Christian community is the heart of this matter, Paul deems it necessary to reiterate his teaching on the wisdom of the world. He looks at worldly wisdom from God's point of view and declares it folly. In the words of Charles Hodge, Even truth or true knowledge becomes folly, if employed to accomplish an end for which it is not adapted. ^[49] Moreover, Paul bases his teaching on the Scriptures. Earlier he quoted from Isaiah 29:14(1:19); now he turns first to the Book of Job and then to the psalter to show that God despises wisdom that originates in the heart of man. The first quotation (v. 19) is Paul's literal translation from the Hebrew text of Job 5:13.^[50] It is part of a lengthy speech which Eliphaz the Temanite addresses to Job. Eliphaz compares God to a hunter as he catches Job in his craftiness. In a sense, this quotation is taken out of context, but Paul has chosen it because of the keyword wise. Nevertheless, the text applies directly to the wise people of Paul's day who craftily scheme to further the cause of their worldly wisdom. This is a wisdom without God. But God catches the wise in their own craftiness and turns their wisdom into folly. Man's ability to reason cannot stand up against divine sovereignty. ^[51] The second quotation (v. 20), taken from (Psalms 94:11, is purposely adapted to the present context. A translation from Hebrew reads: The Lord knows the thoughts of man; he knows that they are futile. Paul relies on the text of the Septuagint (Ps. 93:11, LXX), which has the plural men. By replacing the words of the men with of the wise, Paul alters the text and at the same time interprets it.^[52] He changes the wording but not the meaning. Once more the keyword is wise, even though Paul had to substitute it for the word men. Yet the context of Psalms 94speaks of the foolish reasoning of arrogant men who oppress and kill the innocent. They boast that they are safe because the Lord neither sees nor pays attentionPs. 94:7). These people resemble those who oppose God with worldly wisdom. Their thoughts are fully known to the Lord, for nothing is hidden from him. The Lord declares that man's thoughts are empty; that is, the opinions of the wise are futile and useless (Rom. 1:21). The two citations from the Old Testament have the Lord God as subject and the wise, who are fools in the sight of God, as object. In the first quote, the wise are like a bird caught in a net; they are unable to escape. In the second, even before they are able to formulate their thoughts, God already declares their deliberations useless. Whoever seeks to oppose God with human wisdom inevitably loses. 21. So then let no one boast in men. For all things are yours, 22. whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death, or things present or things to come: all things are yours. a. So then let no one boast in men. Paul writes a summary statement based on the preceding passage (vv. 18 20): He exhorts the Corinthians not to boast in fellow men. Because he uses the imperative of the verb, a few translators render the sentence No more boasting about men! (NIV; with variations, NEB, TNT). The point of Paul's directive is to not boast in men, be they Paul, Apollos, or Cephas. In 1:31, Paul quoted from the Scriptures to bolster his argument and said: Let him who boasts boast in the Lord (Jer. 9:24). Now he gives the negative side of the same exhortation by telling the readers not to glory in the achievements of human beings. God grants his bountiful gifts to his people, and in their complete dependence on him they are unable to boast in themselves. They must acknowledge that God, not man, rules the world and everything in it. The psalmist professed that the earth belongs to God and everything that is in it belongs to him (Ps. 24:1). Therefore, all praise and honor are due his name. b. For all things are yours. Suddenly Paul shifts the focus of his concluding remarks. He turns from a negative exhortation to a positive assertion that all things belong to the Corinthians. Although the saying All things are yours was a Stoic proverb The wise man &is lord over all that comes to him from without ^[53] Paul removes it from its philosophical context and relates it to Jesus Christ. God's people must see Christ's handiwork in every aspect of creation; they should glorify him for everything he has made and constantly upholds by his power. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 4. Divisions in the Church, part 4 (4:1–21) Outline (continued) 4:1–21 5. Servants of Christ 4:1–5 a. Faithfulness 4:6–8 b. Pride 4:9–13 c. Description 4:14–17 d. Admonition 4:18–21 e. Approaching Visit 5. Servants of Christ (4:1–21) 4 1 So then let a man regard us as Christ's servants and stewards of God's mysteries. 2 In this connection, then, it is required of stewards that one should be found faithful. 3 But to me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by a human court; however, I do not even judge myself. 4 I am not aware of anything against myself, yet not for this reason have I been justified. But the one who judges me is the Lord. 5 Therefore, do not judge anything before the end-time, until the Lord comes, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will reveal the purposes of the hearts. And then each man's praise will come from God. 6 Now these things, brothers, I have applied to myself and Apollos for your sake, that from us you might learn not to go beyond what is written, that no one of you might become arrogant, favoring the one over against the other. 7 For who makes you different from anyone else? And what do you have that you did not receive? And if indeed you received it, why do you boast as if you did not receive it? 8 You already have everything you need, you already have become rich, without us you have become kings. And I wish that you really had become kings, so that we might reign with you. 9 For I think that God has made us apostles last of all as men condemned to death, that we have become a spectacle to the world, to angles, and to men. 10 We are fools because of Christ, but you are relying on your own insight in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong; you are honored, but we are dishonored. 11 To this present time, we are hungry, thirsty, poorly clothed, beaten, and homeless. 12 We toil with our own hands; when we are scorned, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure; 13 when we are slandered, we answer with kind words. We have become like the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things until now. 14 I write this not to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my dear children. 15 Even if you have countless attendants in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. 16 Therefore I urge you to be imitators of me. 17 For this reason, I am sending Timothy to you, who is my dear and faithful child in the Lord, who will remind you of my ways that are in Christ Jesus, just as I teach everywhere in every church. 18 Now some of you have become arrogant, as if I were not coming to you. 19 But I will come to you very soon, if the Lord wills, and I know not the word of those who are arrogant but the power they have. 20 For the kingdom of God consists not in word but in power. 21 What do you want? Shall I come to you with a rod or in love with a spirit of gentleness? In this segment of his epistle, Paul relates that as a servant of Christ he is responsible to his Sender. Christ commands him to be faithful in God's service and to minister to his people. Eventually, Paul will be judge not by men but by Christ himself for the work he has performed. a. Faithfulness 4:1–5 1. So then let a man regard us as Christ's servants and stewards of God's mysteries. a. So then. These two words refer to the preceding chapter, in which Paul told the Corinthians not to boast in men, whether they were Paul, Apollos, or Cephas. He instructed them instead to look to Christ, in whom they possess all things. Further, Christ's servants are fellow workers who are not in competition with one another. By using the words so then, Paul connects are teaching from chapter 3 to what he is about to write. b. Let a man regard us as Christ's servants. Notice that Paul uses the plural in this verse to refer to the apostles and their helpers, but in verse 3 he switches to the singular. With the use of the plural he reminds his readers of the preceding discussion. If all things are theirs in Christ (see 3:21–22), then let each member of the Corinthian church evaluate the apostles as Christ's servants. This word for servant is derived not from diakonos but rather from hypretai (servants under their master). The word originally described the slaves who rowed below a ship's deck. In the first century, the term took on a broader meaning and signified a domestic worker. For instance, the attendant who took the scroll of Isaiah from Jesus when he preached in Nazareth was a servant in the local synagogue (Luke 4:20).^[1] Paul informs the Corinthians that the church should understand the relationship between the apostles and the church and between the apostles and Christ. The apostles are servants in the church, yet the church is not their master; the apostles have been sent by Jesus Christ to serve the church, for the Jesus is their master (Acts 26:16). Thus, the members of the church must respect these apostles who willingly and faithfully serve them in the place of Christ and by his command. c. And stewards of God's mysteries. A second description of Paul and his fellow workers is conveyed by the word stewards. The term applies to a servant to whom his master has entrusted the oversight of the house. The steward is held responsible for his master's possessions and from time to time must give an account of his stewardship (Matt. 25:14; Luke 16:2; 19:11–27).^[2] To put it strikingly, Paul and his fellow workers were underlings of Christ and overseers for God. ^[3] In this verse (v. 1), the term stewards does not refer to a house and its owner's personal effects; rather, the noun mysteries shows that it denotes stewards of God's revelation in Jesus Christ. The expression mystery occurs frequently in the New Testament. To be precise, it appears once in Jesus answer concerning his teaching in parables (Matt. 13:11and the parallels Mark 4:11; Luke 8:10), twenty-one times in Paul's epistles, and four times in Revelation (1:20; 10:7; 17:5, 7).^[4] But what meaning is Paul trying to convey with this expression? We ought not simply to equate the mysteries of God with the gospel of Christ. The mystery is not itself revelation; it is the object of revelation.& Revelation discloses the mystery as such. Hence the mystery of God does not disclose itself. At the appointed time it is in free grace declared by God Himself to those who are selected and blessed by Him. ^[5] The knowledge that God reveals to us is only a glimpse of the entire spectrum of divine knowledge. God's own knowledge will always remain a mystery to the human mind, but from the Scriptures we are able to apprehend Christ's work of redemption. The mystery of redemption is made known to us through God's Word and the working of the Holy Spirit (see the commentary on 2:7). Paul and his co-workers are stewards of God's mysteries. As God's instruments they proclaim the gospel; they strengthen believers in their faith; and, through the working of the Holy Spirit, they build the church. 2. In this connection, then,^[6] it is required of stewards that one should be found faithful. Conclusive statements appear to proliferate in Paul's writing. The last few verses of the preceding chapter (3:21–23) were a summary, and the first verse of this chapter (4:1) also recapitulates that teaching. By saying then, Paul once more draws a conclusion, this time from the preceding context about stewards. The inference is that if Paul and his associates are God's stewards, how do the Corinthians evaluate them? What quality should the members of the Corinthian church examine in regard to these stewards of God's mysteries? Paul's epistle seems to indicate that its recipients appreciate fluency and eloquence. But the primary requirement for a steward is faithfulness. Stewardship demands dedication that excludes all self-interest and includes sacrificial loyalty (Luke 12:42). From the plural stewards, Paul turns to the singular one. He indicates that the requirement to be faithful applies not to the team of workers but to each individual who serves Christ (I Peter 4:10).^[7] Every believer must demonstrate fidelity and dedication. 3. But to me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by a human court; however, I do not even judge myself. a. But to me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you. Paul shows no arrogance but true humility. As a trustworthy steward who checks any self-interest, Paul passes judgement on himself in a self-effacing manner. In typical Old Testament fashion (Judg. 6:15), Paul repeatedly expresses self-effacement before God and before the readers of his epistles (II Cor. 11:1; Eph. 3:8). The superlative form of the adjective small serves as an introduction to the purpose clause. The verb to judge in this verse signifies to examine, interrogate. Paul frequently endured harsh judgement, first as he labored in Corinth, later when he remained imprisoned in Caesarea, and last when he was in Rome (Acts 24:8; 28:18).^[8] Paul was not afraid of being examined or interrogated, for he was willing to suffer everything for his Lord. If the Corinthians wished to interrogate him, he would count this procedure a minor matter. Or if they intended to summon him before a human court, he would also regard it as something very small in comparison to appearing before God's judgment seat. Paul was not responsible to the Corinthians but to God, who through Jesus Christ had commissioned him. b. Or by a human court. The Greek actually means, a day appointed by a human court. ^[9] But here the expression implies a contrast to the final judgment day when every sinner has to stand before God (3:13). The term human court probably alludes to an ecclesiastical court that was convened to test Paul's apostleship.^[10] c. However, I do not even judge myself. This is not a conceited statement by which Paul places himself above criticism. Not at all! Paul knows that he cannot be objective in evaluating his own thoughts, words, and deeds. Therefore, he leaves this act of judging to God, who alone can be an impartial judge. This is not to say that Paul wishes to forego any evaluation. Paul is not talking about human deeds which must be examined from time to time; he is talking about his apostleship. This kind of judging belongs to God. Practical Considerations in 4:3 Administrators of educational institutions routinely ask students to evaluate the performance of faculty members in the classroom. Professors realize the value of this procedure, for the students quite accurately analyze both the weak and strong points of an instructor. Members of the administration are able to assist a teacher in overcoming difficulties and to express thanks for superior performance. Pastors should be willing to subject themselves to the church's evaluation of their doctrine and life. They ought not to become hostage to fear or to loss of self-esteem. Examinations nations are meant to strengthen pastors in their work and their self-worth. Conversely, if a faithful pastor is going to be examined by members of a congregation who foster evil intentions, he has every reason to object to such an examination. Paul was not afraid of critique; he told the Corinthians that he considered their judgment a small matter. Regardless of what men think, [a pastor] ought to appeal to God. ^[11] 4. I am not aware of anything against myself, yet not for this reason have I been justified. But the one who judges me is the Lord. a. I am not aware of anything against myself. In the Greek, the word nothing is placed first for emphasis, and so Paul is saying emphatically that his conscience is clear; he is unaware of any wrongdoing (Job 27:6). The comment should not be interpreted that he has silenced his conscience. Rather, he means that with respect to his apostleship, he has been a faithful servant who dutifully has fulfilled all his tasks. By contrast, John Albert Bengel keenly observes, He whom conscience accuses, is held to adjudge his own cause. ^[12] b. Yet not for this reason have I been justified. The lucid wording of this clause expresses a profound truth. If Paul had been justified on the basis of his apostolic faithfulness, he would be teaching a righteousness that could be earned. Justification, however, can never rest on good works performed by man (Titus 3:5), for then the mediatorial work of Christ would have been insufficient or incomplete. On the basis of Christ's perfect work, man is fully justified. Paul writes the verb to justify in the perfect tense: I have been justified. He indicates that he has already been declared righteous, not because of his own works, but because of Jesus Christ. In his life, Paul demonstrates that he is diligent in his apostolic work, yet with his diligence he did not achieve perfection (Gal. 2:16; Phil. 3:12–13). c. But the one who judges me is the Lord. Jesus Christ is the judge, who himself has fulfilled the law (Matt. 5:17) and is the end of the law (Rom. 10:4). He has a right to judge Paul, for through the Holy Spirit Jesus commissioned him as an apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 13:1 3). Jesus judges Paul with respect to the apostolic service Paul performs in his ministry. The Lord assigns, supervises, and evaluates the work Paul must accomplish, whether in periods of frustration (Acts 18:6 10) or in times of impending hardship (Acts 23:11). Hence, Paul tells the Corinthians, he is responsible to the Lord (II Cor. 5:10). 5. Therefore, do not judge anything before the end-time, until the Lord comes, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will reveal the purposes of the hearts. And then each man's praise will come from God. Note the following points: a. The Lord's return. Do not judge anything before the end-time, until the Lord comes. Paul now closes the discussion on adverse comments that he and his co-workers have received. He concludes that because Jesus himself is Paul's judge, the Corinthians should refrain from judging him. He instructs them not to judge anything but to wait until the end-time when the Lord returns. When they with Paul will stand before the judgment seat, then the time will have come to criticize the work performed by Paul (see 6:2–3). The obvious intent of this remark is to show the Corinthians that then they also will face judgment. Notice that Paul gives the readers an emphatic command, which literally reads: not before the end-time judge anything. Linking the consummation of the age to the return of the Lord, he tells the believers to cease uttering their judgmental comments. He is not saying that they should suspend judging altogether. Surely not! When a pastor or teacher fails to adhere to the truth of God's Word and in his teachings and life goes contrary to the Scriptures, the church must judge. But Paul forbids criticizing a person whose teaching and conduct are in harmony with Scripture. When Jesus returns and no one knows when that will be every believer may take part in the judging (6:2). b. The Lord's revelation. Who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will reveal the purposes of the hearts. The Lord will expose both the external and internal things that pertain to man. He will dispel the darkness and thus bring to light all kinds of things that until then remain hidden. Although the term darkness frequently has a sinister meaning (see, e.g., the blinding of the magician Bar-Jesus [ (Acts 13:11] or the command to expose unfruitful deeds of darkness [Eph. 5:11]), here the word has only a neutral connotation and refers to matters that are unknown.^[13] God is the ruler of everything he has created, and that includes darkness. David notes that darkness is the same as light to GodPs. 139:12). In the judgment day, numerous items that were unknown to the believers will come to light. Moreover, people are able to hide thoughts and intentions in the inner recesses of their hearts. Many of these intentions never come to light during a person's earthly life. But when Jesus comes again he will expose them, so that all secrets will be disclosed (Rom. 2:16; Rev. 20:11–13). c. Praise from God. And then each man's praise will come from God. Who receives praise from God? God commends the person who possesses the inner regenerating power of the Holy Spirit and consequently listens obediently to the Word as a recipient of God's commendation (Rom. 2:29). God will graciously apportion praise to the individual believer on the judgment day when Christ reveals all things (Rev. 22:12). Instead of writing words of rebuke, Paul concludes this section with a positive note on praise. It serves as an exhortation to the Corinthians to desist from judging Paul and his associates and to wait for praise not from men but from God. Practical Considerations in 4:5 We should see Paul's emphasis on praise in the context of this particular verse. For example, he begins by indicating when the Christian will receive praise, namely, at the appointed time when Jesus comes. Next, he states that each person will receive praise individually. And last, this praise comes from God, not from human beings. Scripture definitely teaches that there will be rewards in heaven for the Christian. Jesus says, Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done (Rev. 22:12).^[14] The Bible teaches not that a person can earn salvation, but rather that God showers his praise on the believer who faithfully does God's will. Thus, in the teaching of the parable of the talents, we hear Jesus say about both the servant with the five talents and the servant with two talents, Well done, good and faithful servant; you were faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lordMatt. 25:21, 23, NKJV . Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 4:1–5 Verses 1 2 [Greek] this noun is used in an indefinite and general sense that signifies one. This is how one (i.e., you) regard us. ^[15] [Greek] the particle looks back to the word stewards in verse 1 and means on showing that; the adverb [Greek] looks forward, signifying it follows that. ^[16] [Greek] it is required. Many leading manuscripts have the second person plural imperative [Greek] (require!) instead. The imperative continues the series [Greek] (3:21), [Greek] (v. 1). However, it can also be indicative. Translators prefer the impersonal, third person singular, because it balances the second part of the sentence, which has the third person singular. Verse 3 [Greek] this is the intensive use of the superlative adjective from [Greek] and is translated very small. The true superlative is least (see 15:9). The [Greek] clause follows the intensive superlative and explains its meaning: that I should be judged. Verses 4 5 [Greek] this prepositional clause means for that reason and expresses a causal idea. A [Greek] the present active participle of the verb [Greek] (I examine) shows not action in the future but continued action in the present. [Greek] an inferential particle that signifies and so, accordingly (see 3:7).^[17] A [Greek] the noun is preceded by a definite article to emphasize that praise is given to individual Christians. b. Pride 4:6–8 6. Now these things, brothers, I have applied to myself and Apollos for your sake, that from us you might learn not to go beyond what is written, that no one of you might become arrogant, favoring the one over against the other. a. Application. Now these things, brothers, I have applied. Once more Paul addresses his readers with the salutation brothers, which in the parlance of that day included the sisters.^[18] He uses this greeting to prepare his audience for the personal and direct message that follows. And he wants to be pastoral in his approach. What are these things that Paul has applied? This question must be answered in connection with the meaning of the verb to apply. Other translations read have figuratively transferred (NKJV) into this general picture (NEB) to change the form of (Bauer, p. 513) In short, Paul is saying that he wants to use a figure of speech with these things. In the preceding chapter Paul uses images borrowed from agriculture and the building trade; in the immediate context, he uses the imagery of stewards. Hence, the words these things encompass the three metaphors which Paul has written in 3:5 4:5.^[19] Paul states that what he has written to the Corinthians he has applied to himself and Apollos for the benefit of his readers. Both Paul and Apollos had served the church of Corinth for extended periods of time. But by not mentioning Peter, he indirectly calls attention to his earlier remark that Paul and Apollos are Christ's servants charged with the task of proclaiming God's mysteries (3:5; 4:1).^[20] He applies the figurative language of the gardener, builder, and steward to himself and Apollos.^[21] These portrayals, says Paul, are for the benefit of the Corinthians. b. Learning. That from us you might learn not to go beyond what is written. Scholars have spilled much ink in an effort to explain this part of the text. A few examples show various ways to translate this phrase: That you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written (NKJV) May you learn from us not to go beyond what is set down (NAB) So that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, Do not go beyond what is written (NIV) You may be taught the truth of the words, Nothing beyond what is written (Cassirer) These examples reveal not so much different translations of the Greek text as differences in understanding the text itself. Some scholars are of the opinion that the words not to go beyond what is written are an unintelligible gloss that should be deleted.^[22] But there is no textual evidence to substantiate the claim that these words are a gloss. Furthermore, omission of these words makes the verse itself incoherent. Most scholars think that these words are evidently a proverb, or a principle in proverbial form. ^[23] It may have been a saying that was current in the political arena of Paul's day and served to promote unity. Paul, say these scholars, uses a maxim familiar in Corinthian circles to urge an end to the divisions in the church and to foster unity. Nonetheless, when Paul borrows the phrase what is written, is he referring to the Old Testament Scriptures? Presumably, yes! The proverb itself must convey a message, which in the context of the two epistles to the Corinthians signifies the Scriptures. And in these letters, the Greek word gegraptai (it is written) frequently introduces quotations from the Sriptures.^[24] Paul quotes repeatedly from the books of the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. In total, there are seventeen Old Testament quotations in I Corinthians and ten in II Corinthians. Paul's stern warning to the Corinthians not to go beyond what is written appropriates additional meaning in chapter 10. After citing a few incidents from the history of the people of Israel, he asserts: Now these things happened to them as a warning and were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come (10:11). It would indeed be too restrictive to limit Paul's warning not to go beyond what is written to the six Scripture passages he has quoted in the first three chapters of I Corinthians (1:19, 31; 2:9, 16; 3:19, 20). Conclusively, Paul refers to the entire Old Testament revelation. c. Arrogance. That no one of you might become arrogant, favoring the one over against the other. The last part of this verse is important, for in the succeeding verses (vv. 7 8) Paul continues to condemn pride, the basic theme of this segment. The crux of what Paul is saying relates to the division in the Corinthian church: the one party favors Paul and the other party Apollos. Strutting about like ruffled roosters, members of each party arrogantly set themselves against one another. Were it not so serious, it would be comical to watch the individual members of the church parading the favorites of their parties. Paul forbids every one of the Corinthians to foster the factionalism that is rampant in the church (1:12; 3:4). Let no one trumpet his preference for one leader, whether Paul or Apollos, but let each believer strive to learn from them what the Scriptures have to say. They must learn from their leaders to listen to the teachings of God's Word.^[25] In numerous places, the Scriptures warn the people against arrogance (Job 40:12; Prov. 8:13; Gal. 6:3). The Corinthians must learn meekness and understand that everything they possess they have received from God. They hear God speaking to them from the pages of the Scriptures. 7. For who makes you different from anyone else? And what do you have that you did not receive? And if indeed you received it, why do you boast as if you did not receive it? Paul asks that Corinthians three questions: a. Who makes you different from anyone else? Paul addresses each member of the church by using the singular personal pronoun you. He challenges the individual who arrogantly desires to show off his superiority to state from whom he received the rank he has assumed. The question which Paul places before the puffed-up individual is rhetorical and receives a negative reply: Of course, no one! ^[26] Certainly Paul did not create a party in his name, and God did not grant any superiority to individual Corinthians. An arrogant person is unable to appeal to anyone for support. b. What do you have that you did not receive? Paul again poses a rhetorical question addressed to the individual believer. This query also receives a negative reply: Nothing! Asked what he or she possesses, every Corinthian must acknowledge the source of everything listed. An honest answer must be that God has supplied every material and spiritual gift (John 3:27; James 1:17). Each one is indebted to God and must praise him for these possessions and thus has no grounds for arrogance. c. If indeed you received it, why do you boast as if you did not receive it? The third question follows up the second. That is, if a person has received a gift either a spiritual or a material asset he is obligated to express thanks. It would be the height of ingratitude not to acknowledge its source and hence to snub the donor by not expressing thanks to him. The recipient of these gifts then acts as if he had always possessed them and thus poses as their rightful owner. If God grants grace, then his people become the recipients of untold blessings. Because they are fully dependent on God, they cannot take any credit for their acquisitions.^[27] 8. You already have everything you need, you already have become rich, without us you have become kings. And I wish that you really had become kings, so that we might reign with you. a. Contrast. You already have everything you need. Paul again switches to the second person plural you and speaks to the church. He observes that the Corinthians think that they have filled their spiritual and material demands; they have no need of anything or anyone else. In stark contrast to reality, they considered themselves successful in church and society and, in effect, fostered the misconception that they were superior to everyone else. You already have become rich. Self-sufficient people delude themselves, for they believe that they are rich when they are poverty-stricken. For instance, Jesus rebukes the church of Laodicea: You say, I am rich; I have indeed acquired wealth and do not need a thing. But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked (Rev. 3:17). Without us you have become kings. Paul resorts to using phrases that circulated among the Stoic philosophers of that day (see the commentary on 3:21).^[28] These philosophers prided themselves on being self-sufficient, and the Corinthians appeared to be influenced by their teaching. Instead of seeing themselves as citizens in God's kingdom, the Corinthian Christians act as if they are rulers in that kingdom. They claim to be kings rather than subjects of the king. b. Irony. And I wish that you really had become kings, so that we might reign with you. In this verse, Paul's tone is laced with irony. He expresses his wish that God's kingdom had indeed appeared and the Corinthian believers would be reigning with Christ (II Tim. 2:12; Rev. 3:21). If that were the case, he and Apollos would readily take a seat of royal honor next to them. But because the opposite is true, he uses sarcasm to shake the readers of his epistle. They fail to acknowledge that Christ's servants (Paul, Apollos, and others) had taught them about God's kingdom and had led them to Christ. Now they claim to be independent of these servants and deceive themselves by pretending to be rulers. The ironic comment conveys to them that they are ahead of Paul and his associates, who are still waiting for the coming of the kingdom. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 4:6–8 Verses 6 7 In the Majority Text, the present infinitive [Greek] (to think) occurs after the verb [Greek] (it is written; see KJV, NKJV). Both older and more geographically representative manuscripts, however, omit the infinitive. [Greek] &[Greek] the verb in the second person plural middle is a present subjunctive in the context of a purpose clause (Gal. 4:17). The phrase [Greek] Qere [Greek] means each one on behalf of one against the other (none &in favor of one against the other). ^[29] The simple condition introduced by [Greek] expresses reality; it features the conjunction [Greek], which is intensive and is translated indeed. Verse 8 [Greek] the periphrastic construction with the perfect passive participle of [Greek] (I satiate) and the verb to be in the present tense second person plural signifies that for a considerable time the Corinthians have had all the things they needed. The verbs [Greek] (you have become rich) and [Greek] (you have become kings) are ingressive aorists; that is, the Corinthians have become rich and from their perspective continue to be rich. c. Description 4:9–13 9. For I think that God has made us apostles last of all as men condemned to death, that we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men. If Paul expressed irony in the preceding verses (vv. 7 8), here (vv. 9 13) he realistically assesses his present condition. We assume that Paul refers to what he had recently endured in Ephesus. He composed this epistle about the time the riot occurred (Acts 19:23 41). The Corinthians were acquainted with Paul's predicament as he describes the plight of an apostle. This plight is the opposite of Paul's caustic remark that he wished to be a king with the Corinthians and rule with them (v. 8). Instead of being at the top and reigning, he is at the bottom and faces persecution and death. a. For I think that God has made us apostles. Paul is not critical but observes only that God appoints men to be apostles. He accepts this appointment as a fact, but he has his own reflection on the significance of being an apostle. (The plural apostles is not specific but refers to the general category apostle.) He has experienced that because of his apostleship he is subject to ridicule, hatred, physical and verbal abuse, and the possibility of death. The phrase I think is an aside and should be understood in the light of the entire sentence. b. Last of all as men condemned to death. God has placed the apostles last, as it were in a victory parade,^[30] in which the conquerors appear first and the conquered last. This place marks them as victims who soon face death at either the hand of man or the teeth of wild beasts. c. We have become a spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men. Paul employs the word theatron, from which we have the derivative theater. Note that this same Greek word appears twice in Luke's account of the riot, where Paul's associates Gaius and Aristarchus were dragged into the theater (Acts 19:29, 31) and were made a spectacle for the crowd. At amphitheaters, anyone and everyone could be present to watch the executions of slaves and criminals. Paul's statement that he is a spectacle to the world, therefore, is no exaggeration. In apposition to the word world, Paul adds the two nouns angels and men. What a contrast between these two categories! Angels are sent by God to minister and be of service to his elect. Thus, when God's people endure suffering and face death, angels support and strengthen them. Angels observe everything and as messengers bring a report to God. By contrast, men are cruel and coldhearted; they take delight in seeing fellow human beings who in arenas face wild beasts that tear them to pieces. If the Corinthians should take a moment to reflect on the life of Christ's apostles, they would have to admit that the apostles are at the opposite end of the spectrum from ruling monarchs. 10. We are fools because of Christ, but you are relying on your own insight in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong; you are honored, but we are dishonored. a. We are fools. Self-esteem is a basic ingredient of a balanced life, and to be called a fool is a degrading experience that can severely alter one's self-image. If a person asserts that he himself is a fool, we would suppose that irony is lacing the voice of the speaker. And that is exactly the case in the present verse.^[31] Paul states that he and his fellow apostles are fools because of Christ (Acts 14:19; 16:22–25; 17:10; 18:12). From a human perspective, Paul and the other apostles are fools to risk their lives for the sake of Christ. Yet there is an obvious double entendre: They also thereby reflect the truth of the gospel, which is folly in the eyes of the worldly wise. ^[32] b. But you are relying on your own insight in Christ. The apostles are fools in the eyes not only of the world but also of the Corinthian believers. Paul's sarcasm is harsh when he tells the recipients of his epistle that they consider themselves to be intelligent and discerning believers in Christ. He intends to convey the contrary because their wisdom is purely human wisdom that has nothing to do with divine wisdom in Christ.^[33] We would have expected the Corinthians to be receptive to the guidance of the Holy Spirit (2:12). In their opposition to Paul, however, they are influenced by worldly wisdom (II Cor. 11:19) and separated from Christ and the Holy Spirit. Instead of turning to Christ for wisdom, they rely on their own faulty insight. With his use of irony, Paul attempts to make them see their arrogance. c. We are weak, but you are strong; you are honored, but we are dishonored. Here is still more irony. Paul contrasts the lot the apostles with that of the Corinthians. He readily proclaims the weakness of Christ's servants in a world in which weakness is despised and strength is praised. Then in reverse order he contrasts the honor which the Corinthians have received with the dishonor that has been ascribed to the apostles. Elsewhere Paul contrasts his weakness (II Cor. 12:5, 9, 10; 13:4) with the virtues of power and strength. He considers his own weakness to be a mark of a true follower of Jesus Christ, for it is Christ who strengthens him (Phil. 4:13). He takes Jesus revelation concerning Paul's weakness as an occasion of boasting; he says that Christ's power has been made perfect in him (II Cor. 12:9). The Corinthians, by contrast, claim to be strong but are weak without the close fellowship of Christ. They should be mighty in the Lord; indeed, they have been called and sanctified by him (1:2, 9). The Corinthians profess to be honored. But because they seek to fuse the things of Christ with the things of the world, they heap nothing but shame on themselves. Conversely, the apostles are mocked, scorned, and dishonored by unbelievers; yet because of their intimate fellowship with Jesus, they are honored by God. 11. To this present time, we are hungry, thirsty, poorly clothed, beaten, and homeless. 12. We toil with our own hands; when we are scorned, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure; 13. when we are slandered, we answer with kind words. We have become like the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things until now. Paul employs irony in only a few remarks. He draws attention to the life the apostles live but does not want to discourage the readers. He is not asking for pity, but he desires the Corinthians to know that true servants of Christ must endure affliction and reproach. a. To this present time, we are hungry, thirsty, poorly clothed, beaten, and homeless. This description tallies with other passages in which Paul catalogs calamities: beatings, floggings, imprisonments, riots, shipwrecks, sleepless nights, hunger, thirst, cold, and mortal perils (II Cor. 4:8–9; 6:4–10; 11:23–27; 12:10; see Rom. 8:35; Phil. 4:12).^[34] In addition, Paul must have suffered an almost fatal illness when he resided in the province of Asia, perhaps in Ephesus (II Cor. 1:18–11). When Paul writes that he was beaten, the Greek verb indicates that he was pummeled with fists by people who rejected Christ's gospel. The verb generally refers to mistreatment Paul often had to endure.^[35] The word homeless does not mean that Paul lacked a roof over his head. Rather, it implies that he was a wanderer without a fixed abode.^[36] During his frequent travels, he presumably used a tent which he himself had constructed. Jesus had given his disciples the command that the worker must receive his wages (Luke 10:7). Paul clarified his command by saying that those who preach the gospel should be supported by those who hear it (I Tim. 5:18). Paul himself took no advantage of that ruling; he preferred to work with his own hands so as not to hinder the progress of the gospel (9:12b). As a result, Paul frequently had an inadequate supply of food, liquid, and clothing. b. We toil with our own hands. Every Jewish boy had to learn a trade, usually from his father, to support himself. Jesus became a carpenter, John and James fishermen, and Paul a tentmaker. Even though Paul's trade was considered menial, he was not all ashamed of it. In both Acts and Paul's epistles, references to Paul's readiness to work with his own hands abound (Acts 18:3; 20:34; I Cor. 9:6; I Thess. 2:9; II Thess. 3:8). Yet in the Hellenistic culture of that day, Greeks disdained manual labor.^[37] They were of the opinion that physical labor had to be performed by slaves. By working with his hands Paul lowered his status in the eyes of local citizens. c. When we are scorned, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure. The world is unable to understand this attitude Paul describe, In today's rough-and tough world, countless people live by the slogan, I don't get mad, I get even. Scorn meets scorn and persecution encounters reaction. The Jews observed the rule, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot (Exod. 21:24; Lev. 24:20; Deut. 19:21). But Jesus taught them, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.& Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you (Matt. 5:39, 44; see Luke 6:28). The apostles adopt the teaching of Jesus and demonstrate his instruction in their daily lives. The verbs that Paul writes in this passage are in the present tense to indicate that the apostles were constantly mocked and persecuted. In response, they continued to bless their enemies and endure persecution. Paul literally says that in respect to persecution, we are putting up with it. The apostles learned to live with oppression in a spirit of meekness consistent with the teachings of Christ (Matt. 5:5, 9 12). d. When we are slandered, we answer with kind words. The verb to slander actually means to misquote or to misrepresent someone. The word conveys the idea of shading the truth so as to place someone in a bad light. The medicine which Paul prescribes is difficult to take: We answer in a kind manner. ^[38] In the light of Paul's description of apostolic conduct, this translation indeed fits the context. Paul is saying that even when the truth is turned into a lie, he continues to love his accusers. e. We have become like the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things until now. The language Paul uses to depict himself and the rest of the apostles is picturesque. He refers to the scum or refuse that is wiped away in a thorough cleaning of a house or a building. Then he adds that they are the offscouring of all things. This appears to be a synonymous expression. But in Greek literature, the word peripsma (offscouring) was often used in connection with annually sacrificing criminals or deformed persons. They were the scum of society. ^[39] These offerings were made for the benefit of society. Likewise, the apostles are representatives of Jesus, who was regarded as a criminal and placed on a cross for the benefit of the people (John 11:50). Although Jesus gave himself as the supreme sacrifice for the sins of mankind, the apostles also suffered physically for the sake of Christ's gospel. Despised by society and considered trash, the apostles could find strength and consolation in the Lord. They knew that during their earthly life, they would have to endure the derision of the world. Hence, Paul writes the phrase until now. While he was writing this epistle in Ephesus, he may very well have heard some kind of ominous chant from the local people: Christians to the lions! (15:32).^[40] Practical Considerations in 4:11–13 Statistics reveal that the church increases numerically and spiritually in countries where persecutions, hardships, poverty, corruption, and distress are common. By comparison, church membership declines steadily in countries that exude affluence and ease. Whenever Christians are surrounded by material ease and comfort, they often tend to forget the claims of Christ. They become self-sufficient and, while maintaining a religious veneer, have lost their love for Christ and the message of salvation. Should Christians, then, rejoice in persecution and affliction? They ought never to seek persecution for its own sake. But when they are obedient to the gospel, they will be rejected by the world and have to endure persecution. To them Jesus says, Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven (Matt. 5:12). Followers of Jesus experience that worldly friends forsake them. They undergo verbal abuse that is frequently accompanied by physical and mental agony. In effect, they struggle against spiritual forces controlled by Satan (Eph. 6:12). Yet they rejoice, for they will receive their reward. Should Christians, then, seek poverty to be alive spiritually? Not necessarily. Abraham is known as the father of believers, yet God blessed him with numerous earthly possessions. Similarly, Job was tried, tested, and strengthened in his faith. Yet God blessed him with untold riches. Material wealth, however, should always be subservient to the cause of Christ and should never become the Christian's master. As Paul puts it, Greed &is idolatry (Col. 3:5). Jesus teaches that a believer should love God with heart, soul, and mind, and love his fellow man as himself (Matt. 22:37–40). Then he will be rich in Christ, even though he is considered a pauper by the world. Henry F. Lyte gave poetic expression to his personal desire to follow Jesus and to accept the consequences: Jesus, I my cross have taken, All to leave, and follow Thee; Destitute, despised, forsaken, Thou from hence my all shalt be; Perish every fond ambition, All I've sought or hoped or known; Yet how rich is my condition: God and heaven are still my own. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 4:9–13 Verses 9 10 [Greek] a parenthetical statement that means for in my opinion; numerous manuscripts that reflect age and wide geographic representation delete the conjunction [Greek] (that). [Greek] the noun in the dative case is explained by the indefinite nouns [Greek] and [Greek] and means to the world, both to angels and to men. ^[41] [Greek] &[Greek] note, first, the position of these two personal pronouns (at the beginning and the end of the three sentences, which denotes emphasis); next, their repetition; and last, their reversed order in the last sentence. Verses 11 12 [Greek] until this moment. This segment (vv. 11 13) begins and ends with a time reference, [Greek] (until now). Except for the aorist passive [Greek] (we have become) in verse 13, this entire segment has all the finite verbs and the participles in the present tense. [Greek] the present participle of [Greek] (I scorn) can have a concessive meaning. Verse 13 [Greek] this compound of [Greek] (around) and the noun derived from the verb [Greek] (I cleanse) signifies the residue from scrubbing an object. The [Greek] ending of this noun denotes the result of the action. [Greek] from the preposition [Greek] and the verb [Greek] (I wipe, rub), it indicates that which has been scraped off. d. Admonition 4:14–17 14. I write this not to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my dear children. Paul has harshly rebuked the Corinthians but turns to them as a loving father who cares for his offspring (II Cor. 6:13; Gal. 4:19; I Thess. 2:11). One thing children dread most is to be put to shame in the presence of their friends. Shame places an indelible mark on their minds, which, so it seems, they are unable to erase. The church at Corinth does not want to be disgraced in the presence of the other churches in Achaia, Macedonia, and Asia Minor (compare 6:5; II Cor. (9:4). After a negative statement, not to make you ashamed, Paul utters a positive remark, to admonish you. He wants the Corinthians to listen to him for their own benefit. He admonishes them to pay attention to his words, for in Christ he is their father and they are his dear children. His words are the words of a father who in love corrects his children.^[42] Paul addresses the Corinthians in genuine love; thus he writes the adjective dear, which in older translations is beloved. In the succeeding verses, he reveals the content of his admonition.^[43] 15. Even if you have countless attendants in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. a. Even if you have countless attendants in Christ. With an overstatement, Paul calls attention to the concept father. He says to the Corinthians, Now suppose for a moment that, in addition to Apollos and myself, you had been guarded by innumerable attendants who led you to Christ. Nevertheless, I am your spiritual father who first taught you the gospel. Paul employs the term paidagMgos, from which we have the derivative pedagogue. In Hellenistic culture, a pedagogue was either a household slave or a freedman who accompanied a child (or the children) of well-to-do parents to and from school. He was appointed to tutor the child in proper conduct, chide him whenever necessary, guard him from danger and evil influences, and to give him an interest in correct speech, grammar, and diction.^[44] He helped a boy do his homework, nursed him when sick, and attended to his needs until the boy reached adolescence. Paul purposely exaggerates when he suggests that the Corinthians would have ten thousand pedagogues to guard, chide, and correct them in respect to Christian conduct and teaching. Note that a father employed a pedagogue always remained in charge of his son's education. The father was much closer to the son than the pedagogue could ever be. b. You do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Each person can have countless teachers, but only one biological father. So Paul observes that the Corinthians could presumably have innumerable pedagogues to lead them to Christ, but each one could not have many spiritual fathers. For eighteen months Paul labored to plant the church at Corinth (Acts 18:11). Hence, he could truthfully say that in Christ Jesus he was the spiritual progenitor of the Corinthian church. From a Jewish perspective, a teacher who taught students the content of the Torah (the Old Testament Scriptures, other Jewish sacred literature, and oral tradition) was considered a father.^[45] In that capacity, Paul asserted his apostolic authority with respect to those members of the church who questioned it. If we look at this matter from a different perspective, we see that the church did not bring forth the apostles; rather, Jesus Christ endowed the apostles, who went forth to found the church. Although other workers, among whom were Timothy, Silas, Apollos, and Titus, came to Corinth to assist in teaching and edifying the members of the church, Paul exercised lasting authority over them.^[46] Through Christ's gospel Paul is able to call himself the father of the Corinthians. 16. Therefore I urge you to be imitators of me. 17. For this reason, I am sending Timothy to you, who is my dear and faithful child in the Lord, who will remind you of my ways that are in Christ Jesus, just as I teach everywhere in every church. a. Imitators. Paul brought the gospel to the Corinthians, witnessed their spiritual birth, taught them the Christian way of life, urged to follow Christ, and demonstrated his unwavering love for them. Now he directs them to become his imitators and adopt his personal testimony of Christ.^[47] By implication, Paul urges them to imitate Christ, who reveals himself in the gospel. Elsewhere in this epistle he writes, Be imitators of me, just as I am of Christ (Gal. 4:12; Phil. 3:17; II Thess. 3:7, 9). What Paul is trying to say is that one who is imitating Paul is imitating Christ. Speaking as their spiritual father, Paul expects the Corinthians to follow his example. From the moment they are born, children are dependent on their parents for survival, care, guidance, and teaching. They copy the parents way of life, learn elementary truths, and adopt their basic values. Children not only physically but also spiritually reflect the likeness of their father and mother. The closer the relationship of parent and child, the more the similarities develop. ^[48] This close relationship, of course, is founded on love. Paul demonstrates his love toward his spiritual offspring by calling them his beloved children (v. 14, NKJV). b. Offspring. Most translators render the Greek literally: I have sent or I sent, which implies that Paul instructed Timothy to travel to Corinth. Yet we have no evidence that Timothy ever arrived in Corinth (but see 16:10–11). About this time (a.d. 55), Paul began writing the First Epistle to the Corinthians. If Timothy had been with Paul at that time, we would have expected Paul to include his name in the greetings, as in II Corinthians 1:1. Other translators prefer the present tense of the verb: I am sending. The reasoning is that when a writer sent a letter or a messenger, he would place himself in the position of the recipients. For the recipient the act of sending occurred in the past. But from the sender's point of view, this happened in the present. For this reason, I am sending Timothy to you, who is my dear and faithful child in the Lord. Along with the letter, Paul is sending Timothy to the Corinthians. Timothy became acquainted with the faith of his grandmother Lois and his mother, Eunice (II Tim. 1:5); we assume that he was converted when Paul and Barnabas came to Lystra and Derbe on their first missionary journey (Acts 14:8 21). When Timothy eventually accompanied Paul, he was heartily recommended by the Christians in Lystra (Acts 16:1 3) and presumably had been a believer for some time. Paul called Timothy my dear faithful child in the Lord, This means that Paul considered himself Timothy's spiritual father. As a natural father normally loves his son, so Paul deeply loved his spiritual father. As a natural father normally loves his son, so Paul deeply loved his spiritual son (I Tim. 1:2; II Tim. 1:2; compare Philem. 10). And Timothy proved to be Paul's faithful child in working for the Lord. We learn from Acts and Paul's epistles that Timothy often completed tasks that Paul himself was hindered from doing. For example, when Paul had to leave Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea, Timothy went there to work in his place (Acts 17:15; Phil. 2:22; I Thess. 3:1–3, 6). c. Instruction. [Timothy] will remind you of my ways that are in Christ Jesus, just as I teach everywhere in every in every church. As Paul's spiritual son, Timothy must refresh the memory of Paul's spiritual children in Corinth. He has to remind them of Paul's Christian conduct, mentioned here as ways that are in Christ Jesus. These ways relate to the work Paul performed while he was with the Corinthians: teaching, preaching, counseling, shaping, nurturing, and praying. They pertain to the work Paul accomplished on behalf of Jesus Christ and the building of the church. Paul intimates that even though he has not visited the church in Corinth for some time, let no one think that he has not been busy elsewhere. He has been teaching, chiefly in Ephesus and the province of Asia. And his teaching there is similar to what the Corinthians received some years earlier. Furthermore, Paul believes in and contends for the unity of the church of Jesus Christ (see 7:17; 14:33). There is, therefore, no place for divisions and doctrines that are contrary to the gospel. Doctrinal Considerations in 4:14–17 When Paul writes that he is the father of the Corinthian Christians, we immediately think of the words Jesus spoke when he pronounced his woes over the Pharisees: And do not call anyone on earth father, for you have one Father, and he is in heaven (Matt. 23:9). Is Paul disregarding Jesus command? Not necessarily. Jesus words must be understood in the context in which they were spoken. In his discourse against the Pharisees, Jesus tells the twelve disciples and the crowds to reject the title rabbi as a name for themselves, for they have only one Master (Matthew 23:8). Then he says that no one should call them father, because God is their Father. The term the fathers became a very common way of referring to earlier teachers of the law, especially the great masters. ^[49] Jesus warns against the use of titles that foster pride in the persons who are so honored. In the New Testament, Paul and the other apostles are never addressed as father. When Paul uses the figure of speech of father and children, he qualifies this by saying: In Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel (v. 15). Not Paul but Jesus Christ receives glory and honor. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 4:14–17 Verse 14 [Greek] the negative particle [Greek] precedes the present active participle of [Greek] (I make ashamed). Normally the particle [Greek] controls participles, but here the contrast of the words [Greek] &[Greek] calls for a departure from the rule.^[50] [Greek] from the verb [Greek] (I warn), this reading with the present participle is preferred to the finite verb [Greek]. Both readings have equal manuscript support, yet the use of the participle appears to be a dominant feature in Paul's writings. Verse 15 [Greek] this adjective in the accusative masculine plural means not ten thousands but rather innumerable. ^[51] [Greek] &[Greek] with the verb in the subjunctive, the conditional sentence expresses skepticism. The adverb [Greek] in the apodosis signifies at least. [Greek] notice these two personal pronouns placed next to each other to indicate the close relationship of Paul and the Corinthians. Verse 17 [Greek] the aorist active of [Greek] (I send) is probably the epistolary aorist, I am sending. [Greek] who will remind you. This clause expresses purpose; it functions as a parallel to the preceding clause, who is my dear and faithful child. e. Approaching Visit 4:18–21 18. Now some of you have become arrogant, as if I were not coming to you. 19. But I will come to you very soon, if the Lord wills, and I will know not the word of those who are arrogant but the power they have. a. Arrogance. Paul returns to a discussion of the arrogance that was exhibited by some Corinthians (see v. 6), for this sin remains a persistent evil in the congregation. It appears not only in the form of a divisive spirit but also in a lack of respect for Paul (II Cor. 10:9–10). Before he turns his attention to disciplinary matters, Paul once more urges those people who are arrogant leaders to take note (compare 1:11–12; 3:3–4). Personified as wisdom, the Lord says: I hate pride and arrogance, evil behavior and perverse speechProv. 8:13b . These are the sins that some of the Corinthians committed (compare 5:2; 8:1). Paul wants these proud Corinthians to acknowledge their offense and to repent, so that this evil might not permeate the entire congregation. b. Intention. Arrogance blinds a person to reality. The haughty leaders in Corinth thought that Paul would stay in Ephesus and not visit the Corinthians. They underestimated Paul's loving concern for the church and his intention to visit the churches in Macedonia and Achaia (Acts 19:21). Paul daily remembered the churches in prayer and continued to have a personal interest in their spiritual well-being (Phil. 1:3–4; Col. 1:3–4; I Thess. 1:2–3; II Thess. 1:3). He was determined to visit them, even if their leaders were spreading the rumor that Paul would not come to Corinth. They probably felt secure, thinking that the presence of Timothy conveyed the apostle's lack of interest in the Corinthian church. However, they know very well that Paul is equipped with power from God. ^[52] c. Assertion. I will come to you very soon, if the Lord wills. Paul speaks with determination, for he is indeed going to visit the Corinthian church. He writes that he is coming very soon. After traveling through Macedonia, he intends to arrive in Corinth and spend some time, perhaps an entire winter (16:5–7). He even tells them that he will leave Ephesus after Pentecost (16:8), probably in a.d. 56. Paul qualifies his intentions with the clause if God wills (see also 16:7). He knows that he serves the Lord, who sends him wherever Paul's presence is needed. He is not his own master but belongs to his Lord Jesus Christ. d. Purpose. And I will know not the word of those who are arrogant but the power they have. Paul is not interested in learning what his opponents have to say, for their accusations were uttered while he was away. He wants to know what influence these leaders have had on the church members. Should these men be filled with the Holy Spirit, they would be able to give positive leadership in the church. But if they were without the Spirit, they would lack the ability to build the church. Paul plans to spend time in Corinth to find out if these leaders have been endowed with spiritual power to advance the cause of Christ. 20. For the kingdom of God consists not in word but in power. In the concluding remarks to this part of his letter, Paul carefully chooses his words. With the concept kingdom, he calls to mind God's worldwide power and influence. Paul had earlier mocked the Corinthians by calling them kings (v. 8), but now he teaches them the doctrine that Christ reigns with power throughout his kingdom. This is the first time that Paul employs the word kingdom in his epistle. Although the term itself appears chiefly in the synoptic Gospels, it also occurs frequently in Paul's epistles.^[53] In many passages, Paul features the present aspect of Christ's kingdom. For instance, the kingdom is a matter not of food and drink (Rom. 14:17), not of arrogant talk, but of power (I Cor. 4:20) and of lives that are worthy of God (I Thess. 2:12). In other texts, he highlights the eschatological aspect of the kingdom: wicked people do not inherit it (Gal. 5:19–21; Eph. 5:5). In his references to the kingdom, Paul places appropriate emphasis on the lordship of Jesus Christ. The exercise of lordship implies the exercise of a dominion which is closely akin to the idea of dynamic rule seen in the teaching of Jesus. ^[54] Even though Paul omits the name Jesus in this verse, the kingdom of God belongs to Christ. To him has been given all authority in heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18). In God's kingdom, then, Jesus Christ rules supremely by exercising spiritual power (Mark 9:1). We enter that kingdom only because God's saving power transforms us in a wonderful way and makes us partakers of his kingdom. ^[55] 21. What do you want? Shall I come to you with a rod or in love with a spirit of gentleness? Paul ends his discourse by asking two direct questions. In his first question, he asks his readers what they want him to do; in his second he gives them a choice. Do they desire to be punished or to be loved? He puts the question not merely to those who are arrogant but to the entire Corinthian church. Everyone in the congregation shares the blame for the damage that divisiveness and arrogance have caused. Because of their corporate responsibility, they must now respond to Paul's question. a. Shall I come to you with a rod? How do we interpret the word rod? It can be understood literally or figuratively. Is Paul coming to Corinth as a schoolmaster or a pedagogue who applies the rod to unruly pupils?^[56] This literal interpretation would suit the context in which Paul mentioned pedagogues who were given the task of correcting the behavior of children (v. 15). Yet, a figurative explanation has merit if we understand Paul to come to Corinth with a word of power. ^[57] Paul offers to come to the Corinthians with a rod of spiritual power given to him by Jesus Christ. He is Christ's representative and in that capacity is able to correct the people with the authoritative Word of God. The New Testament depicts Christ endowed with absolute power that is symbolized in a rodHeb. 1:8[Ps. 45:6]; Rev. 2:27; 12:5; 19:15[Ps. 2:9] . Christ uses that rod for the final overthrow of evil.^[58] This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 5. Immorality and Lawsuits, part 1 (5:1–13) Outline (continued) 1 a. An Immoral Brother b. A Judgment B. Immorality and Lawsuits 5:1 6:20 5 1 It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of such a kind that does not even happen among the Gentiles, namely, that a man has the wife of his father. 2 And you are arrogant! Should you not rather be grieved? Put the man who practiced this deed out of your midst. 3 For even though I am absent in body but present in spirit, as if I were present I have already judged the man who has so committed this. 4 When you come together and I am with you in spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 in the name of our Lord Jesus deliver this man to Satan for destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord. 6 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a small amount of yeast causes the entire batch of dough to rise? 7 Clean out the old yeast, that you may be a new batch, unleavened, just as you are. For indeed Christ has been sacrificed as our Passover lamb. 8 Therefore, let us celebrate the feast not with old yeast, namely, with the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with the unfermented bread of sincerity and truth. 1. Incest 5:1–8 In the conclusion of the preceding chapter, Paul gave the Corinthians a choice: he would come to them either with a rod or in a spirit of love and gentleness. He implied that if they repented he would be to them a loving father, but if not, he would have to chasten them with a rod. This conclusion serves as a bridge to a new subject that Paul wants to discuss with the Corinthians. He has been told that someone in the church has committed the sin of incest and that this person has not been censured by the members of the church. This heinous sin in the sight of God and man must be removed. Both the man, because of his act of incest, and the church, because of its failure to act, are guilty of sin. a. An Immoral Brother 5:1–5 1. It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of such a kind that does not even happen among the Gentiles, namely, that a man has the wife of his father. a. Report.It is actually reported. The first word in the Greek sentence, holos, is an adverb that means either actually, generally, or altogether. It conveys more the concept of thoroughness than of [Greek] -2 _ftnref1 [Greek] and signifies that the whole story has been reported. Because it stands first in the sentence, the adverb is emphatic and modifies the impersonal verb it is reported. Paul is not interested in revealing who the reporter is or how he has received the news. He only states the fact and does not provide details, except to say that in an earlier letter he had warned the Corinthians not to associate with immoral people (v. 9; see the commentary). b. (Content.There is immorality among you &a man has the wife of his father. Paul relates a report on immorality that pertains to a member of the church and the wife of the man's father. We are not told if the woman is a Christian or whether the man's father is living, but Paul gives the impression the father is still aliveGen. 35:22; Amos 2:7). In Jewish circles, the wording (wife of his fathermeant stepmother. Although the woman was not biologically related to the son, yet because of her marriage vows to his father she plunged the son into sin by having sexual relations with him. God repeatedly told the Israelites, Do not have sexual relations with your father's wife; that would dishonor your fatherLev. 18:8; 20:11; Deut. 22:30; 27:20). If a son purposely had sexual relations with his stepmother, the community would have to put him to death by stoning. Would a son be free to marry his stepmother if his father had passed away? In the first two centuries of the Christian era, some Jewish rabbis condemned a marriage of a proselyte son and his pagan stepmother, but others tolerated [Greek] -2 _ftnref2 [Greek] Is it possible that this tolerance was known to the Jewish people and proselytes in Corinth? We do not know. Regardless, Paul condemns the deed and calls attention to the conduct of the Gentiles in this matter. Of such a kind that does not even happen among the Gentiles. [Greek] -2 _ftnref3 [Greek] When Paul mentions the word Gentiles,he certainly wishes to indicate the severity of the sin which the member of the church had committed. Paul alludes to the Gentiles to prod the Christian community to take action instead of allowing one member to shame the entire congregation. As one rotten apple in a box can spoil its entire contents, so one reckless sinner can make the entire Corinthian church ineffective in its witness to the Gentile community. 2. And you are arrogant! Should you not rather be grieved? Put the man who practiced this deed out of your midst. Why were the Corinthians negligent in chastising this immoral person and expelling him? Paul's words are biting: You are arrogant. In the preceding chapter he stated that some of the Corinthians were arrogant in their talking (4:6, 18, 19). Now he addresses all the believers in Corinth, for he knows that the leaders have led the others astray. They have been haughty for some time already and continue to be proud. They think that they are free to decide not to do anything about this wickedness (6:12; 10:23), because they claim to possess superior knowledge (3:18; 8:1–2). Paul faces the difficulty of trying to reason with people who lack both humility and constraint. With a rhetorical question that expects an affirmative answer Paul queries, Should you not rather be grieved? Now that he has alerted them to a blot on the body of the church, he is asking them to begin a period of mourning. The verb (to grieverefers to sorrow for sin that has been committed either by oneself or by others. The Old Testament provides the example of Ezra, who mourned over the unfaithfulness of the exiles. They had returned to Jerusalem and rebuilt the temple, but had married foreign women belonging to the people around themEzra 10:1 [Greek] -2 _ftnref4 [Greek] Paul tells the Corinthians to likewise enter a period of grieving and thus exhibit repentance with godly sorrow. Subsequently they will humble themselves before God and experience his loving presence. The Corinthians must turn from their pride, show renewed obedience to God's law, and expel the evil man from the church. Paul says, Put the man who practiced this deed out of your midst. The Greek indicates that the man has committed an act of immorality, not that he continues to practice it. The time for church discipline has arrived. Discipline must take place, just as a surgeon must use a scalpel to remove a malignant tumor from a patient's body. If the Corinthians do not dismiss the immoral man from the church, the Christian community itself will be placed under divine condemnation (v. 13). The church of Jesus Christ is characterized by holiness and must remove the blatant and unrepentant sinner by excommunicating him. Conversely, removal accompanied by the church's repentance cleanses the body of Christ. 3. For even though I am absent in body but present in spirit, as if I were present I have already judged the man who has so committed this. a. Concession.For even though I am absent in body but present in spirit. In verses 2 and 3, Paul gives his outspoken judgment on the matter of immorality. For emphasis, he places the pronoun youin verse 2 over against the pronoun Iin verse 3. He admits that geographical distance separates him from the recipients of his letter, but this does not mean that his written words can be taken lightly. On the contrary, he is with the church in spirit, and in that sense he is giving personal leadership. In spirit he takes the gavel in hand, so to speak, and chairs the meeting of the local church. He knows that he and the Corinthians have to remove the blemish from the congregation. He does this through prayer on behalf of the Corinthians and through his epistle. b. Judgment.As if I were present I have already judged the man who has so committed this. Paul tells the congregation that he has taken action with respect to the immoral man. He speaks as though he is in Corinth and in essence repeats himself when he says, as if I were present. He writes the perfect tense, I have already judged, to indicate that he had made a decision as soon as he heard about the offense. Because Paul does not speak of an action but of a judgment there is no question here of divine judgment as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira. [Greek] -2 _ftnref5 [Greek] The wording is emphatic in the clause the man who hasso committed this. For the sake of style some translators delete the word so. A few translations, however, dutifully include it to show Paul's intended [Greek] -2 _ftnref6 [Greek] Paul writes a sequence of three concepts that serve as demonstratives (the man, so, this deed). In the Greek, he points out that the act of sinning happened in the past and has lasting effects for the church. Let no one think that Paul is far removed from the scene and therefore powerless. Paul is not impotent; he wants the church to take action guided by his judgment. In proper assembly, the church must remove the man who has committed the crime. Paul does not list a detailed procedure for church discipline, yet we are confident that the practice of confirming the truth by two or three witnesses had to be followed (Matt. 18:15–17). 4. When you come together and I am with you in spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5. in the name of our Lord Jesus deliver this man to Satan for destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord. a. (Meeting.The intent of Paul's words is to move the church at Corinth to eliminate immediately this evil from its midst. He instructs the members to meet in assembly and to do so as if he himself were present. While they are gathered, they should call on Jesus name, who himself had promised that where two or three people gather in his name he will be presentMatt. 18:20). In addition, they should know that Paul himself will be with them in spirit. They ought not to minimize his presence in spirit, as if his physical presence would be real and his spiritual presence illusory. No, not so for several reasons. First, Paul repeatedly writes, I am with you. Next, in the Greek he uses the emphatic personal adjective mywith the noun spirit. In English idiom, this adjective is deleted. Third, the phrase in spiritis synonymous with the phrase the power of our Lord Jesus. Paul speaks with apostolic authority which Jesus delegated to him; as an apostle he wields divine power. b. Translations.In verses 3, 4 and 5, Paul writes a lengthy sentence that lacks fluency and so reveals inner tension and agitation. The difficulty we face is the punctuation of this passage (vv. 3 [Greek] -2 _ftnref7 [Greek] The Greek original indicates that these verses can be construed as one loosely-connected sentence: For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus -2 _ftnref8 (KJV). This single sentence becomes unwieldy and fails to communicate Paul's intention. Modern translators present shorter sentences and introduce appropriate punctuation. But even then numerous questions remain, as is evident from the following translations. How should the phrase in the name of our Lord Jesusbe construed? This phrase can modify one of [Greek] -2 _ftnref9 [Greek] italicized clauses: I have already pronounced judgmentin the name of the Lord Jesus on the man who has done such a thing. When you are assembled &you are to deliver this man to Satan. -2 _ftnref10 (RSV) When you are assembledin the name of our Lord Jesus &hand this man over to Satan. -2 _ftnref11 (NIV) I as one who is present have already judged the one who has done this thingin the name of the Lord Jesus. When you are assembled &such a person should be handed over to Satan. [Greek] -2 _ftnref12 [Greek] When you and my spirit are gathered together &you should, in the name of the Lord Jesus, hand over to Satan such a manas this. -2 _ftnref13 (Cassirer) Many translators favor the first reading because Paul, although absent from Corinth in body but present in spirit, speaks with authority in Jesus name. His verdict, then, is not a personal opinion but is pronounced on Jesus behalf and with his approval. Conversely, there is wisdom in looking at a phrase in the context of the Greek text and linking it to the nearest phrase. When church officials read this epistle in Greek to the congregations, the hearers had to link the phrase in question to either the preceding or the succeeding words. If we follow this principle, we might favor either the second or the third reading. Many scholars endorse the second reading: When you come together in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit with the power of our Lord Jesus. They maintain that believers who gather in the name of Jesus know that he is the head and they are the body (Eph. 1:22–23). And these believers know that where two or three are gathered in Jesus name, he will be in their midst (Matt. 18:20). The objection to this reading is the repetitive phrase of our Lord Jesus. This phrase occurs with the nouns nameand powerand makes them indistinguishable. The third reading conveys the sense that the man committed sexual sin with his stepmother in the name of the Lord Jesus. But this reading meets some objections. First, because of textual variants, it is difficult to decide whether the reading should be our Lord Jesusor the Lord Jesus. In view of Paul's usual wording throughout the epistle he nearly always speaks of the Lord without the identification Jesusscholars prefer he reading with the personal pronoun our. Next, there appears to be an incongruity in the conduct of a Christian son who had illicit intercourse with his Gentile stepmother and invoked the name of Jesus to justify his sin. I suspect that the last name this sinner would invoke would be the name of our Lord Jesus. Last, if this were the case, we would have expected Paul to mention the misuse of Jesus name with scathing rebuke. The fourth reading seems best. If we take the prepositional phrase in the name of our Lord Jesuswith the clause deliver this man to Satan,the sentence conveys Paul's command to the Corinthian congregation to expel the man. Except for the phrase in the name of our Lord Jesus,verse 4 should be understood as a parenthetical statement. The emphasis, then, falls on Paul's command and the church's execution of it. The Corinthians must obey Paul and act on the basis of Jesus authority. Paul says: [I have already judged]; in the name of our Lord Jesus, deliver this man to Satan. He tells the members that when they come together they must take action, for both Paul's spirit and Jesus power are [Greek] -2 _ftnref14 [Greek] When the Corinthians act, they are aided by Paul's spiritual presence and Jesus power. c. (Destruction.Deliver this man to Satan. I have translated the verb to deliveras an imperative the Greek has an infinitive to show the severity of the case. Handing someone over to Satan is akin to the prescription Jesus gave his disciples: treat an unrepentant sinner as a pagan or a tax collectorMatt. 18:17). The command to deliver someone to Satan has a parallel in another epistle where Paul writes about some people shipwrecking their faith: Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme (I Tim. 1:20). Paul's command to hand a person over to Satan is the act of excommunication. Excommunication purges evil from the church (compare v. 13). Believers are safe in the hand of God, from which no one, not even Satan, can snatch them (John 10:28 29). But if a sinner is delivered to the prince of this world, he faces destruction. He no longer enjoys the protection which a caring Christian community provides. When adrift and deprived of spiritual support, he will come to his senses and subsequently repent. From the Old and New Testaments respectively we draw to examples of individuals who repented. Gomer, who as Hosea's sexually immoral wife personifies Israel, exclaims: I will go back to my husband as at first, for then I was better off than now (Hos. 2:7). And the prodigal son repented by confessing that he had sinned against God and against his father. He came to his senses after he herded pigs for a Gentile even on the sabbath and was physically starving. He had broken God's commands, but confessed his sin before God and of his own volition returned to his parental home. In the words of the father, the wayward son was dead but when he returned home he was alive again (Luke 15:24, 32). For destruction of the flesh. What does Paul mean by the word flesh? For lack of pertinent detail, we are forced to resort to either of two hypotheses. The first one is an explanation that flesh, when it pertains to the base part of man's physical life, causes him to [Greek] -2 _ftnref15 [Greek] In the hands of Satan, this part of a person's being perishes. We demur. Satan may destroy only that which God [Greek] -2 _ftnref16 [Greek] but he never leads a sinner to Christ and repentance. He is set on leading a sinner further away from God. In brief, Satan restrains rather than promotes the cause of Christ. Therefore, this explanation fails to merit favor. We prefer the second hypothesis. In addition to the act of excommunication, God permits Satan to attack and gradually weaken man's physical body (Job 2:4 6; II Cor. [Greek] -2 _ftnref17 ([Greek] Paul is not referring to a sudden demiseActs 5:1 10) but to a slow process of physical decline. During this process, the sinner receives ample time to reflect on his condition and [Greek] -2 _ftnref18 [Greek] That his spirit may be saved. The clause on the destruction of the flesh is grammatically subordinate to this main purpose clause. Even though the Greek word pneuma(spirit) in translation can refer to the Holy Spirit or man's spirit, translators understand the term to refer to not the divine but the human spirit. Nevertheless, one scholar has suggested that the Christian community had to expel the incestuous man to avoid offense to the presence of the Holy Spirit. [Greek] -2 _ftnref19 ([Greek] Certainly, Scripture teaches us not to grieve or stifle the Holy Spirit of GodEph. 4:30; I Thess. 5:19). But that is not the point of the current passage. We reject this interpretation for at least three reasons. First, verse 5 contrasts man's flesh and spirit, not human flesh and Holy Spirit. Next, Paul states that man's spirit may be saved, not that the presence of the Holy Spirit may be kept. And last, in the preceding verses (vv. 3 and 4) the word pneumaoccurs twice and refers to man's spirit, not to the Holy Spirit. The destruction of the flesh serves the purpose of making the sinner's soul whole again before he dies. The gift of salvation depends on repentance, which takes place during a person's earthly life, not after his death. Scripture clearly teaches us that repentance must take place on earth, not in hell. Physical death irrevocably closes the door to a second opportunity for repentance and salvation (Luke 16:19 31). Yet Paul writes that the man's spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord, which seems to point to the judgment day. He does not imply that the man will have to wait until the end of time to be saved. Rather, Paul means that in this life the forgiven sinner receives salvation and in the day of the Lord is counted among those who are glorified. Salvation is primarily an eschatological reality, experienced in the present to be sure, but to be realized fully at the Day of the Lord. [Greek] -2 _ftnref20 ([Greek] Also, the phrase day of the Lordcan refer to more than the end of time when the judgment will take place. It can also mean a unique period during which God's people rejoice in the Lord. The Old Testament prophets understood the phrase to mean a time in which God claims victory over the world and his people triumph with himIsaiah 2:11, 17 20; Zech. 14:7). In his infinite wisdom to bring a sinner to repentance, God uses various means and methods (I Peter 4:6). God is interested in the salvation of man's soul. In the day of our Lord Jesus. Paul hopes that even though Satan may destroy the physical body, the man's spirit may be saved at the judgment day. The question remains whether this man was restored physically and [Greek] -2 _ftnref21 [Greek] Practical Considerations in 5:3–5 When the Israelites entered Canaan and conquered Jericho, Achan transgressed God's command by taking items devoted to God. The people stoned him and thus removed God's wrath against sin (Josh. 7:25–26). God calls his people to be a holy people. In the Jerusalem church, Ananias and Sapphira purposely tried to deceive the Holy Spirit. Peter uncovered their deception; and God removed them from the Christian community by taking their lives (Acts 5:1 11). God wanted the followers of Jesus to honor the truth. Paul confronted the Corinthian church with the incestuous behavior of one of its members. With a direct command, he instructed the members to expel the man from the church in the name of the Lord. The man's excommunication consists of being delivered into the hands of Satan. Paul charges the church to purge itself of wickedness and evil and to embrace the virtues of sincerity and truth (v. 8). If Paul had not acted forcefully to exclude this man from the church, his sin would have continued to infect the entire congregation. The man's immoral conduct posed a direct threat to the existence of the church itself. Christians dwell in a glass house, so to speak, and the world is free to observe them. When the church fails to check a sin which the world condemns, the church has become ineffective. In our culture we observe a rapid growth of sects, cults, and religions other than Christianity. The reason for this phenomenal expansion is the church's lack of credibility. Its standards of morality fail to compare with those of other faiths. For many people it has become a sham: they see a church in which some leaders are corrupt, where discipline is lax, and where excommunication has become an obscure practice. The church today must deal seriously with sin. It must attempt to bring offenders to repentance and salvation or else resort to excommunication. In word and deed, it must exhibit an intense hatred for sin and a genuine desire for holiness. Such holiness demands ardent love for Jesus Christ and total obedience to his commands. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 5:1–5 Verse 1 [Greek] the adverb meaning altogether stands first in the sentence for emphasis and modifies the verb [Greek] (it is reported), which in the present tense is iterative. [Greek] the adjective denotes severity; the noun, which occurs twice, normally means fornication but in this context signifies incest. The [Greek] clause is more explanatory than either a result or a purpose [Greek] -2 _ftnref22 [Greek] [Greek] the position of this indefinite pronoun is unique; it is placed between [Greek] (wife) and [Greek] (of the father) and emphasizes both [Greek] -2 _ftnref23 [Greek] Verse 2 [Greek] the emphatic position of the pronoun with the conjunction is balanced by the introductory phrase [Greek] (for I) in verse 3. The particle [Greek] is part of a rhetorical question that calls for an affirmative response. [Greek] although this particle usually introduces a purpose clause, here an imperative structure makes sense. Thus [Greek] is imperatival. [Greek] the manuscript evidence for either this aorist participle or [Greek] is about evenly divided. Both participles have the same meaning in this verse, so that the choice is difficult indeed. Verse 3 [Greek] as the first word in the sentence, this personal pronoun is emphatic. The particle [Greek] stands by itself and is not balanced by a corresponding [Greek]. The present participle [Greek] (be absent) denotes concession. Its counterpart is [Greek] (yet present). Verses 4 5 [Greek] manuscript evidence for this personal pronoun appears to favor inclusion instead of omission. The presence of the word [Greek] following the noun [Greek] remains problematic because the external evidence of leading Greek manuscripts is strong for either inclusion or [Greek] -2 _ftnref24 [Greek] The possibility is that a scribe added the word to give extra weight to the phrase in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. [Greek] the aorist passive participle from the compound verb [Greek] (I gather) constitutes the genitive absolute construction, which extends to the next phrase ([Greek], and my spirit). [Greek] the aorist infinitive, denoting single action, takes the place of an imperative: deliver! b. A Timely Illustration 5:6–8 In the preceding verses, Paul explained the basis for his judgment to exclude the sinful brother from the Christian community. He now adds a vivid illustration taken from daily life: the process of baking bread. Paul uses the example of yeast that permeates a batch of dough and can contaminate the dough if the yeast harbors harmful bacteria. But to illustrate what he has in mind, he first has to remind the Corinthians of their sinful boasting. 6. Your boasting is not good. Do you know that a small amount of yeast causes the entire batch of dough to rise? In a few words, Paul repeats what he had been saying earlier (see v. 2). He rebukes the Corinthians for their arrogance in not removing the sinner from their midst. He had already told them not to boast in men but in the Lord (compare 1:31; 3:21; 4:7). He wanted to humble them by showing them the reality of their situation and the seriousness of sin. Comments John Calvin, For they were as proud as if they were living in the conditions of a Golden Age, when in reality they were surrounded by many shameful and unseemly things. [Greek] -2 _ftnref25 [Greek] If the Corinthian Christians do not act swiftly, the evil of immorality in their midst will destroy them all. Paul refers to yeast (also called leaven), which in his day consisted of dough retained from the time of the last baking. Liquid was added to a piece of this dough and was mixed with flour to start the process of fermentation. But if the yeast became infected with harmful bacteria, it would threaten the physical health of the people eating the baked bread. Hence, the cycle had to be abruptly broken by discarding the yeast. The illustration of contaminated yeast conveys the idea of its pervasiveness (Gal. 5:9) and its potential to bring harmful results. The Christians in Corinth, and especially those of Jewish descent, knew that at the time of the Passover celebration, every bit of yeast had to be removed from homes, and for an entire week Jewish people ate unleavened bread (Exod. 12:15). Also, from Jesus teachings the Jewish Christians in Corinth knew that yeast often symbolized [Greek] -2 _ftnref26 [Greek] The second part of verse 6 is a rhetorical question that demands an affirmative answer. Of course, the Corinthians were fully acquainted with the harmful results of infected yeast. They knew that the amount of yeast is relatively small in comparison to the batch of dough. How much more will a sexual scandal of such a kind that does not even happen among the Gentiles (v. 1) corrupt the entire Christian community in Corinth! 7. Clean out the old yeast, that you may be a new batch, unleavened, just as you are. For indeed Christ has been sacrificed as our Passover lamb. a. Clean out the old yeast. The first sentence of this verse seems to reveal an inherent contradiction. Paul commands the Corinthians to put away old yeast and at the same time states that they are a new batch, unleavened. But yeast must be interpreted symbolically in this context. Yeast stands for evil. Just as the Jews had to remove old yeast from their homes and eat unleavened bread for an entire week, so the Corinthians must purge evil from their midst. When Paul says that they are unleavened, he means that they have been sanctified by Christ (1:2; 6:11) and are called to live holy lives. Paul stresses the positive and makes the negative subordinate to it. That is, their sanctification in Christ Jesus should prompt the Corinthians forthwith to remove the evil from their midst. Paul wants the Corinthian church to cleanse itself, much as the Jews once a year cleansed their homes of every particle of yeast. b. That you may be a new batch. The removal of old yeast from the homes of the Israelites in Egypt occurred in haste and symbolized their liberation from slavery (Exod. 12:33–34, 39). Purging the old yeast from the Corinthian church likewise must be done quickly; it symbolizes freedom from slavery to sin, specifically the sin of the incestuous party. Prior to celebrating the Passover feast, the Israelites had to purge every particle of yeast from their homes, because the Passover bread had to be without leaven. So the Christians in Corinth had to remove every trace of evil from their midst and demonstrate that they are a new batch, that is, a new people in [Greek] -2 _ftnref27 [Greek] c. For indeed Christ has been sacrificed as our Passover lamb. Paul packs a volume of theology in a rather short [Greek] -2 _ftnref28 [Greek] Because he places this sentence not in a theological context but in a passage relating to discipline, he is concise. The imageryof the paschal lamb's slaughter on the eve of the Passover feast and Christ's death on the cross must have come quite naturally to [Greek] -2 _ftnref29 ([Greek] He reminds the Corinthians: The Israelites had to remove yeast from their homes before they could eat the Passover lamb. They then killed the lamb and put its blood on the sides and tops of their doorpostsExod. 12:7, 13). But when Christ was crucified, he, as the Lamb of God, became the supreme and final sacrifice for God's people (Heb. 9:26). He removed the sin of the world (Isa. 53:5–6; John 1:29). His people are sanctified because of his death on the cross. By bringing this theological outlook to mind, Paul expects the Corinthians to make a practical application and quickly remove sin from their midst. In a spiritual sense,Christians can celebrate Passover. Their sin has been purged through Christ's sacrificial [Greek] -2 _ftnref30 [Greek] The followers of Christ are saved from eternal death by the blood of the Passover lamb slain at Golgotha. Christians are set free from the burden of guilt and have been given the gift of eternal life. Is Paul giving a time reference in this passage that aids us in dating the epistle? No, because apart from the reference to Pentecost (16:8), this epistle is devoid of any type of chronology. From this passage we cannot deduce that Paul was about to celebrate the Jewish Passover in Ephesus. That would be putting something into the text instead of deriving something from it. 8. Therefore, let us celebrate the feast not with old yeast, namely, with the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with the unfermented bread of sincerity and truth. a. (Negative.Let us celebrate the feast not with old yeast, namely, with the yeast of malice and wickedness. Paul is not requesting the Corinthian Christians to observe the Jewish celebration of Passover. If he were asking them to do so, he would be denying the significance of Christ's atonement. In addition, he would be asking Gentiles to become Jews before he could accept them as Christians. Neither is Paul saying that the Corinthians should celebrate the Lord's Supper, for in a subsequent chapter (11:17–34) he will teach them about Holy Communion. No, Paul is speaking figuratively about the joy Christians have in knowing that they are cleansed from sin. This exhortation implies celebrating our freedom in Christ Jesus, working out our own salvationPhil. 2:12), and consecrating ourselves to do his will (Rom. 12:1–2; I Peter 2:5). The exhortation to celebrate a life of obeying the will of Christ excludes old yeast, that is, malice and wickedness. The expressions maliceand wickednessare explanations of the term old yeast,which itself describes one's old sinful nature. Unconverted man is characterized by the vices of ill will and evil. Ill will is the wicked disposition of a person and evil is the sinister exercise of that disposition. In Greek, Paul writes the word ponria(evil), which refers to the activities of the devil. b. Positive.[Let us celebrate the feast] with the unfermented bread of sincerity and truth. The language Paul employs is unmistakably metaphorical. He urges the readers to observe the feast of consuming unfermented bread, which means bread that is not contaminated and permeated by evil. This bread on which the Corinthians are to feed consists of sincerity or purity of mind. When Paul writes sincerity,he poses the opposite of the expression ill will. Purity of mind is an asset of the sanctified believer, whose purpose is to love the Lord and to love his neighbor as himself. Further, the term (truthis the converse of evil, Jesus calls himself the truthJohn 14:6) but describes the devil as the evil one (Matt. 13:19) and the father of lies (John 8:44). In earlier passage, Paul informed the Corinthian Christians that they have fellowship with Christ (1:9). Now he tells them to eat the bread of truth, which signifies that they should live a new life untarnished by the evil influences of impurity and [Greek] -2 _ftnref31 [Greek] Instead of instructing the Corinthians to adopt exclusive standards of morality, Paul directs their attention to the truth in Christ. With that truth they are able to live in harmony with all God's precepts including moral [Greek] -2 _ftnref32 [Greek] Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 5:7–8 Verse 7 [Greek] the aorist active imperative from the compound verb [Greek] (I clean out). The compound is more perfective (thorough) than directive. [Greek] in this context the adjective conveys the idea of a break with the old to be completely new. The adjective [Greek] means that the new exists together with the oldNewTestament . Verse 8 [Greek] here the particle does not introduce a result clause but is inferential and means therefore. The verb in the present active subjunctive is hortatory and denotes continued action. [Greek] literally, and not. This particle should be taken as an explanation of the term old yeast. 2. Excommunication 5:9–13 9 I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people. 10 I referred not to immoral people of this world, or greedy people and swindlers or idolaters, because then you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing you not to associate with anyone who, although he calls himself a brother, is an immoral person or a greedy person or an idolater or a slanderer or a drunkard or a swindler. With such a person do not even eat! 12 For what right do I have to judge those who are outside [the church]? Do you not judge those who are inside? 13 But God will judge those who are outside. Expel the evil man from among you. From the two Pauline epistles to the Corinthian church, we learn that Paul wrote two additional letters that are no longer extant. Before he penned I Corinthians, he already had sent the congregation an epistle with a message concerning immorality (5:9). And before he composed II Corinthians, he sent the church an epistle which may be called the sorrowful letter (II Cor. 2:4) and seems to be different from I Corinthians. Altogether Paul sent four communications to Corinth (see the Introduction). a. Miscommunication 5:9–11 9. I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people. 10. I referred not to immoral people of this world, or greedy people and swindlers or idolaters, because then you would have to leave this world. a. I wrote you in my letter. For several reasons we cannot assume that Paul is referring to this epistle. First, other than mentioning the incestuous man, he has not yet said anything about immoral people. Next, the phrase (I wrote you in my letter(literally, in the letter) suggests something that happened in the past; verse 11, but now I am writing, indicates a decided contrast. And last, Paul wrote many letters that have not become part of the New TestamentII Cor. 10:10). Accordingly, we understand Paul to allude to a previous letter that has not been preserved. b. Not to associate with immoral people. All we have left from Paul's earlier epistle is the above-mentioned clause, which in Greek consists of only three words and in English at least four: don't mingle with fornicators. The clause reflects Paul's concern for his readers living in the immoral city of Corinth. We lack further information on the content of the short letter of advice Paul had written, yet from his succeeding remarks we conclude that the Corinthians had misunderstood him. Now he explains what he has in mind, albeit in an awkward sentence whose meaning can best be conveyed by a paraphrase: c. I referred [Greek] -2 _ftnref33 [Greek] to immoral people of this world, or greedy people and swindlers or idolaters. Written communications often are open to misunderstanding. The writer means one thing but the reader understands another thing. In an oral dialogue one can ask for clarification and then receive an immediate answer. This is not the case with written correspondence, in which delays are common and anticipated. Lack of clarity, therefore, becomes a formidable hindrance to understanding. The Corinthians understood Paul's initial letter to tell them not to associate with sexually immoral people of the world for example, those in the marketplace, the workshop, and the sports arena. The readers had laid the letter aside because they realized that Paul's order could not be implemented. In this imperfect world, Christians cannot stay away entirely from immoral people; otherwise they might as well leave this world (John 17:14 18). However, Paul did not mean to say that the Corinthians should completely separate themselves from sexually immoral people. He meant to say: don't get involved with such people! (II Thess. 3:14). He intended that the Corinthian Christians not associate with a fellow church member who practices sexually immoral acts. He told them to expel such a person from their midst. He objects to the presence of the incestuous man in the Corinthian church and for that reason writes the phrase sexual immoralityfour times (vv. 1, 9, 10, 11). We deduce that in the previous letter he had expressed himself with a general term, immoral people,but now he is direct in his use of the singular: an immoral person (v. 11). The catalogue of vices (greed, swindling, idolatry) actually is an extension of Paul's prohibition not to associate with people who perpetrate sexual [Greek] -2 _ftnref34 ([Greek] The vices in this extended list pertain to the service of any idol instead of the living God. Greedy persons and swindlers serve not God but MoneyMatt. 6:24; Luke 16:13), and Jesus reveals the impossibility of serving both at the same time. Paul pointedly calls a greedy person an idolater (Eph. 5:5; see Gal. 5:20; Col. 3:5) who will not inherit God's kingdom. Such persons are not part of the kingdom but of the world. d. Because then you would have to leave this world. If a Christian wanted to separate himself from worldly people, he would have to depart from human society altogether. According to Jesus parable, the wheat and the tares grow together in the field until the harvest. Then the weeds will be cast into the fire and the wheat stored in the barn (Matt. 13:30). For the present, however, the believers has to live next door to the unbeliever. 11. But now I am writing you not to associate with anyone who, although he calls himself a brother, is an immoral person or a greedy person or an idolater or a slanderer or a drunkard or a swindler. With such a person do not even eat! a. But now I am writing you. The adversative butcontrasts the first words in verse 9, where Paul alluded to an earlier letter. Paul is saying, If any one doubted the purport of the former letter, it shall be impossible to mistake my meaning now. [Greek] -2 _ftnref35 [Greek] I explain the adverb nowas a reference to the present condition in the Corinthian church; it relates to time and to the matter concerning the incestuous [Greek] -2 _ftnref36 [Greek] b. [Do] not &associate with anyone who, although he calls himself a brother, is an immoral person. In his earlier epistle Paul wrote the collective expression immoral people,but in the present context, the word means an immoral person. To describe someone who is sexually immoral as a brother is to write a contradiction. These two concepts are mutually exclusive. But Paul qualifies his statement by saying that the immoral man calls himself a brother. Yet this person, because of his sin, cannot belong to the Christian community and is excluded from God's kingdom. His actions contradict everything the church teaches. If he remains within the Christian fellowship, the church can no longer be called Christian. c. A greedy person or an idolater. Paul repeats himself in this extended list of vices. Nevertheless, he wants the Corinthians to know that sexual immorality is not the only sin which the Christian community condemns. Paul's condemnation of greed and idolatry apparently addresses the social condition of ancient Corinth. Due to trade of goods, transportation of merchandise, and travelers from abroad, money ruled supreme. Love of money invariably leads to idol worship whatever the idol may be. Paul frequently warns the Christians not to engage in idol worship. The word (idolateroccurs four times in this epistle (5:10, 11; 6:9; 10:7) and once in Ephesians 5:5Rev. 21:8; [Greek] -2 _ftnref37 [Greek] This repeated warning reveals Paul's anxiety regarding idol worship, which he considered a blatant sin and a tribute to demonic [Greek] -2 _ftnref38 [Greek] d. A slanderer or a drunkard or a swindler. Two additional vices mentioned here are slander and drunkenness; Paul listed swindling in the preceding verse (v. 10). The list of sins he tabulates in this passage resembles some of the commandments of the Decalogue: do not practice idolatry, fornicate, steal, slander, or covet (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). Paul does not follow the sequence of the Ten Commandments; he stresses sins that were common in the culture of that day; he omits the command not to commit murder. In respect to the consumption of wine, both the Old and the New Testaments nowhere prescribe total abstinence. Only those bound by the Nazirite vow (Num. 6:3–4) and a few others are told to abstain (Lev. 10:9; Jer. 35:6, 8, 14; Ezek. 44:21). The Scriptures, however, denounce the drunkard and warn him about the spiritual consequences of his intemperance (e.g., 6:10). e. With such a person do not even eat! In an Eastern society, established norms of hospitality might not be broken. To not offer food to a relative, an acquaintance, a friend, or a guest could be interpreted as a declaration of war. The parable of the friend at midnight indicates that a host would be willing to incur his neighbor's displeasure in an effort to obtain food for his guest (Luke 11:5 [Greek] -2 _ftnref39 ([Greek] In a reversal of the established norms, Jesus often ate with tax collectors and sinners and was called their friendMatt. 11:19; Luke 15:2) and scandalized the religious leaders. Then, what is the point of Paul's injunction? The matter concerns church discipline. Jesus instructed his followers that his prescribed procedure for excommunication might result in a complete separation of the Christian community and the offending sinner (Matt. 18:17). The sinner is a blot on the integrity of the church (II Peter 2:13; Jude 12). Such a sinner must be excluded from Christian fellowship. Then he may learn to see the error of his way, repent, and return to the faith (II Thess. 3:14–15). By contrast, Christians could follow accepted social customs and eat with non-Christians. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 5:9–11 Verse 9 [Greek] this is not the epistolary aorist but the past tense of the verb (to writeRom. 15:15). In both verses 9 and 11, the compound present middle infinitive [Greek] (to associate) is used as an imperative in an indirect command structure. Verse 10 [Greek] this combination appears to signify I do not mean immoral people in general. [Greek] -2 _ftnref40 [Greek] [Greek] the first occurrence means the secular world, the second the entire world. [Greek] Greek editions including Nestle-Aland, the British and Foreign Bible Society, and Merk have the reading [Greek], which links the two nouns [Greek] (covetous persons) and [Greek] (swindlers). The Majority Text has the reading $ (or), thus mechanically conforming to the context. The reading [Greek] is strongly supported by both Alexandrian and Western witnesses. [Greek] -2 _ftnref41 [Greek] [Greek] with this conjunction, the clause reveals an ellipsis of a protasis in a contrary-to-fact conditional sentence: [if this were the case,] you would have to leave the world. The conjunction [Greek] is not temporal but rather causal, in the sense of for otherwise (see [Greek] -2 _ftnref42 [Greek] Verse 11 [Greek] this is the epistolary aorist. The writer views himself to be in place of the recipient of the letter; he writes the aorist but means the present. For a similar occurrence, see 9:15. [Greek] the present middle participle denotes concession: although he calls himself. [Greek] the combination of the negative particle with the conjunction means not even. In two verses Paul sets forth the legitimacy of applying church discipline. He presents a clear demarcation of the lines of authority with reference to himself, to the Corinthian congregation, and to God. He concludes this section with an appeal to the congregation to let the Scriptures have the last word on this subject. b. A Judgment 5:12–13 12. For what right do I have to judge those who are outside [the church]? Do you not judge those who are inside? a. Paul's right.Paul comes to the end of his discourse on excommunicating willful sinners. He refers to his misunderstood letter and his subsequent explanation (vv. 9 10): he is not talking about sinners outside the Christian community. When Paul uses the expression those who are outside,he discloses his Jewish background. The Jewish rabbis designated people who belonged to a different religion outsiders. [Greek] -2 _ftnref43 [Greek] The insiders were those adhering to the Jewish faith. In this passage, Paul applies these terms respectively to the world and to the church. He openly admits that he does not have a right to judge the world. In the next chapter, Paul asks the Corinthians if they know that the saints will judge the world (6:2). But that particular verse speaks of the last judgment and not about the present time. This is not to say that Paul condoned the sinful lives of unbelievers. On the contrary, when he walked the streets of ancient Athens, he was agitated because the city was full of idols (Acts 17:16). But Paul lacked authority to judge outside the church. b. The church's duty.Within the Christian community, not Paul but the entire church must judge those cases that call for decisive separation between church and world. When a member of the church intentionally persists in sin and refuses to repent, the church must exercise discipline. Then the church regards this person no longer as one of its own but rather as one of the world. Hence, Paul asks the Corinthians a rhetorical question that demands a positive answer: Do you not judge those who are inside? Anyone who claims to be a member of the church must pledge obedience to Jesus Christ. But if he or she chooses to live in disobedience to the Lord, the entire congregation must exclude this person from its ranks. If the church fails to judge, it places itself on the side of the sinner and is equally guilty before God. Not an individual church leader but the entire church is responsible for administering discipline to unruly members. Writes C. K. Barrett, Responsibility for judgment is in the hands of the whole body of believers, not of a small group of ministerial authorities. [Greek] -2 _ftnref44 [Greek] 13. But God will judge those who are outside. Expel the evil man from among you? c. God's task.In the Greek, the difference between the present or the future tense of the verb to judgedepends on an accent mark. But ancient manuscripts lacked accent marks, and therefore we are unable to determine whether Paul means to say God judges or God will judge. Translators are equally divided on this matter. Some favor the present tense and say that it points to [Greek] -2 _ftnref45 ([Greek] The judging of the world we defer to God, who is both omniscient and omnipotent. And with Abraham we query. Will not a Judge of all the earth do right?Gen. 18:25). He knows the lost and the saved of the people in the world. Other scholars prefer the future tense, in view of the first few verses of the next chapter (see the commentary on 6:1 [Greek] -2 _ftnref46 [Greek] In general, however, the difference is insignificant. God judges the people and will conclude this task on the judgment day. In this passage, Paul clearly contrasts the members of the Corinthian church, whom he emphatically addresses with the pronoun you(v. 12), and God (v. 13). The church administers discipline for the sake of its purity, while God judges the people of the world. God certainly judges erring church members, but the task of expelling unrepentant sinners is a duty the church must exercise. d. God's word.Paul's concluding statement is a line from the Scriptures, Expel the evil man from among you. The text with a slight variation appears repeatedly in [Greek] -2 _ftnref47 [Greek] The Old Testament passage in both the Hebrew and the Greek has the imperative verb expelin the singular. Paul, however, uses the second person plural of the present imperative to indicate that the entire congregation must be involved in the process of purging sin to achieve purity in the church. The passage echoes Paul's earlier directive to deliver the incestuous man to Satan (v. 5). Paul calls attention to both this man and any other person in the congregation who deliberately practices evil. Paul presumably has chosen the Greek word for evil that features a play on the Greek word for fornicator. [Greek] -2 _ftnref48 [Greek] The severity of expelling a sinner from the support and nurture of the church compares with the excommunication of social and moral outcasts in the Jewish society of Jesus day. When the sinner faces total isolation, the possibility of repentance is real. Church discipline is designed to cause contrition in the heart of the sinner and to nurture a desire to return to the care of the Lord Jesus. Greek, Words, Phrases, and Construction in 5:13 [Greek] the aorist imperative from the compound verb [Greek] (I drive away) has a directive connotation (compare v. 2). [Greek] away from yourselves. The Greek text of Deuteronomy 17:7and parallels has the reflexive pronoun [Greek]. This pronoun in the second person plural is introduced by the verb [Greek] (you must purge) in the second person [Greek] -2 _ftnref49 [Greek] Summary of Chapter 5 After telling the Corinthians that he can come to them to either punish or love them (4:21), Paul reveals that he has heard about immorality within the local church. He reveals that a man has had sexual relations with his father's wife. Paul rebukes the members of the church for being arrogant; he admonishes them to grieve and to expel the sinner from their midst. He himself already has decided to exclude the man from the congregation by delivering him to Satan and then instructs the church to do so. Using a domestic illustration, Paul notes that yeast in a small quantity permeates an entire batch of dough. But contaminated yeast he speaks figuratively of yeast as ill will and evil must be discarded for the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. Paul had written a letter to the Corinthians in which he ordered them to not associate with immoral people. Now he reveals that he had in mind not all the immoral people of the world, for then his readers would have to leave this world. Instead, he admonishes them not to associate with people in the church who are immoral, greedy, idolatrous, slanderous, drunk, or intent on swindling. He forbids them to have table fellowship with these people. Church members must judge fellow members who engage in evil practices. Conversely, God is the judge of sinners who are outside the church. Paul concludes his discourse by quoting an appropriate verse from the Old Testament. -2 _ftn1 1 The SEB has, It is being told everywhere. By contrast, JB reads, I have been told as an undoubted fact. -2 _ftn2 2 SB, vol. 3, p. 358. -2 _ftn3 3 Cicero condemns incest: Pro Cluentio5.11 14. -2 _ftn4 4 Bauer, p. 642. See also Brian S. Rosner, [Greek]: Corporate Responsibility in 1 Corinthians 5, NTS38 (1992): 470–63. -2 _ftn5 5 F. W. Grosheide, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p. 121. -2 _ftn6 6 KJV, NKJV, NASB, Cassirer. Bauer translates the combination soand thisas so basely (p. 597). -2 _ftn7 7 In my translation, I have made the phrase in the name of our Lord Jesuspart of verse 5. -2 _ftn8 KJV King James Version -2 _ftn9 8 Hans Conzelmann lists six choices and Leon Morris seven. Consult Conzelmann's 1 Corinthians: A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, ed. George W. MacRae, trans. James W. Leitch, Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975), p. 97; Morris's 1 Corinthians, rev. ed., Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series (Leicester: Inter-Varsity; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), pp. 84–85. -2 _ftn10 RSV Revised Standard Version -2 _ftn11 NIV New International Version -2 _ftn12 9 Jerome Murphy-O Connor, I Corinthians V, 3 5, RB84 (1977): 245; Gerald Harris, The Beginnings of Church Discipline: 1 Corinthians 5, NTS37 (1991): 1–21. -2 _ftn13 Cassirer A New Testament Translation, E. Cassirer -2 _ftn14 10 Refer to G. A. Cole, 1 Corinthians 5:4& with my Spirit, ExpT98 (1987): 205. -2 _ftn15 11 (N. G. Joy, Is the Body Really to Be Destroyed?1 Corinthians 5:5), BibTr39 (1988): 429–36; Anthony C. Thiselton, The meaning of Sarxin 1 Corinthians 5.5: A fresh Approach in the Light of Logical and Semantic Factors, SJT26 (1973): 204–28; J. Cambier, La Chair et l Esprit en1Cor. v. 5, NTS15 (1969): 221–32. -2 _ftn16 12 See, however, T. C. G. Thornton, Satan God's agent for punishing, ExpT83 (1972): 151–52. -2 _ftn17 13 Colin Brown, among others, states that physical destruction is not envisagedNIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 466 . -2 _ftn18 14 Frederic Louis Godet, Commentary on First Corinthians(1886; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1977), p. 257; Morris, 1 Corinthians, p. 86. -2 _ftn19 15 Adela Yarbro Collins, The Function of Excommunication in Paul, HTR73 (1980): 263. -2 _ftn20 16 Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), p. 213. -2 _ftn21 17 Consult E. Fascher, Zu Tertullians Auslegung von 1 Kor 5, 1 5 (De Pudicitia c. 13 16), ThLZ99 (1974): 9–12; Brian S. Rosner, Temple and Holiness in 1 Corinthians 5, TynB42.1 (1991): 137–45. -2 _ftn22 18 C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, 2d ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960), p. 140. Bauer lists it as a result clause (p. 900). -2 _ftn23 19 Friedrich Blass and Albert Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans. and rev. by Robert Funk (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), #473.1. -2 _ftn24 20 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 3d corrected ed. (London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 550. -2 _ftn25 21 John Calvin, The first Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, Calvin's Commentaries series, trans. John W. Fraser (reprint ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), p. 109. -2 _ftn26 22 (Matt. 16:6, 11; Mark 8:15; Luke 12:1. The parable of the yeast is an exceptionMatt. 13:33; Luke 13:21). -2 _ftn27 23 Consult Jean Héring, The First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corinthians, trans. A. W. Heathcote, P. J. Allcock (London: Epworth, 1962), p. 36; SB, vol. 3, pp. 359–60. -2 _ftn28 24 Dean O. Wenthe, An Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 5:7b, Springfielder38 (1974): 134–40. -2 _ftn29 25 Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology(Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity, 1981), p. 464. -2 _ftn30 26 Refer to J. K. Howard, Christ Our Passover: A Study of the Passover-Exodus Theme in 1 Corinthians, EvQ41 (199): 97–108. -2 _ftn31 27 Anthony C. Thiselton, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 886. -2 _ftn32 28 Consult Ralph P. Martin, New Testament Foundations: A Guide for Christian Students, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), vol. 2, p. 397. -2 _ftn33 29 I was not, of course, referring to people in general who are &(REB). Bauer has by no means (p. 609) and Thayer not entirely (p. 476), but these last two translations fail to communicate. -2 _ftn34 30 Peter S. Zaas, Catalogues and Context: 1 Corinthians 5and 6, NTS34 (1988): 622–29. -2 _ftn35 31 G. G. Findlay, St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians, in vol. 3 of The Expositor's Greek Testament, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, 5 vols. (1910; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961), p. 812. -2 _ftn36 32 Bauer has as things now stand(p. 545). -2 _ftn37 33 (The noun idolatryappears four times in the New TestamentI Cor. 10:14; Gal. 5:20; Col. 3:5; I Peter 4:3). -2 _ftn38 34 Friedrich Büchsel, TDNT, vol. 2, p. 380; Wilhelm Mundle, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 286. -2 _ftn39 35 Refer to Simon J. Kistemaker, The Parables of Jesus(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), p. 177. -2 _ftn40 36 Blass and Debrunner, Greek Grammar, #433.2. -2 _ftn41 37 Metzger, Textual Commentary, p. 551. -2 _ftn42 38 Bauer, p. 284 -2 _ftn43 39 SB vol. 3, p. 362. -2 _ftn44 40 C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, Harper's New Testament Commentaries series (New York and Evanston: Harper and Row, 1968), p. 133. -2 _ftn45 41 Godet, First Corinthians, p. 278. -2 _ftn46 42 Fee, First Corinthians, p. 220 n. 7. -2 _ftn47 43 Deut, 17:7; 19:19; 21:21; 22:21, 24; 24:7. -2 _ftn48 44 Consult Peter S. Zaas, Cast Out the Evil Man from Your Midst1 Corinthians 5:13b , JBL103 (1984): 259–61. -2 _ftn49 45 Blass and Debrunner, Greek Grammar, #288.1. 6. Immorality and Lawsuits, part 2 (6:1–20) Outline (continued) 6:1–11 3. Litigations 6:1–3 a. The Saints Will Judge 6:4–6 b. The Wise Will Speak 6:7–8 c. The Humble Will Endure 6:9–11 d. The Ungodly Will Forfeit 6:12–20 4. Immorality 6:12–14 a. Permission 6:15–17 b. Prostitute 6:18–20 c. Purchased 3. Litigations 6:1–11 6 1 Does any one of you, when he has a lawsuit against someone, dare to go to law before the ungodly instead of the saints? 2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is judged by you, are you not competent to settle trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more ordinary matters? 4 If then you have cases of ordinary matters, do you appoint men who are of no account in the church? 5 I say this to your shame. Is it actually possible that there is no wise man among you who is able to be an arbitrator between his brothers? 6 However, a brother goes to law against a brother and that before unbelievers? 7 It is, then, already an utter defeat for you that you have lawsuits against yourselves. Why not rather be treated unjustly? Why not rather be defrauded? 8 But you treat unjustly and defraud, yes, even your brothers. 9 Or do you not know that the ungodly will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, homosexuals, sodomites, 10 thieves, greedy persons, drunkards, slanderers, swindlers none of them will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. However, you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. For Paul, the purpose of Christianity is to permeate the world, to influence and change it according to the norms of the gospel. But Paul notices that in Corinth the opposite is taking place. The world is entering the Christian community to conform it to worldly standards. Evidence of this is the matter of court cases that are not settled within the confines of the Christian community but are taken to worldly judges. The Christian brothers who take their cases to non-Christians are causing the church to be a laughingstock in the Gentile world. Paul interrupts his discussion on immorality to instruct the Corinthians on the course they ought to take in regard to lawsuits. The Greeks had a penchant for listening to lawyers debate cases at a court held near the marketplace in every city. The Jews in Israel and in the Dispersion had their own courts, for they were forbidden in the Talmud to go to Gentile judges.^[1] Lawsuits that involved two Jews were settled in a Jewish court. In Paul's opinion, Christians also ought to settle disputes within the confines of their own fellowship. The developing church in a Gentile world should take a leaf from the Jewish notebook on conducting lawsuits in their own circles. a. The Saints Will Judge 6:1–3 1. Does any one of you, when he has a lawsuit against someone, dare to go to law before the ungodly instead of the saints? As with the report concerning the incestuous man (5:1), we are unable to determine how Paul learned about Christians bringing lawsuits against fellow Christians to a non-Christian judge. Nor are we able to know what kind of a lawsuit Paul has in mind. We assume that Paul's discussion on judging (5:12–13) reminded him of another problem in the Corinthian church.^[2] In the context of a relatively few verses, he discusses the problem in terms not of details but of principles. a. When [any one of you] has a lawsuit against someone. The phrase any one of you is purposely general, for Paul does not isolate any specific case. If even one Christian initiates a lawsuit, he has already violated a principle that Christ taught his followers, namely, to seek the good of one's fellow man even if he is an enemy (Luke 6:27). Should a Christian ever contemplate bringing a lawsuit against anyone? Yes, if he observes and fulfills the royal law, Love your neighbor as yourself (James 2:8). Also note the following points: First, Paul makes no distinction between a believer and an unbeliever but merely writes against someone. Next, he is not interested in detail but in principles. He knows that a court case often is a fight unto death in which irreparable harm (economic, psychological, and spiritual) is done to parties. ^[3] The person who sues another person is bent on obtaining, under cover of law, this party's financial resources. He is intent on winning the case regardless of the damaging effect the trial may have on the defendant. John Calvin, who studied law at two French universities before he became a theologian, keenly observed that the parties involved in lawsuits were motivated by greed, impatience, revenge, hostility, and obstinacy. He writes: Indeed wherever law-suits occur frequently, or the parties are obstinate in joining issue with each other with the utmost rigour of the law, it is perfectly obvious that their minds are inflamed far too much by wrongful, greedy desires, and that they are not prepared for calmness of mind and endurance of wrongs, according to the commandment of Christ.^[4] The underlying motive for civil lawsuits is often incompatible with one's Christian profession. b. Does any one of you &dare to go to law before the ungodly instead of the saints? Today's secular world urges people to demand their rights and, if denied, to take a person or an agency to court. But the Bible teaches love which, when put to practice, translates into conciliation. Disputes should be settled through mediation in a spirit of promoting each other's interests. Elsewhere Paul gives additional instruction when he says, No one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him (I Thess. 4:6). Paul frankly asks the Corinthians whether anyone can bring himself to go to law. ^[5] He actually queries whether any Corinthian has the audacity to take a fellow Christian to court for the purpose of returning evil for evil instead of applying the Golden Rule (Luke 6:31). He wants to know if anyone is so brazen as to seek judgement from sinners and not from God's holy people (NJB). The Greek word adikoi, which I have translated ungodly, means unbelievers; the other side of the proverbial coin is the word hagioi, which signifies holy ones. The point Paul is making is that the Corinthians ought not to give the world an opportunity to ridicule Christ and to divide his church. By going to a Gentile judge, the Corinthians are washing their dirty linen in public! ^[6] If the Christians have a disagreement, let them settle it in the presence of God's own people (Matt. 18:17). They should fulfill the command to love their neighbor as themselves. 2. Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is judged by you, are you not competent to settle trivial cases? a. Knowledge. Do you not know? At least six times in this chapter,^[7] Paul reminds the readers of lessons about the end of time and morality that he taught them on earlier occasions. He engages them in a dialogue and they must respond positively to the rhetorical questions he poses. Here the question is whether the saints know that they will sit in judgment on the world (Matt. 19:28; Luke 22:30; Rev. 20:4). Of course, the Corinthians remember the lesson Paul taught them about the judgment day, when the books will be opened and everyone appears before God's throne. b. Authority. The saints will judge the world. We are confident that Paul was acquainted with the teaching of intertestamental literature that speaks of the saints judging and ruling the nations and the peoples of the world (see, e.g., Wis. 3:8). He applies this teaching to the day of judgment. At that time, the roles will be reversed, for believers will be judging the sinful world including their earthly judges. The saints not only will judge, but also will reign with Christ in the age to come (II Tim. 2:12). Incidentally, Polycarp, who quotes the words the saints will judge the world, comments that Paul teaches this doctrine (Epistle to the Philippians 11.3). Paul has a follow-up question: And if the world is judged by you, are you not competent to settle trivial cases? He employs the literary device of going from the greatest to the smallest.^[8] If the believers will judge the world on the judgment day, they ought to be able to take care of common matters among themselves today. They should be able to mediate problems in the congregation and settle the matters to the satisfaction of everyone involved. Compared with their momentous duties in the life to come, they certainly are competent to take care of trivial court cases in this life. To their shame, however, they fail to do so. Paul makes another comparison, albeit implicit: If the Corinthians receive the singular honor of judging the world, how much more do they dishonor God's name and cause when they bring insignificant court cases before a Gentile judge. By contrast, Paul teaches his readers to love (that is, to honor) God and to love their neighbor. 3. Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more ordinary matters? Note that Paul includes himself when he writes the first person plural. He probably had earlier spoken about the fall of the angels and that God would judge them (Isa. 24:21–22; II Peter 2:4; Jude 6; Rev. 20:10). We presume, however, that Paul is speaking about both the angels who left their former positions of authority and those who in purity and faithfulness continue to serve God. God's children are greater and higher in rank than the angels, for these reasons: First, man is created in God's image and has been redeemed by Christ. Next, because angels lack a physical body, they are not created in God's image and are not helped by Christ (Heb. 2:16). Third, God sends angels forth to serve man, who is about to inherit salvation (Heb. 1:14). While fallen angels receive their just punishment, holy angels continue in their glorious service. Once again, Paul uses the familiar literary device of reasoning from the greatest to the smallest. Holy angels surround God's throne and as such are far above earthly woes and cares, while we mortals cope with ordinary matters on a daily basis. The comparison is unique, because this comparison occurs only here in Scripture. How much more, therefore, should we be able to settle commonplace concerns? Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:1–3 Verse 1 [Greek] this is a technical phrase current in legal circles: having a suit against his neighbour. ^[9] The preposition [Greek] means against. And in context, the term [Greek] refers not to a Jew or a Gentile but to a fellow Christian with whom the plaintiff has an adversarial relation. [Greek] the middle voice of this present infinitive conveys a reciprocal idea, as if the pronoun [Greek] appeared in the context: to judge one another. ^[10] [Greek] when this preposition is followed by the genitive case, it denotes in the presence of. Verses 2 3 [Greek] although ancient manuscripts lacked accent marks, the context demands not the present [Greek] (they judge) but the future tense. The passive form [Greek] with the prepositional phrase [Greek] features an instrumental dative, judged by you. [Greek] the noun signifies lawsuits and the adjective is an elative superlative that means very small. [Greek] here is an elliptical expression that is similar to [Greek] and means not to speak of. ^[11] b. The Wise Will Speak 6:4–6 4. If then you have cases of ordinary matters, do you appoint men who are of no account in the church? a. Versions. The translations of this particular verse vary with respect to punctuation and interpretation. Is the second part of the verse a command, a statement of fact, or a question? The script in the ancient Greek manuscript was written without punctuation. Hence, editors and translators of the Greek text must determine the meaning of the text, usually by studying the context. Here are three representative versions: Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, appoint as judges even men of little account in the church. (NIV) But when you have matters of this life to be judged, you bring them before those who are of no account in the Church. (NJB) If you then have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge? (NKJV) The first six verses of this chapter contain a number of questions. Within this sequence, the position of an imperative at the end of a sentence is uncommon (see NIV). Even a statement of fact (NJB) disrupts the flow of the interrogative sentences. It then appears logical to take verse 4 as an interrogative statement rather than a declarative or an imperatival statement. If we understand the verse to be interrogative, how should we interpret it? b. Interpretation. From the preceding verse (v. 3), the expression ordinary matters is repeated, as is the term cases from verse 2. On the basis of these two verses, Paul comes to a conclusion with a conditional clause: If then you have cases of ordinary matters. He completes the sentence with a second clause, which is open to various interpretations. For instance, some translators consider the subject of the clause to be Gentile judges: those who are of no account in the church (NJB). Such an interpretation infers that these judges were held in contempt by the members of the Christian church (I Tim. 2:1–2), which seems unlikely. It also seem unlikely that the Corinthian Christians appointed Gentile judges, for these judges had already been appointed by the state.^[12] Other translators, however, understand the judges to come from the Christian community itself. But would the community appoint judges who were considered to be of little significance or who were not respected? If Paul is asking a rhetorical question, he expects a negative answer. Moreover, he indirectly rebukes the Corinthians for their arrogance in looking down on fellow Christians. A Christian of little significance, according to Paul, is at least as competent as a non-Christian judge. Thus Paul applies the principle of contrast. c. Conclusion. No translation or interpretation is free from difficulties. The flow of the passage clearly depicts Paul's condemnation of the practice of Christians bringing lawsuits before Gentile judges. It seems that he prefers instead a principle used in biblical history. When Moses served God's people as judge in the Sinai desert, his father-in-law Jethro advised him to appoint assistant judges. He said, Select capable men from all the people men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. Have them serve as judges for the people at all times, but have them bring every difficult case to you; the simple cases they can decide themselves. [Exod. 18:21–22] Moses listened to Jethro and appointed capable and honorable men to serve the people as judges; these men took care of the trivial cases while Moses decided the difficult ones. Likewise, King Jehosaphat of Judah appointed judges in all the fortified cities of the land (II Chron. 19:5). When the Jews returned to Israel from Babylon, they adopted this system, which was still current in apostolic times. Indeed, in every Jewish community throughout the Dispersion, the Jews had their own court of justice, their [Greek] d�n.^[13] Paul is now asking the Christians that they, too, appoint respectable and wise men from their own community to serve as judges. 5. I say this to your shame. Is it actually possible that there is no wise man among you who is able to be an arbitrator between his brothers? The Corinthian Christians long ago should have extended the principles of Christian faith to legal matters. They should have appointed wise and capable men from their own community to settle trivial cases for fellow Christians. Accordingly, Paul rebukes his readers for their neglect and apathy. Although he earlier wrote that he would not put them to shame (4:14), now he openly tells them that his words are meant to shame them. He hopes that his rebuke will induce the readers to take immediate action to remedy the situation. a. Is it actually possible that there is no wise man among you? Here is one more rhetorical question to which the Corinthians are expected to respond: Of course there is a wise man in our community. Paul wants them to appoint a man who is able to act as mediator, that is, a person who arbitrates between two people to bring about harmony. This wise man was comparable to a Jewish rabbi who settled problems in a Jewish community either in Israel or abroad.^[14] b. [A wise man] who is able to be an arbitrator. Paul is not suggesting that the Corinthians appoint judges to hold permanent office (see v. 7). On the contrary, this passage breathes a spirit of mediation rather than revenge. The wise man acts not as a judge who delivers a verdict, but rather as a mediator who seeks to bring two parties together for mutual understanding and agreement. c. Between his brothers. The Greek sentence is extremely terse in the last part of this verse: between his brothers, which we must understand to mean two Christian brothers. I have combined the reference to the two men in the expression brothers. 6. However, a brother goes to law against a brother and that before unbelievers? This verse can be understood as either an exclamation or a question. In light of the near repetition (see v. 1), we favor an interrogative which, in the last part of this verse, emphatically expresses Paul's feelings. The fact that a Christian brother is taking a fellow Christian to court is sufficient proof that he has set aside the command to love his neighbor. Within the Christian community this royal law (James 2:8) must function without restrictions. For Paul, this is an incredible situation that denies the fundamentals of the Christian faith. Can a plaintiff who goes to court have the spiritual, emotional, physical, and financial well-being of the Christian brother in mind? Writes Calvin, If a Christian therefore wants to prosecute his rights in a court of law, without going against God, he must take special care not to come into court with any desire for revenge, any bad feeling, any anger, or in a word any poisonous thing. In all this love will be the best guide.^[15] Even though the ideal is difficult to attain, the command to love one another is a fundamental precept for the Christian. Paul returns to this point in the next few verses. But now he queries whether the Corinthians are taking fellow believers to law before a non-Christian judge. In another place (II Cor. 6:15) Paul asks: What do believers and unbelievers have in common? The reply is emphatically negative. Moreover, the response implies that when these two categories of people come together, the believer garners detrimental results. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:4–6 Verse 4 [Greek] these inferential particles may be translated in colloquial English as Why, I myself thought.& ^[16] [Greek] the particle with the verb in the present subjunctive introduces the protasis of a conditional sentence that expresses probability. The apodosis has the verb [Greek] as the present indicative in interrogative form: Are you appointing? Verses 5 6 [Greek] manuscript evidence favors this reading instead of [Greek] (compare 15:34 and variant). The preferred reading denotes the content of speaking; the variant signifies the act of speaking. [Greek] this is a contraction of the form [Greek] (there is), which with the negative [Greek] means there is no. The duplication of [Greek] in [Greek] (no one) emphasizes the negative. [Greek] the compound verb differs in meaning from the simple verb [Greek] (v. 6). The compound means to arbitrate, the simple connotes to judge.^[17] [Greek] the singular noun fails to complete the sentence. It should have been either in the plural or repeated in the singular. &N[ew] T[estament] writers merely follow in the beaten track of Greek usage with proper freedom and individuality. ^[18] [Greek] in context, this preposition is used in an adversarial sense as against. c. The Humble Will Endure 6:7–8 7. It is, then, already an utter defeat for you that you have lawsuits against yourselves. Why not rather be treated unjustly? Why not rather be defrauded? a. Defeat. From a worldly perspective, Paul turns everything upside down when he says that winning a lawsuit is a defeat for the Corinthians. Instead of telling them that they should demand their rights, he rebukes the Corinthians for degrading fellow Christians by taking them to court. In the preceding verse (v. 6), Paul notes a single incident of a Christian who files a lawsuit against a fellow Christian. But in this verse he addresses all the Corinthians. In other words, the practice of suing one another appeared to be not uncommon in the Christian community. Paul states that this custom is unacceptable for believers; for them a lawsuit is an utter defeat. ^[19] Usually, before a person takes someone to court, he has already spent many hours discussing his grievances in the presence of the defendant and others. Paul's use of the word already points to this preliminary activity during which, in his opinion, the controversy should have been settled. If the plaintiff wants to proceed and initiate a lawsuit, he faces already an utter defeat, not only for himself but for the entire Christian community. What is Paul trying to tell the Corinthians? Simply this: Even if a judge should rule in favor of the plaintiff, the court case already has had a detrimental effect on both the defendant and the entire Christian community. The church demonstrates a lack of love in an atmosphere of hostility and is unable to be an effective witness to the world. The plaintiff should not receive any praise for winning a lawsuit, because he does so at the expense of the Christian community. Comments John Albert Bengel, Praise is not expressly mentioned here, but some such antithesis is intended. ^[20] The word choice in the first part of this verse is unique. Paul does not say that the Corinthians had lawsuits against one another, but against themselves. The entire Christian community, so to speak, becomes a defendant before Gentile judges. The result is that these lawsuits are devastating to the morale of the Christian fellowship. b. Injustice. Why not rather be treated unjustly? As if Paul anticipates objections to his words, he poses a question that implies a command for the Corinthians. In a subtle way, he reminds his readers of Jesus word, If someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well (Matt. 5:40; compare Luke 6:29 30). Anyone instinctively protects his possessions, but Paul, following Jesus instruction, teaches his readers not to cling to earthly belongings. Rather, they should be willing to endure injustice. c. Swindled. Why not rather be defrauded? If anything goes contrary to our sense of values, it is to permit ourselves to be robbed. If the Corinthians are still not convinced that material possessions have only transitory value, Paul asks them to submit to theft and that in a court of law. By asking the Corinthians to sustain a loss of material possessions, he encourages them to pursue love for one another and reveal a forgiving spirit. A spirit of meekness and unselfishness that willingly endures wrong (I Peter 2:19–23), not a spirit of greed, gains approbation before God. He who fosters this attitude follows in the steps of Jesus. 8. But you treat unjustly and defraud, yes, even your brothers. In this verse, Paul shows that he is fully aware of the effect litigations have had on the Corinthian community. These lawsuits have nursed an attitude of envy, anger, and hatred that now threatens the essence of the church's fellowship. Two issues surface in this text. First, the concept of Christian fellowship is severely undermined by the litigious spirit of the Corinthians. How could a Christian still call a fellow church member a brother in the Lord if he had injured him morally, emotionally, and financially in a lawsuit? The lack of love and the presence of hatred has made true Christian fellowship impossible. When individuals attack each other, the unity of the body disintegrates (compare 12:25). A second concern is whether a Christian may sue in court at all. If a believer ought not to initiate a lawsuit, how does justice function within the context of a Christian fellowship? A Christian should lay aside any desire to treat his brother unjustly or to defraud him. Instead he should seek the material well-being of his fellow man and thus fulfill positively the commandment not to covet the possessions of one's neighbor. For Paul, the conduct of the Corinthians is entirely contrary to Christian principles. They ought to solve their disputes and differences through mediation, promote the welfare of the Christian community, and bear a clear witness to the world. Practical Considerations in 6:7–8 May a Christian ever resort to court action? The Scriptures speak affirmatively to this question. To illustrate, the Book of Acts clearly shows that Paul used the Roman judicial system a number of times. Granted that he did not initiate lawsuits, he nevertheless appealed to Roman law to defend himself and the cause of Christianity (Acts 16:37; 22:25; 25:11). Furthermore, God has instituted civil government, which includes the judiciary. Government officials and judges are appointed by God to serve the public and ensure the welfare of citizens (Rom. 13:1–5). Should the Christian community have its own judges and lawyers? Here also the answer is affirmative. Yet Christians ought to refrain from filing lawsuits, for litigation is a blot on the community. Christians should recognize that litigation is a manifestation of an absence of community. ^[21] Lawsuits contribute to the disintegration of a society and cause individualism to reign supreme. When this happens, loving concern for one's neighbor is extinguished in an atmosphere of rank egoism. Society in general but Christians in particular ought to settle differences in a climate of mediation and reconciliation. Christian citizens should be in the forefront to foster respect for one's fellow man and thus contribute to building a stable society. They must demonstrate that esteem and love for one another are the hallmarks of decency and morality. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:7 [Greek] the adverb already stands first in the sentence for emphasis. With it Paul points to a process that precedes court action. The particle [Greek] is balanced by the particle [Greek] that should be supplied in the rhetorical questions Paul poses. [Greek] the preposition has an adversarial connotation ( against; see v. 6). The reflexive pronoun is not synonymous with [Greek] (each other). The later would bring out the idea of diversity of interest, [while] [Greek] emphasizes that of identity of interest. ^[22] [Greek] &[Greek] these two verbs in the present tense and middle voice express the idea to let yourselves to be wronged and robbed. ^[23] These two middle forms express a permissive or perhaps a causative sense. d. The Ungodly Will Forfeit 6:9–11 After Paul's discussion on court cases and their devastating effect on the Christian community, he broadens his discourse by mentioning sinful people who are barred from God's kingdom. In this segment, Paul distinguishes between those who deliberately sin and the Corinthians who are cleansed from sin. As he alludes to these immoral sinners, he once again lists some of the same categories of evil people (see 5:9–11). 9. Or do you not know that the ungodly will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, homosexuals, sodomites, 10. thieves, greedy persons, drunkards, slanderers, swindlers none of them will inherit the kingdom of God. a. Or do you not know? Paul continues with the conjunction or that links this passage to the preceding verses (vv. 2 and 3), which feature the same rhetorical questions. Do the Corinthians know and understand the spiritual implications of lawsuits and sinful lives? The rhetorical question that Paul raises in this verse demands a positive answer. b. The ungodly will not inherit the kingdom of God. Paul queries whether the Corinthians are aware of basic facts that pertain to God's kingdom. First, who will inherit this kingdom? Certainly not the ungodly, whose sexual immorality and other sins disqualify them. They are people whose desire is to do wrong.^[24] They are inclined, unlike the righteous, to inflict damage on others and thus are dissimilar to the righteous. Paul does not have in mind persons who see the error of their way and repent. He refers instead to those who willfully continue in their sins and glory in them. Next, the word inherit relates to sons and daughters who share an inheritance in the kingdom and in this case are the children of God. They receive the inheritance not by works but by grace (Eph. 2:8–9). Unrepenting sinners, however, are excluded from the kingdom. Third, the verb to inherit means that there is no possibility that unrepentant sinners at some time will share God's blessing. The use of the future is definite: they will never inherit the kingdom. And last, the concept kingdom occurs repeatedly in the synoptic Gospels, especially in that of Matthew. But in his first epistle to the Corinthians, Paul mentions the concept only five times (4:20; 6:9, 10; 15:24, 50). With the exception of 4:20, all these passages relate to the future blessings of the coming kingdom.^[25] c. Do not be deceived; immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, homosexuals, sodomites. Once more Paul exhorts the readers not to be deceived (see 3:18);^[26] they should be fully aware of the evil society in which they live. He enumerates sins that pertain to sexual immorality and mentions first the fornicators (see the commentary on 5:9, 10, 11). He uses this term to describe illicit intercourse either between a married and an unmarried person or between two unmarried persons. Paul affirms Jesus doctrine that sexual immorality makes a person unclean (Matt. 15:19–20). Notice that Paul places the idolaters between immoral people and adulterers. The inclusion of idolaters in this list of sexual sins seems slightly misplaced. But in the Gentile world of that day idolatry often was a source of sexual perversion (Rom. 1:18–32). The next three categories are adulterers, homosexuals, and sodomites. The first Greek expression, moichoi (adulterers), describes the sexual sin which a married person commits with someone who either is or is not married; it results in breaking the marriage bond. The next Greek word, malakoi (homosexuals), relates to men and boys who allow themselves to be misused homosexually. ^[27] This word connotes passivity and submission. By contrast, the third Greek term, arsenokoitai (sodomites), represents men who initiate homosexual practices (I Tim. 1:10). They are the active partners in these pursuits.^[28] From Greek and Latin prose, pottery, and sculpture, we learn that preoccupation with sexual practices was prevalent among men in the first century.^[29] These men wallowed in homosexual sins and rivaled even the inhabitants of ancient Sodom (Gen. 19:1–10; see also Lev. 18:22; 20:13). d. Thieves, greedy persons, drunkards, slanderers, swindlers. Paul now turns from sexual sins to those that pertain to material possessions, physical and verbal abuse, and robbery. He seems to echo the Decalogue, even though he does not list the ten sins he has enumerated in the order of the Ten Commandments. Except for the category thieves, the list is a repetition of an earlier passage (5:10–11). e. None of them will inherit the kingdom of God. The duplication of this solemn statement (v. 9) serves to emphasize the severity of the transgressions Paul has listed. He is not saying that a person who commits any of these sins will never inherit God's kingdom. He implies that anyone who persists in practicing these vices will be barred from entering the kingdom. But when a sinner shows genuine repentance and yields his life in faith to Christ, he is forgiven, cleansed from sin, freed from guilt, sanctified and declared righteous. The Corinthians could relate to Paul's expos� on moral sins, for some of the members had left a life of sexual and social sins. 11. And that is what some of you were. However, you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. Note the following points: a. Unclean. And that is what some of you were. Jesus says that he came to call not the righteous but sinners to repentance (Mark 2:17; Luke 5:32; I Tim. 1:15). The tax collectors and the prostitutes were the sinners in Jesus day; they were social and moral outcasts. Jesus called them to repentance and then ate and drank with them in their homes (Matt. 11:19). When Paul first came to Corinth, he brought the gospel of salvation to some people who lived in sexual and social sins. In his epistle, Paul now speaks not in generalities but notes that only a few Corinthians used to live a degenerate life: some of you were [degenerates]. Because of their sinful lives they used to be unclean, but through the preaching of the gospel they have received the gift of salvation and are clean. b. Cleansed. However, you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified. Using the strong adversative however, which in the Greek occurs before each one of the three verbs, Paul conveys the message of immense spiritual change. He contrasts the sinful past of the Corinthians with their new life in Christ. In addition, he writes the second person plural you in this particular verse in every verb form. Paul wishes to be acutely personal in his address. You were washed. The washing is thorough and complete. When God forgives a repentant sinner he clears the record of guilt. The verb washed (as translated) and the next two verbs (sanctified and justified) are in the passive voice. The verb to wash appears only twice in the New Testament, here and in (Acts 22:16. In the present text Paul refrains from using the verb to baptize, even though the act of washing away sin is linked to baptism. Here he wants to stress the effect of baptism. In Acts, Paul recounts his conversion experience in Damascus, when Ananias instructed him to be baptized and to wash his sins awayActs 9:17 18). He underscores the act of being cleansed from sin and leaves the impression that we should understand this act figuratively.^[30] As Paul himself had experienced the cleansing from his sin of persecuting Christ's church, so the Corinthians were cleansed from the sins of their former life. You were sanctified. Already at the beginning of his epistle, Paul told the Corinthians that they were sanctified in Christ Jesus (1:2). Now he reminds them that they were made holy. The New Testament teaches that everyone who believes in Jesus is sanctified in him (John 17:19; Acts 20:32; 26:18). Sanctification means that the believer has entered into God's fellowship (see 1:9). You were justified. In earlier centuries, Protestant theologians debated whether sanctification should precede justification, for elsewhere in this epistle Paul places righteousness before holiness (1:30).^[31] Justification is a declarative act of God whereby the believer is pronounced righteous in Christ and is coordinated with God's act of sanctification. The three verbs (washed, sanctified, justified) are grammatically related. In the Greek, they are in the aorist tense, which describes a single instantaneous action. Paul is saying that at a given moment God declared the Corinthians both holy and righteous. In this context, he is not explaining the distinction between sanctification and justification but is writing a discourse against unrighteousness.^[32] c. Grace. In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. The last part of this verse reveals an implied trinitarianism, for Paul mentions Jesus Christ, the Spirit, and God. Yet this observation should not be pressed, for in this text Paul does not explicitly teach the trinitarian baptismal formula of the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19).^[33] Nonetheless, the phrase in the name of occurs at times in connection with baptism (Acts 2:38; 8:16; 19:5). The concluding part of the verse must be linked to every one of the preceding verbs (wash, sanctify, justify). The preposition in occurs twice, applies to all three verbs, and must be understood to mean in relation to. Let us now consider how these three verbs relate to the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit of God. First, the washing away of sin is the result of baptism. Believers are baptized in the name of Jesus Christ and in the power of the Spirit (Matt. 3:11; John 1:33; Acts 10:48). Paul uses Jesus full name, the Lord Jesus Christ, but he writes the Spirit of God, not the Holy Spirit. The former word choice is common for Paul, especially in this epistle (2:11, 12, 14; 3:16; 7:40; 12:3). Next, the act of sanctifying believers is based on the redeeming work of the Lord Jesus Christ and is sustained by the power of the Holy Spirit. Likewise, justification has its basis in Jesus atoning work and becomes real to the believer through the Spirit's powerful testimony. Last, the act of justifying the believer appears in connection with the power of the Spirit only in this text. True, in the early Christian hymn of I Timothy 3:16, Christ is vindicated by the Spirit; but nowhere else in Scripture do we find the Spirit involved in the believer's justification. The Holy Spirit takes part in the sanctification of the believer, but justification is God's work based on Christ's righteousness. Only in the present text is the Spirit linked to the believer's justification. Practical Considerations in 6:11 God's forgiving grace offered to sinners who repent is both overwhelming and thoroughly gratifying. Jesus tells the immoral woman who entered the house of Simon the Pharisee, Your sins are forgiven.& Your faith has saved you; go in peace (Luke 7:48, 50). He addresses the woman caught in adultery by saying, Go now and leave your life of sin (John 8:11). To one of the criminals crucified with him he remarks, I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise (Luke 23:43). And he calls Paul, the persecutor of the early Christians, my chosen instrument (Acts 9:15). The Old Testament reveals the astonishing account of God's grace extended to Manasseh, king of Judah and son of Hezekiah. Manasseh was born into the family of Hezekiah, who loved the Lord and faithfully served him. Manasseh, however, did evil in the eyes of the Lord. He worshiped the Baals, built altars to the starry hosts in the courts of the temple, sacrificed his own son, practiced sorcery and divination, placed a carved image in God's temple, led astray the people in his kingdom, and shed innocent blood (II Kings 21:1–9, 16; II Chron. 33:1–9). Yet this king, when he came to himself in captivity, repented. God not only forgave him but restored him as king of Judah (II Chron. 33:12–13). Reading this narrative, we are amazed at God's forgiving grace. We try to fathom the depth of God's forgiving love, and we boldly ask whether God will forgive any and every sin committed against him. Will he pardon those sins which, as Paul indicates, exclude a sinner from the kingdom of God? The answer is affirmative to every sinner who comes to God, confesses his sin, and pleads for mercy. Here is Jesus assurance, with one qualification: Every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. [Matt. 12:31–32] Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:11 [Greek] the pronoun in the neuter plural is used to refer not to things but to people. A more accurate word would be [Greek] (such persons), although the neuter plural pronoun is emphatic and direct. [Greek] most translators interpret this aorist middle indicative of [Greek] (I wash) as passive.^[34] Believers are unable to wash away their own sins, for only Christ Jesus cleanses them. Yet some translators present a literal translation: you washed yourselves clean. ^[35] They interpret the middle to mean that baptismal candidates submitted themselves to baptism. [Greek] this preposition interchanges often with the preposition [Greek]. As is well known, [Greek] and [Greek] are really the same word. Hence the rigid distinction between the two prepositions cannot be insisted on. ^[36] 4. Immorality 6:12–20 12 All things are permissible to me, but all things are not profitable; all things are permissible to me, but I will not be mastered by anything. 13 Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will destroy both of them. The body is not for immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14 God has not only raised the Lord but will also raise us by his power. 15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Well, then, shall I take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! 16 Or do you not know that the one who cleaves to a prostitute is one body with her? For he says, The two shall become one flesh, 17 But the one who cleaves to the Lord is one spirit with him. 18 Flee immorality. Every other sin a man commits is outside his body, but the immoral man, sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? And you do not belong to yourselves. 20 You were bought with a price; glorify God then in your body. After admonishing the Corinthians about litigations, Paul now returns to the subject of immorality. In the preceding chapter he gave instructions concerning the case of incest; now he discusses general principles pertaining to sexual immorality. a. Permission 6:12–14 12. All things are permissible to me, but all things are not profitable; all things are permissible to me, but I will not be mastered by anything. In verses 12 and 13a, Paul writes two slogans that were used by the Corinthians. He lists the slogans successively and gives his appropriate response: Slogan Response All things are permissible to me but all things are not profitable All things are permissible to me but I will not be mastered by anything Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food but God will destroy both of them Let us now comment on the individual slogans and Paul's responses that follow. a. All things are permissible to me. This slogan appears four times in Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians (6:12 [twice], 10:23 [twice]). The origin of the slogan is not of paramount importance. We cannot determine with certainty whether Paul had given his readers these words. Nor do we know whether the motto came from Greek philosophers or incipient Gnostics.^[37] What is significant is that certain members of the Corinthian congregation used the slogan as an excuse to advance their understanding of Christian liberty. Freethinking Corinthians were of the opinion that they could do whatever they pleased.^[38] Their application of the motto all things are permissible to me exceeded the limits of acceptable Christian behavior. Instead of living as forgiven, holy, and righteous believers, they indulged in sexual and social sins. Instead of submitting to the rule of Jesus Christ, they condoned sin in the name of the freedom granted them in Christ. Instead of serving the Lord and their neighbor in genuine Christian love (Matt. 22:37–40), they served themselves. In one of his succinct sayings, Martin Luther has shed some light on the Corinthians faulty understanding of Christian liberty. He wrote, A Christian is a perfectly free lord of all, subject to none. A Christian is a perfectly dutiful servant of all, subject to all. ^[39] b. But all things are not profitable (compare Sir. 37:28). Some freethinking Corinthians seemed to apply the words all things to everything, including sexually immoral acts. But Paul rejects the notion that the expression must be understood to include sin; God's commandments delineate clear parameters for acceptable conduct. Although Paul agrees with the motto, he qualifies it with an adversative statement: but not all things are helpful (RSV). In this statement he omits the referent. That is, he does not say helpful to me or helpful to you but leaves the matter open. But our conduct, whether good or bad, always affects people with whom we interact. We have no right to do whatever we please without taking note of any harmful effect our behavior has on our fellow man. Selfishness is contrary to the command to love our neighbor as ourselves. Consequently, Paul writes, But all things are not profitable. c. All things are permissible to me, but I will not be mastered by anything. ^[40] Again Paul cites the motto that circulated in the Christian community at Corinth, and he once more limits its extent and thereby its impact. The expression all things has a counterpart in the negated pronoun anything. What is Paul trying to communicate with this disclaimer? First, in the Greek Paul presents a play on words. When he says that all things are lawful for him, he means that he has authority to do all things. The play on words in Greek is reflected in the italicized terms. To have authority is to have mastery over something or someone. But, says Paul, I will not permit anything or anyone to have authority over me. Next, he becomes personal by applying the motto to himself in the first person singular. He does so quite often to provide leadership and guidance for the readers who face moral and social issues.^[41] Third, by identifying himself with these issues, he notes the fact that he no longer possesses that which possesses him. God has given us natural appetites which we may satisfy in Christian liberty. For example, we are limited by natural and moral laws: eating and drinking should be done with moderation, and sex should be kept within the bonds of holy matrimony. But if a person yields to sin, he is its slave and sin his master (Gen. 4:7; Rom. 6:16). A person can freely exercise Christian liberty in all things provided this takes place in communion with Christ. 13. Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will destroy both of them. The body is not for immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. a. Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food. Beginning with a general slogan, all things are permissible to me, Paul now recites a specific proverbial saying: it pertains to food and the stomach. The composer of this saying, whoever he was, made it vivid by reversing the two nouns in its second half. Therefore, the public readily accepted the motto. But even though Paul acknowledges the truth of this proverb, he adds a comment to the motto in a manner similar to that of the preceding text (see v. 12). God has created a world that produces a variety of foods to sustain life. If not wasted, food terminates in the stomach of the one who eats. And conversely, a stomach receives food for the benefit of the consumer. This is how God designed his great creation. But God also sets limits. Food products that are subject to perishing, and human life, which is subject to aging, in time pass away. Both food and the stomach are temporal and lack permanence. b. But God will destroy both of them. Here Paul addressed the temporality of food and the stomach. To stress their fleeting nature, he states that God will destroy both. In this context, Paul does not elaborate on either eating foods offered to idols, Christian liberty, or eating and drinking to God's glory. Elsewhere he addresses those topics (8; 10:23–33). c. The body is not for immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. The message Paul delivers to the Corinthians is that they should not identify sexual appetite with an appetite for food and drink. J. B. Lightfoot notes that the Corinthians confused the prohibitions of two different categories, meats and drinks on the one hand, and sins of sensuality on the other. ^[42] Food and drink should be consumed with moderation and discretion. But consumption as such is not a matter of morality, for anyone with sanctified common sense wishes to be and to remain healthy. Conversely, God's command to shun fornication and adultery relates to sexual morality. God created the human body not for sinful pleasure but for his glory. He formed it in his image and after his likeness (Gen. 1:26), not for sexual immorality. The members of the Jerusalem Council knew that the Gentiles considered sexual immorality acceptable. Thus, to the decrees on food the council members added the moral law: To abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from strangled animals, and from fornication (Acts 15:29). Those Corinthians who flaunted their freedom in Christ considered themselves free to indulge in eating and in sexual gratification. But their sexual immorality violated the precepts of the Jerusalem Council and was a transgression of the Decalogue (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). God created man's physical body for service in his creation (Gen. 1:28). He instituted marriage for the propagation of the human race and for the enrichment of the marriage partners. He sees the use of the human body for fornication to be absolutely contrary to this purpose (I Thess. 4:3–5). Hence Paul notes that the body is to serve the Lord and, he adds, the Lord is for the body. To the slogan of the Corinthians Paul adds his own teaching. He parallels the rhythm and style of their slogan: Food for the stomach and the stomach for food. The body for the Lord and the Lord for the body. As food and the stomach are meant for each other so the physical body and the Lord serve each other. Both food and the stomach are of passing significance, but the body and the Lord have lasting significance in relation to the resurrection. The parallelism should not be pressed to its logical conclusion, for that is not Paul's purpose.^[43] Our physical body, created by God but stained by sin, will at death descend into the grave. It has been redeemed by Christ and will be raised as his body was raised. The Lord claims this body because it belongs to him (Rom. 14:8). 14. God has not only raised the Lord but will also raise us by his power. Inasmuch as God destroys food and the stomach, he restores both Christ's body and ours in the resurrection. We should discern the difference in both the time and the kind between Christ's resurrection and ours. Christ is the firstfruit and we are his followers (15:15, 20). He is the author of our salvation and we are his family (Heb. 2:10–11). But this difference is not Paul's concern in the present text. In the Gentile world of Paul's day, Greek philosophers considered man's physical body of insignificant value while they regarded his soul to be all-important. For this reason, Paul returns to the doctrine of the resurrection in chapter 15 and stresses the significance of the human body. But in the current context, he merely introduces the fact that God raised Christ from the dead; and he gives the assurance that God will also raise our bodies by his power. The understanding is that as Jesus was raised physically so our physical bodies will be raised. Note that Paul becomes personal by using the first person plural pronoun us, in which he himself is included. Although committed to the grave at the time of death, our physical bodies are precious to God (Ps. 116:15). He has high regard for them and will raise them by his power (Rom. 8:11; II Cor. 4:14; 13:4). God's power reached down to Christ's body in the tomb, and that same power will touch our dead bodies in the grave to give them life. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:12–14 Verses 12 13 [Greek] the use of the future passive of [Greek] (I have authority over) demonstrates a play on words, for the verb [Greek] (it is permitted) denotes that the person to whom it applies has received authority ([Greek]). [Greek] this indefinite pronoun can be either masculine or neuter. The second translation is preferred because it balances the neuter [Greek] (all things). [Greek] &[Greek] the repetition of the conjunction signifies both &and. Verse 14 [Greek] the future active fits the teaching that portrays man's physical resurrection as a coming event.^[44] It also balances the future tense of [Greek] (he will destroy) in the preceding verse (v. 13). Other readings are the aorist [Greek], which follows the aorist of the single verb [Greek], and the present tense [Greek], which probably represents an unintentional scribal error.^[45] Translators favor the first reading. The compound verb and the single verb are identical in meaning. b. Prostitute 6:15–17 15. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Well, then, shall I take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! a. Do you not know? Once again, Paul asks a rhetorical question with the verb to know that demands an affirmative answer (see, e.g., vv. 2, 3, 9). He seems to refresh the memory of his readers by referring to earlier oral teachings.^[46] He asks whether they have any knowledge concerning their own bodies. b. Your bodies are members of Christ. Paul continues the thought of a previous verse (v. 13) in which he stated that the body is for the Lord and the Lord for the body. Now he reveals the extent of this intimate relationship: the physical body of the believer is actually a member of Christ. In this verse Paul states the simple fact that believers are members of Christ. In a subsequent context he extends this fact to the body of Christ, which is the church (Rom. 12:5–6). Christ uses our physical bodies to further the cause of the gospel and to foster his fellowship. We, therefore, are Christ's hands and feet! We must obey the directives that come from Christ; he is our head and we are his limbs. c. Well, then, shall I take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Paul expects to receive a positive answer to his first question (v. 15a) and now continues with another query. Before he poses it, he wants his readers to agree with him and thus he writes, well, then. He is saying, If this is so, shall I take away from Christ these limbs that do his bidding and unite them with a prostitute? Paul expects a negative answer from the Corinthians. The Greek word porn (prostitute) is an echo of the word porneia (fornication, sexual immorality [vv. 13, 19]; the colloquial English word porn derives from it). In the Greek culture of that day, prostitution and fornication were considered permissible activities. Athenaeus, a writer in the second century a.d., quotes from a speech of Demosthenes, We keep mistresses for pleasure, concubines for daily concubinage, but wives we have in order to produce children legitimately and to have a trustworthy guardian of our domestic property. ^[47] When Paul speaks of the members of Christ and the members of a prostitute, he does not intend to draw an exact parallel. Rather, he contrasts the sacred fellowship of the believer with Christ and the sinful lust of the person who has relations with a prostitute. Christ is so joined to us, and we to Him, that we are united in one body with Him. ^[48] Paul expresses justifiable indignation regarding the moral condition in Corinth, where sexual immorality occurred even among Christians. But Paul teaches that if they are united with Christ, they cannot be united with a prostitute. These two concepts are mutually exclusive. Hence, Paul answers his own rhetorical question with a sharp retort. d. Never! The negative answer to Paul's question is given in one word, never. Other versions read, Certainly not (NKJV), Impossible (GNB), or Out of the question (NJB). All of them stress that the matter at hand is unthinkable. 16. Or do you not know that the one who cleaves to a prostitute is one body with her? For he says, The two shall become one flesh. a. Or do you not know? Notice the repetitive phrase do you not know? that occurs three times (vv. 15, 16, 19). We surmise that in his oral communications, Paul had taught the Corinthians to discontinue the sexually immoral practices of the Gentiles. They had to know that they belonged to Jesus with body and soul. Let no one say that he serves Christ in spirit but bodily is free to do as he pleases. Body and spirit are intimately connected. If a person has sexual relations with a prostitute, his act involves not merely his physical but also his spiritual being. The act affects his inner self and directs him materially, socially, and religiously. Concludes Horst Seebass, He who unites himself to a harlot has a common existence with her. There is no purely sexual sin. The spirit of the brothel and the Spirit of Christ mutually exclude one another. ^[49] b. The one who cleaves to a prostitute is one body with her. In English the words with her must be supplied to make the translation of the Greek sentence complete. Scripture shows that the verb to cleave refers to more than a physical union; it involves a bonding relationship that has spiritual implications. Here are two illustrations: First, God commanded the Israelites to fear him, to serve him, and to cleave to him (Deut. 10:20). Next, Solomon clung to his foreign wives who induced him to worship other gods instead of the Lord God (I Kings 11:1–8). c. For he says, The two shall become one flesh. Paul denounces sexual sin by stating that the man who cleaves to a prostitute is one body with her. He proves his point by alluding to the account of Eve's creation in which the verb to cleave occurs. For this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall become one fleshGen. 2:24, NASB . Of this verse, he cites only the last part and takes it from the Septuagint translation: The two shall become one flesh. This one-line quotation from the institution of marriage seems out of place, for the passage relates to the sinless state of Adam and Eve in paradise. Nevertheless, the statement holds true for every marriage (Matt. 19:5; Eph. 5:31). Within the bonds of marriage, a Christian husband and wife become one flesh and are one in the Lord. But when the husband has illicit relations with a prostitute, he is one flesh with her and breaks his bond with the Lord. Instead of receiving God's blessing, he is under God's curse.^[50] As a sexually immoral person he forfeits his share in the kingdom of God (v. 10). 17. But the one who cleaves to the Lord is one spirit with him. This verse parallels the first part of the preceding verse: the one who cleaves to a prostitute is one body with her (v. 16). The verb to cleave, used in both verses, actually means to be glued to someone. The relationship is as close as two pieces of glass lying on top of each other; it is impossible to lift the one piece from the other because the air pressure glues them together, as it were. That is the relationship a Christian should have with the Lord. Already Paul noted that our bodies are members of Christ (v. 15) and thus stressed the uniqueness of our physical frame. Now he mentions the close relationship of our spirit that is joined to Christ. He contrasts the bodily union of a male and a female with the spiritual union of the believer and Christ. This contrast cannot be pressed, for although a prostitute and Christ are complete opposites, body and spirit are not. For the believer, body and soul form a unit in service for the Lord. Clinging to a prostitute constitutes degradation and brings disrepute; clinging to the Lord signifies exaltation and results in esteem. A believer becomes united with the Lord through the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit.^[51] Thus he becomes one with the Lord in spirit and enjoys an inner union with him (II Cor. 3:17). In this verse (see v. 16), we also have to supply the words with him to complete the translation of the Greek. Practical Considerations in 6:16–17 Striking indeed is the contrast between the person who clings to a prostitute and the one who adheres to Christ. For instance, the relationship between a man and a prostitute is momentary, without love, devoid of responsibility, mutually destructive, decidedly egocentric, and shamefully immoral. Conversely, the believer's relationship with Jesus Christ is characterized by permanence, love, trust, edification, obedience, and purity. Prostitution makes one prone to disease and is degrading, sinful, and damaging to one's soul. However, Christ exalts a person, encourages wholesome living, instructs him or her in the law of love for God and one's fellow human being, and refreshes the believer's spirit. An immoral person fails to enjoy matrimonial bliss, experiences failure in personal intimacy, substitutes sex for service to God, and indulges in vulgarity, obscenity, and sensuality. But a Christian builds loving and lasting companionship with his spouse, seeks fulfillment in serving others, loves his Lord, joyfully worships God, cultivates wholesome speech, promotes decency, and exemplifies virtue. Thus we can understand why the Ephesian letter [Eph. 5:21–33] emphasizes that Christ and his church, as the bridegroom and the bride, constitute the union that is normative for marriage. ^[52] Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 6:15–16 Verse 15 [Greek] this is either a future active indicative or the aorist active subjunctive. Because the sentence is interrogative, the deliberative subjunctive is preferred. It expresses doubt and incredulity. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 7. Marriage Problems (7:1–40) Outline (continued) 7:1 16:4 III. Paul's Response to Corinthian Concerns 7:1–40 A. Marriage Problems 7:1–7 1. Proper Conduct 7:8–11 2. Faithfulness and Marriage 7:8–9 a. Unmarried and Widows 7:10–11 b. Married and Divorced 7:12–16 3. Believer and Unbeliever 7:17–24 4. A Digression 7:25–40 5. Virgins and Marriage 7:25–28 a. Marital Status 7:29–31 b. Hardships 7:32–35 c. Marriage and Service 7:36–38 d. Engagement and Marriage 7:39–40 e. Marriage Vows III. Paul's Response to Corinthian Concerns 7:1 16:4 7 1 Now concerning the things you wrote about: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 2 But on account of immorality, let each man have his own wife and each woman have her own husband. 3 Let the husband fulfill his marital duty to his wife and similarly the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body but her husband has, and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body but his wife has. 5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by mutual consent for a specified time that you may have time for prayer. Then come together again, lest Satan tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 But I say this as a concession, not as a command. 7 I wish that all men were as I am. However, each one has his own gift from God, one this gift and another that gift. 8 But I say to the unmarried and the widows, it is good for them if they remain as I am. 9 But if they do not exercise self-control, let them marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with sexual desire. 10 To those who are married I give this command not I but the Lord let a wife not separate from her husband. 11 But if she in fact leaves, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband and let the husband not divorce his wife. 12 To the rest I say, I, not the Lord: If any brother has an unbelieving wife and she consents to live with him, let him not send her away. 13 And if any woman has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, let her not send him away. 14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified by his [Christian] wife and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified by the [Christian] husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. 15 But if the unbeliever departs, let him leave. A [Christian] brother or sister is not bound in such matters. God has called us to peace. 16 For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? 17 Nevertheless, so let each one live the life the Lord has imparted to him, as God has called each one. And I am laying down this rule in all the churches. 18 Anyone who has been circumcised and called, let him not become uncircumcised. Anyone who has not been circumcised but has been called, let him not become circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commands is important. 20 Let each one remain in the same calling in which he was called. 21 Were you a slave when you were called, let that not bother you. But if indeed you are able to become free, make the most of it. 22 For he who was called in the Lord while a slave is a freedman of the Lord; likewise the free man when he was called is a slave of Christ. 23 You were bought with a price. Do not become slaves of men. 24 Brothers, let each one remain with God in the situation in which he was called. 25 Now concerning the virgins I have no command of the Lord, but I, as one who by the mercy of God is trustworthy, give my opinion. 26 I think, then, that on account of the present crisis it is good for a man to remain as he is. 27 If you are bound to a wife, do not seek to be released. If you are released from a wife, do not seek one. 28 But even if you should marry, you have not sinned. And if a virgin should marry, she has not sinned. Yet such people will have great affliction in this life, and I would like to spare you this trouble. 29 I say this, brothers, the time is shortened, so that from now on even those who have wives should be as though they had no wives. 30 And those who weep, let them be as though they did not weep, and those who rejoice, let them be as though they did not rejoice, and those who buy as though they did not possess. 31 And those who use the world as though they did not fully use it. For this world in its present form is passing away. 32 I want you to be free from anxiety. The unmarried man cares for the things belonging to the Lord, how he may please the Lord. 33 But the married man cares for the things of this world, how he may please his wife, 34 and his interests are divided. Also the woman who is unmarried or the virgin cares for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in both body and spirit. But the woman who is married cares for the things of the world, how she may please her husband. 35 I say this for your own benefit, not to restrain you but to promote decorum and devotion to the Lord without distraction. 36 But if someone thinks that he is behaving dishonorably toward his marriageable virgin if his passions are strong and it must be so let him do as he wishes; he does not sin. Let them marry. 37 But he who stands firm in his own heart and is under no necessity but has his desire under control and has decided in his own heart to keep his own virgin, he will do well. 38 So then he who marries his bride-to-be does well but he who does not marry her does better. 39 For a woman is bound as long as her husband lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry whom she pleases, only in the Lord. 40 She is happier to remain as she is, in my opinion. And I think that I also have the Spirit of God. A. Marriage Problems 7:1–40 In the preceding two chapters (5 and 6), Paul wrote concerning incest, litigations, and sexual immorality. He indignantly condemned the moral laxity of the Corinthians and urged them to live wholesome lives to glorify God. Nonetheless, he had not yet touched on the subjects of marriage, separation, virginity and celibacy. When he received a letter from the Corinthian church, Paul was asked to give advice on marital problems in the church. In this chapter, he discusses the proper conduct of marriage partners, their abiding faithfulness in matrimony, the decorum of virgins, and continence. Apart from a few passages elsewhere in the New Testament, this chapter is unique in providing basic guidelines for those who are married, those who wish to be married or once were married, and those who want to remain single. 1. Proper Conduct 7:1–7 1. Now concerning the things you wrote about: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. We note the following points: a. Letter. Now concerning the things you wrote about. Paul frequently sent epistles to the Corinthian church and in turn received correspondence from them. He sent the Corinthians a letter (5:9) in which he had written about sexually immoral people in Corinth. Perhaps this letter, which is no longer extant, also referred to idolatry and other matters, but we choose to refrain from speculation.^[1] The Corinthians replied to this epistle in a written communique, delivered by Stephanus, Fortunatas, and Achaicus (16:17), in which they asked counsel on a number of items. Paul responds to their request in the greater part of I Corinthians (7:1 16:12). We are able to determine with a degree of certainty the questions they posed. One indicator is the recurring phrase now concerning (vv. 1, 25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12; with variations).^[2] Paul discusses marriage (7:1–24, 39 40), celibacy (7:25–38), meat offered to idols (8:1 11:1), worship (11:2–34), spiritual gifts (12 14), the collection for the Jerusalem Christians (16:1–4), and Apollos (16:12).^[3] Because the phrase now concerning is lacking, we cannot determine whether in their letter the Corinthians asked him about the doctrine of the resurrection (15:12–57). It is possible that they also asked Paul concerning this teaching, because it was of current interest to the Corinthians and the Thessalonians (I Thess. 4:13 5:11; II Thess. 2:1–12). In their letter, the Corinthians asked Paul for advice; presumably marriage was the first item they mentioned. b. Chastity. It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Is this sentence a quotation from the epistle Paul received from the Corinthians? One translation puts the statement in the interrogative, Is it best for a man not to marry? ^[4] Or is it Paul's opening statement of his discussion on marriage? In light of the context, we are inclined to give a positive reply to the first question and a negative to the second. On his own authority, Paul could not have advocated celibacy for everyone, for he would be contradicting God's utterance: It is not good for the man to be alone (Gen. 2:18). Then Paul would be against procreation (Gen. 1:28), God's covenant blessings from generation to generation (Gen. 17:7), and the growth of the church. But Paul is not against marriage, which he compares with the union of Christ and the church (Eph. 5:22–33). Thus he holds a high view of matrimony. Further, the rabbis commonly taught that marriage was man's obligation and some of them even said it was a woman's duty.^[5] Whether Paul at one time was married is difficult to say (see the commentary on v. 7). In view of his keen insight into married life, the possibility that he was once married cannot be dismissed lightly. Paul's background and training would inhibit him from uttering a saying not to touch a woman, for it could be interpreted that he advocates celibacy for everyone. We infer that Paul is quoting a line from the letter he had received from the Corinthians. The quote, undoubtedly in greatly abbreviated form, may be considered a summary statement of the query, which Paul is now going to discuss in succeeding verses (vv. 2 7). c. Meaning. What does the sentence mean? The New International Version translates the text, It is good for a man not to marry. This translation is an interpretation of the text, but it misses the mark. The expression to touch a woman is a euphemistic term not for marriage but for sexual intercourse (Gen. 20:6; Prov. 6:29).^[6] Apparently, a group of believers in Corinth set themselves against the immorality prevalent in the city. They advocated celibacy and declared this state to be a norm for the rest of the local Christians. These Corinthians were saying that it is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman. Their statement, however, is more extensive than a mere reference to marriage. The Greek uses the general term anthrMpos (man) instead of the specific expression anr (husband). Moreover, the Greek has the indefinite noun gyn (woman), which does not mean wife. The Corinthian slogan, therefore, applied to any man and any woman. According to Walter Bauer, the phrase it is good signifies that celibacy is morally good, pleasing to God, contributing to salvation (Gen. 2:18). ^[7] But by quoting this statement, is Paul indicating that celibacy is preferred to marriage? No, not really. He himself alluded to the union of Adam and Eve in paradise in the knowledge that God instituted marriage (Gen. 2:24). Writes John Calvin, For God so ordered it in the beginning that the man without a wife was half a man, as it were, and felt himself lacking in help which he particularly needed; and the wife was, as it were, the completion of the man. Therefore whatever evil or trouble there is in marriage springs from the corruption of God's institution. ^[8] In succeeding verses (vv. 2 5), Paul speaks favorably and knowledgeably about marriage, possibly from personal experience. He shows no indication that he discredits it in any way. In his instructions to Timothy, he writes that apostates forbid people to marry (I Tim. 4:3). Nowhere in any of his epistles does he deprecate the married state. What then is Paul trying to convey? 2. But on account of immorality, let each man have his own wife and each woman have her own husband. a. But on account of immorality. The first word in Paul's discourse is the adversative but, which qualifies the slogan in the preceding verse (v. 1b). Elsewhere Paul exhorts his readers that they should avoid fornication (I Thess. 4:3), for it is God's will that they be sanctified. He fully realizes that the evils of sexual immorality form the fabric of Corinthian life. Paul literally says, because of fornications. The plural illustrates the frequent occurrences of relations with prostitutes. Paul goes straight to the heart of the problem that existed in the Corinthian community. He points to illicit sexual relations some of the Christians had; they were part of a pagan society that registered no objections to fornication. Hence, Paul endorses the slogan of those Corinthians who championed the cause of celibacy, though he knows that uttering a slogan would not keep a person from falling into sin. He is attentive to the problem which the Christians faced in Corinth. However, his approach to the problem of immorality is more realistic than that of the celibate Corinthians. b. Let each man have his own wife and each woman have her own husband. The inability of some people to practice continence leads them into sin. To prevent them from sinning, Paul recommends that they marry and stay together in monogamous relationships. He effectively rules out polygamy in any form. Note also that he stresses the equality of the male and the female in the state of matrimony. Each partner should have his or her own spouse, for this is how God ordained it from the beginningMatt. 19:8b . Paul intentionally repeats the words each and own and applies both terms equally to the husband and to the wife. The apostle responds to the Corinthian statement (v. 1b) by using the adjective each. Note that their statement, it is good for a man not to touch a woman, is followed by Paul's rejoinder let each man have his own wife. The expressions a man (that is, anyone) and each man complement one another. Paul does not lay down here the ground of marriage, as though it were ordained for a remedy against sin, but gives a special reason why those should marry at Cor[inth] who might otherwise have remained single. ^[9] We ought not, therefore, to accuse Paul of championing the view that marriage is merely a preventive measure against immorality. The verb to have is euphemistic for the sexual act and should not be interpreted to keep in the sense of keeping an illicit lover. In the account regarding the incestuous man, the verb has a sexual connotation. Similarly in verse 2, Paul means that each man should have his own wife sexually and each wife should have her own husband likewise.^[10] And this verse sets the tone for the next sentence in Paul's discourse. 3. Let the husband fulfill his marital duty to his wife and similarly the wife to her husband. 4. The wife does not have authority over her own body but her husband has, and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body but his wife has. a. Parallels. The parallelism in verses 2 and 3 is remarkable and demonstrates Paul's interest in and concern for marriage. Verse 2 Verse 3 let each man have his own wife let the husband fulfill his marital duty to his wife each woman have her own husband similarly the wife to her husband Although the next verse fails to match the rhythm of the preceding two verses, it has its own internal balance: Verse 4 The wife does not have The husband does not have authority over her own body authority over his own body but her husband has but his wife has b. Duty. With keen insight into the intimacies of married life, Paul declares that both husband and wife should fulfill their conjugal duties toward each other. He stresses the equality of male and female in respect to marital union: Let the husband fulfill his marital duty to his wife and similarly the wife to her husband. Further, he stresses that the husband should not demand from his wife but rather fulfill his marital obligations to her; comparably the wife should extend to her husband that which she owes him. With the words fulfill and duty, Paul denotes the payment of a debt that each one owes the other.^[11] Marriage without sex is not only unnatural, but it is expressly forbidden. ^[12] He issues no command on asceticism within the bonds of marriage. Paul discourages those well-meaning but misguided Corinthian Christians who were of the opinion that married couples should abstain from sexual intercourse (see v. 5). c. Authority. Verse 4 reveals that Paul has an even deeper understanding of married life than he expressed in the preceding verse (v. 3). He states that the wife has no over authority over her own body, but that the husband has this power; and vice versa, the husband has no power over his own body, but his wife has this authority. John Albert Bengel correctly calls this verse an elegant paradox. ^[13] Elsewhere Paul teaches that the husband is the head of the wife (Eph. 5:23). But here he plainly declares that in respect to the sexuality of husband and wife, there is complete equality. Each partner has authority over the body of his or her spouse, and both submit themselves to one another. Thus they experience complete mutuality. 5. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by mutual consent for a specified time that you may have time for prayer. Then come together again, lest Satan tempt you because of your lack of self-control. a. Do not deprive one another. What Paul indicates in the first clause of this sentence is that some married couples in the Corinthian community are actually depriving each other of their marital rights. Out of modesty, he omits the direct object for the verb to deprive but expects the reader to complete the thought. The verb connotes stealing or robbing an individual of his or her possessions (compare 6:7–8), or in this instance, of one's rights (Exod. 21:10). Paul tells his readers to stop doing so and commands married couples (second person plural you) not to defraud your spouse. Indeed, he becomes unusually personal in these intimate matters. He instructs the Corinthians that their slogan not to touch a woman (v. 1b) does not apply to married couples. b. Except perhaps by mutual consent for a specified time that you may have time for prayer. Paul allows abstinence from marital relations on three conditions: first, if both husband and wife agree to do so; next, if both concur that abstinence is for a limited period; and third, if both use this time for prayer. Paul permits this exception to the rule but forbids anyone to impose involuntary restrictions on his or her spouse. The phrase by mutual consent stresses the equality of the sexes in respect to intimate relations. Both the husband and the wife should be fully convinced that abstinence is desirable and in their best interest. Paul immediately adds the second restriction that abstinence be temporary, because a permanent arrangement might lead to a ruined marriage and divorce. Divorce is not only contrary to the institution of marriage (Gen. 2:24; Mark 10:2 9) but it defeats the very purpose for which abstinence is intended: to lead a holy life. Daily prayer is the hallmark of every sincere Christian. But in married life, a husband and his wife at times face crises that call for special prayer. When financial, social, spiritual, or physical problems appear to overwhelm them, they flee to God in prayer. At such times, they may voluntarily and temporarily abstain from marital intimacy. c. Then come together again, lest Satan tempt you because of your lack of self-control. Translators interpret the verb to come as a command. Paul tells the believers in Corinth that when the period of prayer has ended, married couples should resume their normal functions. Let no one say, Temporary abstinence is good, but permanent abstinence is better. Should this be the case, it would be advisable not to marry. Paul alerts his readers to the presence of Satan, who seeks to exploit human weakness by tempting either the husband or the wife into committing adultery. To pursue permanent restraint within the bonds of matrimony is contrary to God's gracious provision of marriage and his marvelous gift of sexuality. Marriage is a protective shield that should be employed effectively against Satan's subtleties (Eph. 5:11). Refusal to use the protection God provides is a sin for which the individual is held accountable. Practical Considerations in 7:4–5 When God had created Adam, he declared, It is not good that the man should be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him (Gen. 2:18). From one of Adam's ribs he created Eve. God showed that although Adam was a perfect creation, he was incomplete until God had made Eve to be Adam's counterpart. Calvin pointedly remarks, The man is only the half of his body, and it is the same with the woman. ^[14] God has made us so that in marriage the man complements the woman and the woman complements the man. In addition, both man and woman have been created with sexual needs that find true fulfillment in matrimony, which God has instituted. For that reason, Paul states that the husband has authority over his wife's body and the wife has authority over her husband's body. If God made male and female, created them sexual beings, gave to each one power over the body of the other party, and instituted marriage, then forced and permanent abstinence within wedlock is contrary to God's design. In short, when one partner defrauds the other, he or she violates God's creational ordinance (Gen. 1:28; 2:24) and, instead of being spiritual, is sinful. 6. But I say this as a concession, not as a command. The first word, but, is an adversative that we understand as a qualifier of Paul's preceding comment: Then come together again &(v. 5c). That is, verse 6 should be linked to the immediately preceding verse and not to the entire context (vv. 2 5). Paul is not saying that he regards marriage as a concession. Rather, he allows temporary abstinence that has the consent of both spouses. With the demonstrative pronoun this, Paul refers not to marriage, which he fully endorses, but to the exception to the rule of marital rights (v. 5b).^[15] Marriage in which these rights are honored is Paul's norm. In light of the following verse (v. 7), the term concession alludes to the restraint which Paul allows a husband and wife to observe temporarily. But he refuses to turn this concession into a command. Although he himself had received the gift of restraint, Paul does not impose abstinence on anyone who lacked this gift.^[16] 7. I wish that all men were as I am. However, each one has his own gift from God, one this gift and another that gift. a. I wish that all men were as I am. Paul expresses a genuine wish and not an improbable desire. But what does he have in mind? Is he advocating celibacy rather than marriage? Not at all. Paul teaches that although marriage, which God instituted, is good and commendable, not every person should be married or seek marriage. Some people have been married and are now either separated, divorced, or widowed. The question whether Paul was married at one time is intriguing. In order to be ordained a rabbi, the Law required that the candidate be married; and if Paul was ordained, it follows that he must have been married. ^[17] The rabbis taught that all Jews should be married to procreate.^[18] The early church fathers debated this question at length, especially in light of Paul's thorough knowledge of marriage. If Paul was married when he lived in Jerusalem, could he have been separated from his wife when he was converted to Christianity? His wife may have remained true to Judaism. Whatever Paul's personal history may have been, we do know that he lived the life of a celibate when he wrote I Corinthians. b. However, each one has his own gift from God, one this gift and another that gift. Marriage has been ordained by God for the procreation of mankind and for the personal fulfillment of the marriage partners. When God removes a person's need for marriage, he will endow such a person with the gift of continence. Paul received this gift from the Lord and thus he could rejoice in his condition. But he realizes full well that not every person receives this benefaction. And thus Paul writes that God grants each person his or her own gift. The person whom God has not granted continence does well to marry (Matt. 19:11–12). The Greek word charisma signifies spiritual gifts that range from faith, healing, miracles, prophecy, to speaking in tongues or interpreting them (Rom. 12:6). In this passage, Paul is not referring to any of these spiritual endowments. He is speaking about his own peculiar gift of continence. In respect to celibacy, he was given the grace to practice self-control. This does not mean that someone who is unable to do that and marries instead receives a special gift to engage in marriage.^[19] Paul prescribes no law or command. Each individual should decide this matter for himself. Finally, we may not label Paul as an ascetic who belittles marriage and glories in his celibacy. This is not the case, for he speaks eloquently about intimate matters of sexuality and marriage. He is modest in his choice of words yet candid in expressing his opinion. Paul upholds marriage, encourages people to enter matrimony, and teaches that marriage fulfills human needs that God has created. Yet he urges people who have the ability to exercise restraint to remain single as he is. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 7:1–5 Verses 1 2 [Greek] the aorist active from the verb [Greek] (I write) lacks an indirect object. Many witnesses have the personal pronoun [Greek] (to me, KJV, NKJV), which the older manuscripts omit. [Greek] his own wife. Notice that in distinction from verse 1b, Paul uses the definite article here and in the phrase [Greek] (her own husband). In the New Testament, the terms [Greek] and [Greek] show a difference: [Greek] is followed by the noun wife (Eph. 5:28, 33) and [Greek] precedes the noun husband (Eph. 5:22, 24; Titus 2:4 5; I Peter 3:1, 5). Nevertheless, [Greek] is here [v. 2] used for the sake of variety and is exactly equivalent to the [Greek]. ^[20] Verses 3 4 [Greek] this noun derives from the verb [Greek] (I owe) and signifies a duty or an obligation. The noun has the support of the older and better Greek manuscripts and is preferred to the reading of the Majority Text, [Greek] (the kindness that is her due).^[21] [Greek] the compound verb, from the preposition [Greek] (back) and the verb [Greek] (I give), in this verse denotes a distinctively personal relationship. When a man renders to his wife that to which she is entitled. ^[22] [Greek] Paul purposely chooses this word that means to have power and which in the passive signifies to be mastered by (6:12). This verb has the derived noun (authority) that in this letter occurs ten times (7:37; 8:9; 9:4, 5, 6, 12 [twice], 18; 11:10; 15:24). Verse 5 [Greek] the presence of the particle [Greek] lends a degree of expectancy to this part of the sentence.^[23] The phrase means except perhaps. [Greek] the first [Greek] gives an imperatival sense to the verbs in the clause. Although that idea is not inherent within the particle itself.^[24] [Greek] the aorist tense of the verb to have time is telling because it points to single occurrence and not to continued action. Before the word prayer, the Majority Text has the phrase [Greek] (fasting and). The addition may have been introduced by scribes who fostered asceticism. However, the words are lacking in earlier and better manuscripts. 2. Faithfulness and Marriage 7:8–11 Paul has a systematic approach to the matter of human sexuality. After a rebuke concerning incest (5:1–5), he discusses sexual sins and exhorts the Corinthians to flee from immorality (6:12–20). Then he quotes a line in a letter he has received from the Corinthian congregation. This line reflects an opposite extreme, for it instructs everyone to avoid all sexual relationships. Paul objects to this slogan and points to God's gracious provision of matrimony. After a discussion on a temporary exception to the full function of marriage, he turns to those who are unmarried and desire to remain single. He himself belongs to that group of people, and thus he has a word for them. a. Unmarried and Widows 7:8–9 8. But I say to the unmarried and the widows, it is good for them if they remain as I am. a. Categories. Is Paul indicating two separate categories or is the word unmarried a synonym for widowers? If the latter is the case, he has in mind both males and females whose spouses have died. In the Greek. Paul uses the masculine gender for the unmarried and, as may be expected, the feminine gender for the widows. However, in the context of this particular chapter, the term unmarried refers to a woman separated from her husband (v. 11), to men (v. 32), and to women (v. 34). This term includes those who have never been married and those who have been married and are now unmarried. ^[25] If we accept the broad interpretation given in the preceding paragraph, then the text appears to reveal redundancy. A widow is a woman who was once married but presently is unmarried and belongs to the first group. Would it not be better to group everyone into one category, or to speak of widowers and widows?^[26] No, not at all. The widows were in a special class. The church supported them in their financial needs, and they were assigned particular ministries in the church (I Tim. 5:3–16). Conversely, Paul urges younger widows to remarry, to have children, and to manage their homes (I Tim. 5:14). In this way they are happy in fulfilling their natural calling.^[27] The unmarried are a class of people that includes widowers and both men and women who are single, separated, or divorced. Paul advises these people and the widows to stay unmarried as he himself is unmarried. He fortifies his advice by saying that it is good for them to stay in their unmarried condition. Nevertheless, he already has indicated that the state of matrimony is advisable (vv. 2 5). By giving counsel to those who are not married but lack the gift of continence, Paul is realistic, even descriptive. He writes, 9. But if they do not exercise self-control, let them marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with sexual desire. b. Passion. If they do not exercise self-control, let them marry. Paul fully understands human nature and gives sensible advice. Already he has spoken of incontinence (v. 5); now once more he states that some people do not exercise restraint, presumably because of their lack of self-control. To them, Paul offers the solution which God has instituted for this situation: Let them marry! There is no reproach, no word of disapproval for incontinence, no mention of sin. To preclude the possibility that they might fall into sin because they lack continence, Paul advises wedlock for the unmarried. Let them enter the state of matrimony and thus lead honorable and pure lives. For it is better to marry than to burn with sexual desire. The Greek has only the verb pyrousthai (to burn), but the context demands the addition of the words with sexual desire. Translators know that the verb by itself is incomplete and calls for an explanation. Talmudic rabbis together with scholars from the third century to the present have interpreted this verb to refer to burning in hell.^[28] They perceive it as God's righteous judgment on the sinner who continues to violate sexual mores. But Paul alludes to burning with sexual desire. The common understanding of the verb to burn in this context is related to incontinence. In his discussion of this sensitive subject, Paul is frank but at the same time discreet. His expressions are often incomplete so that the reader has to fill in the obvious meaning. For example, he instructed husbands and wives not to deprive each other (v. 5), but left the completion of the sentence for the reader. By saying that it is better to marry than to burn, he again invites the reader to complete the sentence. In the present verse, he teaches that incontinence has its solution within the bounds of marriage and urges the unmarried who lack self-control to seek marriage partners (v. 9). For him, marriage is the context in which husbands and wives find satisfaction for their sexual desires.^[29] With the comparative word better Paul is placing marriage over against burning. Paul writes that one should enter marriage as a one-time act to avoid a state of continual desire. But his advice fails to cover every situation. G. G. Findlay astutely observes, Better to marry than to burn; but if marriage is impossible, better infinitely to burn than to sin. ^[30] Practical Considerations in 7:8–9 Paul demonstrates his profound insight into human nature by candidly discussing a topic that generally causes embarrassment. He fully understands the sexual characteristics God has created in the male and the female. God created Adam and Eve and their descendants with sexual needs that are met through conjugal union in matrimony. Thus Paul counsels his readers to accept God's provision of marriage. Within the context of wedlock, both a husband and a wife fulfill each other's needs. Conversely, anyone who has not received the gift of continence but tries to exercise restraint experiences undue emotional distress. In addition, this person also faces a spiritual problem of carrying the burden of sin and guilt for his or her incontinence. When sexual needs are met in marriage as God prescribes, a person usually lives a balanced life full of joy and happiness and is free from guilt or remorse over sexual sins. Conclusively, Paul endorses matrimony and instructs people who lack self-restraint to enjoy the sexual satisfaction that married life affords. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 7:8–9 Verse 8 [Greek] the unmarried. Notice that the definite article indicates a category and sets it off from the category of widows. The substantive adjective unmarried applies to men and to women, yet for women the Greeks generally used the word [Greek] (without a husband).^[31] [Greek] Paul writes the present subjunctive to express duration (present tense) and uncertainty (subjunctive mood): If perchance they remain. Verse 9 [Greek] with the use of the particle [Greek] and the present indicative of the verb, Paul states a fact. Moreover, the particle [Greek] (instead of [Greek]) precedes the verb to underscore the negative of the verb [Greek] (they control themselves). This verb is in the middle with a reflexive connotation (see I Clem. 30:3). [Greek] &[Greek] the first verb is the aorist active infinitive. The aorist denotes single action and is ingressive. By contrast, the second verb is the present passive infinitive to indicate continued action. b. Married and Divorced 7:10–11 10. To those who are married I give this command not I but the Lord let a wife not separate from her husband. a. To those who are married. Here Paul addresses believers who already have married. (Incidentally, with the perfect tense in the Greek of the expression have married, Paul indicates both duration and stability.) Even though he has received apostolic authority which he has demonstrated in many places (e.g., 5:5, 12; 6:18; 7:5, 8), he now appeals to the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. Throughout his ministry, Paul repeatedly quoted words uttered by Jesus. One of these, It is more blessed to give than to receive (Acts 20:35), is not even found in the Gospels. In this epistle, Paul many times discloses that he has received words or commands from the Lord, which may have come to him directly by vision or indirectly through the apostles (I Thess. 4:15). But now he alludes to words spoken by Jesus that were eventually recorded in the written Gospels. Paul asserts that he has a command for married people that comes not from himself but from the Lord. He takes the words from an oral Gospel tradition. We presume that Paul heard this statement from the other apostles, probably Simon Peter (Gal. 1:18–19), and thus received it indirectly from Jesus. Paul quotes Jesus word preserved in the Gospel tradition, which for him and the Corinthians has divine authority. In fact, the apostles and the early church accorded the same significance to the Old Testament Scriptures and the oral or written Gospel. For them, both were equally authoritative. And Paul knows that in respect to marriage and divorce, the Corinthian Christians would listen to and obey the voice of Jesus. Writing about this matter, therefore, Paul no longer exerts his authority but the Lord's. Paul steps aside and permits Jesus in speak directly to the Corinthians. b. I give this command not I but the Lord. What does the Lord command? In a discussion with Pharisees who asked him about divorce, Jesus referred them to the Scriptures. Quoting from the creation account, [God] created them male and female (Gen. 1:27) and For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh (Gen. 2:24), Jesus added his own comments. He said, So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate (Mark 10:8b 9). When subsequently the disciples desired to know more about divorce, Jesus added: Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery (Mark 10:11 12). c. Let a wife not separate from her husband. ^[32] Paul exhibits his own authorial prerogatives by reversing the order of Jesus statement. He begins with the wife and in the next verse (v. 11) mentions the husband. Note that in Matthew's Gospel nothing is said about the wife separating from her husband. Instead, the husband makes the decision and divorces his wife (Matt. 19:9). Matthew wrote his account for a Jewish audience, in which the husband could dismiss his wife for any reason. But his wife had no right to divorce her husband. The Gospel of Mark, however, written in a Roman context and addressed to Gentiles, reflects the Greco-Roman world. In that world, a woman had the right to take the initiative and separate from her husband, which is a circumscription for divorce. The possibility is real that influential women in the Corinthian church consulted Paul about marital relations and divorce. The apostle answers them with a word from Jesus. The creation account teaches the unity of husband and wife, which, according to Jesus, should not be broken. The prophet Malachi also refers to the Genesis account and denounces divorce as a breach of the marriage covenant which the husband had made with his wife. He quotes the word of the Lord God, who exclaims, I hate divorce (Mal. 2:14–16). God's intention is that marriage vows ought not to be dissolved. Jesus allows an exception only when one of the spouses becomes unfaithful to his or her partnerMatt. 5:32; the parallel in Luke 16:18omits the exception . The rule that dates from the beginning of human history is that a wife must not divorce her husband and, likewise, a husband must not send away his wife (v. 11). 11. But if she in fact leaves, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband, and let the husband not divorce his wife. a. But if she in fact leaves. The probability of divorce is all too real today. Similarly in Paul's day, divorce even among Christians was not at all inconceivable. With a conditional clause in the Greek, Paul shows that the occurrence of divorce is probable. If then Corinthian believers desired to obey the teaching of the Scriptures and Jesus, what counsel do they have for a Christian couple experiencing incompatibility that leads to divorce? Apparently, the local church was encountering a situation in which a wife initiated divorce proceedings against her husband. The question Paul must answer is how God's word in the Old Testament and Jesus teaching apply to a specific divorce case at hand in Corinth. When divorce eventually becomes a fact, what does the church say?^[33] b. Let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. Editors usually consider this part of verse 11 a parenthesis, so that the last part of verse 10 is completed by the last clause in the following verse. Is Paul giving his own opinion in the parenthetical clause or is this Jesus word? And if it is Paul's own judgment, is he going beyond the exception of unfaithfulness Jesus allowed (Matt. 5:32)? Jesus declares that God has instituted marriage, so that what he has joined together, no one should separate (Matt. 19:6). He means that the marriage partners have no right to annul the vows they have made. Neither the husband nor the wife has the power to render a marriage invalid. ^[34] In other words, in the parenthesis Paul is repeating the teachings of Jesus by permitting no exceptions to the rule of marriage. When Paul writes that a wife leaves her husband, he does not approve of the separation. Rather he commands her to remain unmarried or to be reconciled to her husband. By implying that the marriage bond should not be broken, Paul accepts the reality of separation. Yet he forbids remarriage and counsels the wife who initiates divorce to be reconciled to her husband. The term reconciliation is never used of an innocent party. God is never said to be reconciled to us, but only we to him. ^[35] If the wife initiates divorce proceedings, she should be the one to exert efforts that lead to reunion. c. And let the husband not divorce his wife. What is true for the wife is equally true for the husband. In Greek, Paul uses a synonym for divorce, literally, send away. Although in Jewish and Greco-Roman society the husband had the prerogative to divorce his wife and had greater freedom than his wife, Paul teaches what the Scriptures say on this subject. He refuses to follow the culture of his day but abides by God's Word. He prohibits the husband from dismissing his spouse. By implication, the husband must strive for reconciliation in case of a divorce, because marriage is for life. Practical Considerations in 7:10–11 Paul's advice that a wife who separates from her husband should not remarry appears contrary to what he wrote earlier in this chapter. He counseled those unmarried people who had to cope with a lack of self-control to marry (v. 9). Now he writes that the woman who plans to divorce her husband must remain unmarried. But Paul links the first statement, let her remain unmarried, to the second, be reconciled to her husband. If the first part is not observed, the second has lost its reason for existence. As long as the woman remains unmarried, there is hope for reconciliation. Divorce devastates the entire family. Separation affects husband, wife, children, relatives, and friends. Because it is harmful to everyone, divorce is something God hates (Mal. 2:16). In societies where the extended family is a close-knit unit, relatives exert themselves to prevent divorce if at all possible. In the church community, too, members have the corporate responsibility to help fellow members when they need counsel and advice. When difficulties arise in family life, the members of Christ's body should lend their corporate wisdom to deter permanent ruptures in family life and should facilitate healing. Describing the church, Paul writes: If one members suffers, all the members suffer with it. If one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it (12:26). 3. Believer and Unbeliever 7:12–16 12. To the rest I say I, not the Lord: If any brother has an unbelieving wife and she consents to live with him, let him not send her away. Observe the following points: a. Apostolic authority. To the rest I say I, not the Lord. If we follow today's writing procedures, we would place the preceding passage (vv. 10 11) in quotation marks and introduce it with the phrase Jesus said. Verse 12 would then begin with the introduction, To the rest I say. But Paul is writing in the style of his day. He indicates that he no longer appeals to a word spoken by Jesus but now speaks on his own authority as he does in many places throughout this chapter.^[36] He faces the problem of mixed marriages in which the husband is a believer and the wife an unbeliever or vice versa. In this situation, Paul has to make a ruling on the basis of his apostolic authority. In the first part of the chapter (vv. 2 7), Paul discusses conjugal rights in relation to the institution of marriage (Gen. 2:24). Next he addresses the unmarried and the widows in the church (vv. 8 9) and follows this with a word from the Lord for married couples who are believers (vv. 10 11). Now he encounters the problem of believers and unbelievers in the context of marriage. They are the last group of people to receive apostolic advice. Hence Paul writes, To the rest I say. He has no word for the unbelievers. The church now approaches the apostle to the Gentiles and seeks an answer to marital questions that relate to a Christian-Gentile husband and wife. Paul must speak on this subject with the authority Christ has given him and give advice that is in harmony with Jesus teaching. b. Mixed marriage. If any brother has an unbelieving wife and she consents to live with him, let him not send her away. Throughout the Old Testament God forbids his people to marry Gentiles, and this is true also for the Corinthians. Elsewhere Paul tells them to marry only in the Lord (II Cor. 6:14–18). But in the present situation, a Gentile husband has accepted the gospel and puts his faith in Jesus Christ. Yet his wife remains steadfast in her pagan beliefs and fails to follow her husband in his newfound faith. Paul's advice to the Corinthians is founded on the biblical principle that marriage ought not to be dissolved. He advises the couple to stay together when the unbelieving wife is fully content to live with her believing husband. Paul calls this husband a spiritual brother (see 1:1) who gives leadership as the head of the house. If his wife is happy to stay with him and the husband is content with her, says Paul, then keep the marriage intact. 13. And if any woman has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, let her not send him away. Paul is addressing people in the Greco-Roman world, in which the wife had the right to divorce her husband. This was not the case in Jewish society, in which only the husband could initiate a divorce. The word woman in this context signifies that this person is a believer. She has become a Christian but her husband has not (yet) come to faith in Christ. However, apart from this religious issue, the couple lives together harmoniously. If the husband is content to live with his believing wife, Paul's advice to her is to stay with him and entertain no thoughts about divorce. In the case of mixed marriages, Christian spouses should do everything in their power to stay with their unbelieving partners. They should never be the first to seek divorce. Paul's counsel is: Stay where you are. 14. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified by his [Christian] wife and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified by the [Christian] husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. a. Problem. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified by his wife. In the Greco-Roman culture of the first century, mixed marriages as a rule meant that Christian wives had pagan husbands. A Christian husband normally would not have an unbelieving wife. The New Testament repeatedly mentions accounts of a Christian who is baptized with his entire household (Acts 16:32 34; 18:8; I Cor. 1:16). In these instances, the wife also became a Christian.^[37] Due to the harshness many Christian wives had to endure from unbelieving husbands (I Peter 3:1–6), Paul first alludes to the believing wife who lives with a pagan husband and then the reverse. In these families, the unbelieving spouse has been sanctified by the believing partner. What precisely is the meaning of the verb has been sanctified? The unbelieving husband or wife remains a Gentile and yet Paul declares that he or she has been consecrated. The incongruity of this marital relationship is striking, especially when Paul writes that a believer's body is a member of Christ himself (6:15). How can an unbelieving spouse be sanctified? b. Answer. We ought to be careful about reading too much into the text. However, the gospel penetrates the world so that in a given family one spouse becomes a Christian but not the other. Then the believing spouse by conduct, word, and prayer may win his or her partner for Christ. Because of Christ's power, the influence of a believer is often stronger than the influence of an unbeliever.^[38] Writes Calvin, For the godliness of the one does more to sanctify the marriage than the ungodliness of the other to make it unclean. ^[39] In other words, God's purpose to save his people is much more inclusive than our limited understanding of the process of salvation. Paul is not saying that an unbelieving husband or wife has been made morally holy through his or her Christian spouse. No, man is unable to sanctify or to save a fellow human being. What the apostle means to say is that an unbelieving spouse who lives intimately with a Christian marriage partner experiences the influence of holiness. To be sanctified means that a person is influenced by the claims of Christ. The converse is equally true: anyone who is not sanctified is influenced by the claims of a world that is opposed to Christ. In the Greek, the verb to be sanctified is in the perfect tense, which denotes that from the moment the spouse became a Christian his or her unbelieving partner comes in contact with holiness. c. Sanctified. A study of the Scriptures reveals that the Greek word to sanctify has at least four different meanings. It signifies, first, to set things aside for sacred functions (e.g., items relating to worship at the tabernacle [ (Exod. 29:37, 44]); next, to consecrate people by either baptismI Cor. 6:11), a Christian marriage (I Cor. 7:14), or atonement for sin (Heb. 9:13); third, to reverence people, names, or things (I Peter 3:15); and last, to purity someone from evil.^[40] The second meaning of the verb to sanctify applies to the verse at hand. The believing husband or wife sanctified the unbelieving spouse much as the temple sanctified the gold connected with it, or the altar the gift laid upon it (Matt. 23:17, 19).^[41] The object was not holy in itself but was holy by association. Paul is not saying that the Gentile spouse has a personal relationship with Christ, for then he or she would no longer be called an unbeliever. Nonetheless, this person's conduct is affected by that of the Christian partner. He or she agrees to live with a Christian in whom God's Spirit resides, fulfills the obligations that stem from the institution of marriage (Gen. 2:24), and keeps the marriage intact in obedience to Jesus command (Matt. 19:6).^[42] Both spouses live in a sanctified environment, for the home is consecrated by the reading and application of God's Word and by prayer. Paul also declares holy the children who were born either before or after the spouse's conversion to Christianity. d. Children. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. What about the next generation? Paul mentions the children reared in a family in which only one parent is a Christian. Although he writes two descriptive adjectives (unclean, holy) for the children of mixed parentage, he unequivocally asserts that they are holy if one parent is a believer. He implies that children are consecrated on the basis of the Christian parent's faith; they are not declared unclean on the basis of a parent's unbelief. In short, faith triumphs over unbelief in the family. Paul declares the unbelieving spouse sanctified and the children holy. But what is the difference between the words sanctified and holy in respect to this family? Whereas the unbelieving husband or wife is sanctified by the believing spouse, the children of this spouse enjoy a covenant relationship. God made a covenant with his people and blesses it throughout the generations (Gen. 17:7). Writing about the Jewish people whom God declares holy, Paul says: If the root is holy, so are the branches (Rom. 11:16). When God sanctifies his people, he calls them to live a life of constant holiness. A Christian mother may claim the covenant promises that her children are sanctified in God's sight and called to holiness. Timothy was the son of a Jewess and an unbelieving Greek father. His grandmother Lois and mother, Eunice, raised him in a godly home where he learned to put his faith in Jesus (II Tim. 1:5). Covenant children are to be counted a part of God's people and should be nurtured in the Christian faith and in the fear of the Lord (Eph. 6:4). ^[43] The text fails to indicate whether Paul has in mind only the children in mixed marriages or also children of believing parents in general. If he means the latter, there is all the more reason to consider these children holy, especially when they themselves confess their faith. These children are incorporated into the life of the church through the sacrament of baptism.^[44] 15. But if the unbeliever departs, let him leave. A [Christian] brother or sister is not bound in such matters. God has called us to peace. a. But if the unbeliever departs, let him leave. The words of Paul paint a picture of reality, because the first clause of this sentence states a simple fact. If the unbelieving husband refuses to support the faith of his wife and finds it impossible to live in a Christian atmosphere, let him go. Then he no longer can be considered sanctified through his believing wife. The economic consequences for Christian wives forsaken by their husbands were often severe; these women experienced untold hardship. It is likely that women who had little or no dowry for support found themselves divorced, isolated and penniless for the sake of the gospel. ^[45] Paul advises the Christian sister, Do not stand in his way if he leaves the house. Paul is completely in harmony with his earlier advice that Christians ought not to divorce their spouses (vv. 10 13). But if the unbeliever decides to dismiss his wife, he, not his marriage partner, takes the full responsibility for the divorce. b. A [Christian] brother or sister is not bound in such matters. We have no difficulty understanding Paul's ruling to accept the voluntary departure of the unbelieving spouse. But what is the meaning of the verb is bound? Is he implying that the forsaken party is now no longer bound to his or her marriage vows (Rom. 7:2)? Is he or she free to remarry and start anew? The literal meaning of the phrase is not bound alludes to enslavement: a brother or sister is not enslaved. The unbeliever is the one who breaks the marriage bond, which God had meant to be for life. Now the believer is no longer bound to that union, for his or her unbelieving spouse has made a breach with God rather than with his or her partner. ^[46] In this verse Paul neither forbids nor advocates remarriage for the forsaken spouse and leaves this matter an open question (compare vv. 9, 11). He is interested in the Christian's witness to the world, including the unbelieving husband or wife. He urges the Christian to seek peace with the unbelieving spouse. Paul wants the Christian marriage partner to live in obedience to Christ's gospel and thus to oppose valiantly the forces of the evil one (Eph. 6:15). c. God has called us to peace. This is one of the fundamental principles in the New Testament.^[47] In the previous chapter Paul told the Corinthians not to go to court but by mediation to settle their differences peacefully (6:1–8). Now he recommends peace in marriage by forbidding divorce and promoting reconciliation. This does not mean peace at any cost, for the Christian spouse cannot abrogate his or her faith. What Paul is saying is that the believer who endures divorce must show not hostility but conciliation toward his or her unbelieving spouse. The Christian provides the non-Christian partner opportunity to return and reestablish the marriage. Perhaps the unbelieving spouse will exclaim, I will go back to my husband [or wife] as at first, for then I was better off than now (Hos. 2:7). Paul forbids Christian husbands and wives to seek divorce. But, he says, if a Christian wife initiates divorce, she has to remain unmarried or be reconciled to her Christian spouse (vv. 10 11). With regard to an unbelieving partner, a Christian spouse must give him or her an opportunity to return and restore the marriage. 16. For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife? As long as the unbelieving partner demonstrates his or her willingness to live with the Christian spouse, he or she is sanctified. The continual Christian witness of a believing spouse may prove to be effective in aiding the unbeliever to come to faith in Christ. This witness remains in effect even for the unbelieving spouse who has left voluntarily (v. 15). Paul's general declaration that God has called us to peace also covers family life. When in Paul's day a husband became a Christian, his wife would normally adopt the Christian faith. Peter addresses a similar marital problem: a wife who had become a believer had to live with her husband who did not embrace Christianity and showed resentment and hostility. Peter advises the Christian wife to be submissive to her husband and by her behavior to win him over to Christ (I Peter 3:1). When Paul says that neither believing husbands nor believing wives know whether they will be instrumental in saving their pagan spouses, he points out that only God can save his people. We are unable to effect salvation, yet we are instruments in God's hand to bring it about. The believer must always hope, knowing that God will effect his plan and purpose (II Sam. 12:22; Esther 4:14; Joel 2:14; Jonah 3:9). Does Paul encourage or discourage divorce in a marriage in which the unbelieving spouse departs? In view of his emphasis on peace, albeit not at any price, he discourages divorce. Findlay keenly observes that the Corinthians, with their lax moral notions, needed dissuasives from rather than encouragements to divorce. ^[48] The apostle's advice remains the same: do not break your marriage vows. Practical Considerations in 7:15 Divorce is a soul-wrenching experience and should be avoided if possible. The cultural stipulations for marriage in ancient times demanded that the groom give the bride's father a dowry that consisted of a mutually agreed sum of money or services rendered. But a dowry could also consist of a gift which the father gave to his daughter at the time of marriage. When divorce ended marital ties, the husband departed from his wife without giving her any support. And a Christian wife could not return to her pagan family. Her father would be reluctant or would refuse to take care of a daughter whose husband had sent her away because of her religion. Her only recourse was to go to members of the church for spiritual and financial aid. How is the Christian today to cope with a situation in which divorce has become reality? As members of the body of Christ, we feel the hurt and the harm a divorced person has to suffer. We must speak words of encouragement and provide material and spiritual help. When a Christian woman is divorced by her unbelieving husband, she should know that the Lord will provide for her in all her needs. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 7:12–16 Verse 12 [Greek] &[Greek] the rest. David L. Dungan remarks that this is Paul's customary way of referring to non-believers. ^[49] In a few passages (Eph. 2:3; 1Thess. 4:13; 5:6), this expression is synonymous with [Greek] (the Gentiles). But in the Corinthian context, Paul addresses the spouses in mixed marriages and tells the Christian partners to give leadership. [Greek] this combination expresses authority: I say. The personal pronoun shows emphatic contrast or antithesis to A [Greek] (see v. 10). [Greek] Paul writes the conditional clause twice (vv. 12, 13) to express the fact that he is addressing reality. [Greek] the demonstrative pronoun in the feminine singular has its antecedent in the word wife. The translation should be this one, but it is given as if the text reads [Greek] (she) that serves as the third person personal pronoun (see also [Greek] instead of [Greek], v. 13). Verse 13 [Greek] this compound verb expresses both mutuality (husband and wife both agree to live together) and intensity (she or he is fully content). Verse 14 [Greek] after the word wife, a few Western and other manuscripts have inserted first, the adjectival expression [Greek] (the believing) and next, the corresponding term [Greek] after the word brother (see NAB). I have not adopted the Western reading, but for the sake of clarity I have added the word Christian in brackets (compare REB). [Greek] and [Greek] the preposition with the dative case may denote place (in the sphere of) or cause (because of). [Greek] instead of brother the Majority Text has the reading [Greek] (husband), which nearly every translator has adopted. Yet the better manuscripts have the reading brother. Bruce M. Metzger notes that although the word husband is a more fitting correlative to the term wife than the word brother, the special force of [Greek] [has] not been appreciated. In order to recapture some of the nuance belonging to [Greek], in a subsequent modification [Greek] was added to [Greek]. ^[50] Verses 15 16 [Greek] the particle with the present indicative tense [Greek] (he departs) expresses a factual statement. The present middle imperative [Greek] (let him depart) is permissive. [Greek] &[Greek] the preposition has the function of [Greek] with the meaning God has called you into a peace in which he wishes you to live. ^[51] This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 8. Food Offered to Idols (8:1–13) Outline (continued) 1 B. Food Offered to Idols 4. Sin B. Food Offered to Idols 8:1–13 8 1 Now concerning the food offered to idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. 2 If someone supposes that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. 3 But if someone loves God, he is known by God. 4 Concerning the eating of food offered to idols, then, we know that there is really no such thing as an idol in this world [Greek] -2 _ftnref1 [Greek] and that there is no God except one. 5 For even if there are so-called gods either in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, 6 yet, for us there is one God the Father, from whom all things are and for whom we live, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and through whom we live. 7 However, not everyone has this knowledge. Because they are accustomed to the idol even now, some people eat food as if offered to idols. And their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8 But food will not bring us close to God. We are neither losing anything if we do not eat nor gaining anything if we do eat. 9 But beware that this right of yours not become a hindrance to those who are weak. 10 For if someone sees you who have knowledge dining in an idol's temple, will not the conscience of someone who is weak be emboldened so that he will eat food offered to idols? 11 For the weak brother for whom Christ died is destroyed by your knowledge. 12 Thus you sin against Christ by sinning against your brothers and by wounding their weak conscience. 13 Therefore if food causes my brother to stumble into sin, I will never eat meat again that I may not cause my brother to stumble. After discussing the ethical question of marriage in the previous chapter, Paul now proceeds to a topic that is both ethical and religious: may a Christian eat meat that had been offered to idols? The matter concerns the domestic and social life of numerous Christian families who have to make decisions whether or not to eat with Gentile friends. In Paul's day, pagan sacrifices were religious acts that involved the family. Animals brought to the priest were slaughtered and sacrificed to the gods. Certain parts were burned on the altar, other parts were taken by the priest, and the rest of the consecrated meat was returned to the family that had offered the animal as a sacrifice. The family would invite friends and relatives, among whom were Christians, to a feast. At other times, consecrated meat was sold in the markets. Christians then bought the meat and consumed it in their homes. Members of the Corinthian church faced the question whether they should eat meat that had been consecrated to an idol in a pagan temple. Were they free to go to such a feast? Could they enjoy themselves in the name of Christian liberty (see 6:12; 10:23)? The conscience of some believers was clear while that of others was burdened (8:7). The one party could say to the other party, Do not be overrighteous, and the second party could retort, Do not be overwicked (Eccl. 7:16–17). 1. Knowledge 8:1–3 1. Now concerning the food offered to idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. a. Now concerning the food offered to idols. With the first two words of this text (see 7:1, 25; 12:1; 16:1, 12), Paul turns to the next question in the letter he had received from the Corinthians. The expression (food offered to idolsis a direct reminder of the Jerusalem Council's instructions to Gentile Christians: to abstain from food that had been sacrificed to idolsActs 15:29; 21:25; Rev. 2:14, 20). By implication, the Gentile Christians were debating whether the injunction was comprehensive or flexible. We expect that Jewish Christians consumed only kosher food, yet they were free to eat with Gentile Christians (Gal. 2:11–14). And then there was also the brother with a weak conscience (vv. 7 13), who was at a loss to know what to do. In short, the issue of food that had been offered to idols was hotly debated in the Corinthian church. And Paul at this juncture in his epistle devotes much time and effort to the sensitive question of Christian liberty in relation to food that was eaten in a Jewish-Gentile setting (10:14–33). b. We know that we all have knowledge. Scholars agree that the last part of this sentence is a quotation taken from the letter which the Corinthians had sent to [Greek] -2 _ftnref2 [Greek] Throughout this epistle, Paul repeatedly employs the verb to knowin his debate with the Corinthians (see, for example, 1:16; 3:16; 6:2, 3; 8:1, 4). The Christians in Corinth had been boasting about their knowledge. Notice that they do not say: We have knowledge. Instead, they assert that all the Christians in the Corinthian community and elsewhere possess [Greek] -2 _ftnref3 [Greek] Even though Paul fails to explain the term knowledge,we deduce a few facts from the context. The Corinthians believed that idols were nothing and that God is one (v. 4). Thus, they knew that this one God is Father, and that the one Lord is Jesus Christ (v. 6). Paul soberly reminds them that not everyone knows this (v. 7). However, if the Corinthians exalt knowledge, Paul has something to say to them. c. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. In an earlier context in which he commended the readers for having this treasure (1:5), Paul had already spoken about knowledge. But now Paul suggests that knowledge leads to arrogance, which should be absent from a Christian lifestyle (v. 11; 13:2). A Christian must begin with love. He is able to build his spiritual life only on the foundation of love. Knowledge without love puffs up. Love itself is never arrogant (13:4) but is always constructive. By implication, knowledge that is subordinate to love becomes useful. 2. If someone supposes that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. 3. But if someone loves God, he is known by God. We observe these two points: a. Knowledge.Paul continues his response to the letter he had received from the Corinthians. He reacts to the attitude of a church member who supposes that knowledge is everything. The emphasis is on the verb suppose,a verb that reveals the haughty stance of the Corinthian who glorifies knowledge. But elsewhere in this epistle Paul observes that knowledge passes away, because it is incomplete and imperfect (13:8–10). By itself knowledge is always limited in scope, extent, and depth. In the first clause, Paul uses the verb (to knowin the perfect tense. With this tense, he indicates that the person who imagines he possesses knowledge has accumulated and perfected it for some time already. The result is that this person thinks he knows everything. But Paul wants to have nothing to do with this haughty attitude; he cuts the person off by saying: he does not yet know as he ought to know. Paul already has told the Corinthians that if any of you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become foolish that he may become wiseGal. 6:3). What, then, is the beginning of true knowledge? John Calvin notes that the foundation of true knowledge is personal knowledge of [Greek] -2 _ftnref4 ([Greek] We are able to recognize such knowledge when we see grace, humility, integrity, and obedience at work in a person's life. A believer recognizes his limitations when he confesses that only God has infinite knowledge and wisdom. Hence, Paul urges the Corinthians to reexamine their perspective on knowledge and to understand what they ought to know. They must realize that all knowledge is derivative and comes from God through Christ. All the treasures of God's wisdom and knowledge are stored in ChristCol. 2:3). True knowledge therefore has a spiritual dimension that relates to God, who bases knowledge on love. Knowledge by itself is not wrong; indeed it is essential to life. But when a person fails to link knowledge to divine love, he deceives himself and fails utterly. b. Love.But if someone loves God, he is known by God. Human knowledge is temporal but divine love is eternal. Here Paul links the two concepts and intimates that the essential ingredient of knowledge is love. Without true love, knowledge ceases to be meaningful. But the believer, who loves God, fully comprehends that he is known by God. This does not mean that because of man's love for God he receives divine recognition. The initiator is not man but God. G. G. Findlay provides a quaint but nevertheless characteristic summary: Paul would ascribe nothing to human acquisition; religion is a bestowment, not an achievement; our love or knowledge is the reflex of the divine love and knowledge directed toward us. [Greek] -2 _ftnref5 [Greek] In fact, the Greek uses the perfect tense for the passive verb is knownto imply that the act of knowing took place in the past but has a result that is evident in the present. Two concluding remarks to this segment. First, the message of verse 3 with its emphasis on love contrasts the essence of verse 2 with its emphasis on knowledge. Next, the last part of verse 3 is a small digression from Paul's intention to speak about food offered to idols. Yet, Paul had to stress the biblical truth that God has shown his people (Exod. 33:12, 17; Gal. 4:9; I John 4:19). Practical Considerations in 8:1–3 In the first century, when people aspired to church membership they were baptized and instructed in the truths of Christianity. These truths were the elementary teachings of Christ (Heb. 6:1–2), and in later years included both the Apostles Creed and the Lord's Prayer. From the sixth to the sixteenth century, instruction in the Christian faith was given primarily in the family circle. The Reformation necessitated the writing of numerous catechisms. In 1529, Martin Luther wrote his larger and shorter catechisms to instruct the people who were ignorant of the basic teachings of Christianity. John Calvin composed a catechism in 1536 and diligently educated the people in Geneva every week. The Heidelberg Catechism of 1563 became a standard instructional guide in the Reformed churches in Germany, the Netherlands, and America. In England, the Westminster theologians composed their shorter and larger catechisms in 1646 and 1647 respectively. These educational tools were designed to inculcate the Christian faith especially in the hearts and minds of the children of believers and of inquirers. Throughout the centuries following the Reformation, teachers of the catechisms have been instrumental in imparting biblical knowledge. At times this instruction became an intellectual exercise separated from genuine faith and love. Consequently, knowledge was glorified, with ecclesiastical stagnation following as an inevitable result. In recent times, however, the problem which the church faces is not a lack of love but a lack of knowledge. The problem with the members of the church is not intellectual arrogance but rather biblical ignorance. The rich heritage of the past is no longer passed on from generation to generation. Apart from the Apostles Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, many church members know little of the Bible's content. Because of this scriptural illiteracy, the church's need of the hour is solid instruction in the truths of God's Word. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 8:1–3 Verse 1 [Greek] this substantivized verbal adjective in the neuter genitive plural derives from the noun [Greek] (idol) and the verb [Greek] (I sacrifice). It signifies meat that was sacrificed to an idol and either eaten at feasts or sold in the [Greek] -2 _ftnref6 [Greek] Its synonym [Greek] (meat sacrificed to a divinity) appears in 10:28. ! [Greek] in this text, the noun knowledgeis an attribute ascribed not to God but to man. Some scholars see a link between the situation in Corinth and the Gnostic movement of the second century. However, all we are able to say with certainty is that in the middle of the first century, the beginning stages of Gnosticism were scattered here and there. As the epistles of John reflect, toward the end of that first century the Gnostic heresy entered the church. But in Paul's day Gnosticism was still in the stage of being [Greek] -2 _ftnref7 [Greek] Verses 2 3 [Greek] the perfect active infinitive of [Greek] (I know) denotes an action in the past with lasting effect in the present. [Greek] the aorist tense of this verb is ingressive and is qualified by the negative not yet. [Greek] the middle/passive voice of this verb in the perfect tense is not middle but passive, he is known [by God]. The verb is synonymous with the verbs (calledand chosenby GodRom. 8:28–30). 2. Unity 8:4–6 4. Concerning the eating of food offered to idols, then, we know that there is really no such thing as an idol in this world and that there is no God except one. a. Concerning the eating of food offered to idols, then. In this passage, Paul resumes the subject he introduced earlier (v. 1) and once more speaks about the matter of food offered to idols. This problem is both vexing for the readers and intricate for Paul, who had to give answers to a Christian community with a divided and varied constituency. Many of the members had roots in paganism and needed Paul's guidance to cope with the question of eating sacrificial food that had come from a pagan temple. b. We know that there is really no such thing as an idol in this world. [Greek] -2 _ftnref8 ([Greek] Once again Paul quotes from the letter which the Corinthians had sent to him. He presents the line with the same phrase used earlier (v. 1) and says, We know. Paul repeats a spiritual truth which the Corinthians learned from the Scriptures and which now surfaces in the letter: an idol is nothingIsa. 44:12–20). The unknown psalmist compares Israel's God to the idols of the nations and says: But their idols are silver and gold, made by the hands of men. They have mouths, but cannot speak, eyes, but they cannot see; they have ears, but cannot hear, noses, but they cannot smell; they have hands, but cannot feel, feet, but they cannot walk; nor can they utter a sound with their throats. Those who make them will be like them, and so will all be who trust in them. [Ps. 115:4–8; 135:15–18] c. And that there is no God except one. The last part of the verse is also taken from the letter which the Corinthians addressed to Paul. It echoes the scriptural teaching that there is but one God. This is summarized in the Hebrew creed: Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one (Deut. 6:4; see Ps. 86:10; Isa. 44:8; 45:5). The Jews recited this creed twice a day, in the morning and in the evening. The Christian church inherited this creed from the Jews, but did not recite it morning and evening. The Corinthians confess their belief that God is one; for that reason, they say, no idol really exists. If there are no real idols but merely inanimate objects made out of wood, stone, or metal, the Corinthians argue, they are free to partake of meat which had been dedicated to such [Greek] -2 _ftnref9 [Greek] They regard their freedom to eat this food in the context of Christian liberty. 5. For even if there are so-called gods either in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords. Paul writes the first part of a concessive sentence in this verse, but he fails to complete it grammatically. In verse 6 he begins a new sentence. This is due to the poetic structure of verse 6 and a lack of a smooth transition between the two verses. What is Paul saying when he states that there are so-called gods in heaven or on earth? Is he not contradicting the preceding confession of the Corinthians that there is but one God? Not at all. He allows the Gentiles to employ their word choice when they say that there are gods in heaven and on earth. But by inserting the word so-called,he effectively questions the reality of these gods. Like the psalmists, Paul repudiates the gods whom the Gentiles [Greek] -2 _ftnref10 ([Greek] He notes that these gods exist in name only; they are devoid of authenticity. They fail to lay claim to divinity, because God rules supreme in heaven and on earth. Even though people worship Satan, whom Jesus called the prince of this worldJohn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11), Satan is not and never will be divine. The Gentiles worshiped numerous gods and lords. They paid homage to gods that dwelled in heaven, were on the earth, and were in the [Greek] -2 _ftnref11 [Greek] The expression lordsprobably signifies spiritual beings of a lower rank who were regarded as subordinates to the gods themselves. 6. Yet, for us there is one God the Father, from whom all things are and for whom we live, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and through whom we live. Scholars debate whether Paul composed this verse, because it appears here in the form of a creedal statement. Some say that Paul is the [Greek] -2 _ftnref12 [Greek] while others contend that he borrowed the [Greek] -2 _ftnref13 [Greek] Did Paul write these words or did he quote a confessional formula that was current in Hellenistic Jewish communities of the Christian church? The evidence is inconclusive. But in his epistles, Paul demonstrates an ability to compose doctrinal tenets, so we are unable to preclude Pauline authorship. To illustrate, Paul formulates his doctrinal tenets on the resurrection of the dead (e.g., see 15:12–18, 42 44). a. Yet, for us there is one God the Father. The contrast that Paul presents is between the so-called gods and the one God and Father. The Gentiles placed their gods in either heaven, earth, or sea. But our God, says Paul, is one God who is not confined to one location but is everywhere (Ps. 139:7–10). In the Gospels and even in Acts (1:4, 7), Jesus teaches his disciples to address God as Father (Matt. 6:9). When he refers to God, he repeatedly uses that name. God and the Father are one. The apostles likewise note that God is Father of both Jesus and the [Greek] -2 _ftnref14 [Greek] With the term Father,Paul suggests the family concept and intimates that we are God's children. b. From whom all things are and for whom we live. When Paul addresses Gentiles in both Lystra and Athens, he teaches that God created this world (Acts 14:15 17; 17:24–31). Paul provides instructive doctrine for the Corinthian Christians. It corresponds with his Areopagus speech, we are his offspring (Acts 17:28). And he emphasizes his teaching that all things come from God as we live for him (Rom. 11:36). In Greek, the words (all thingssignify the totality of things without any exclusion; God has made everything in all his creation. These two words also occur in Paul's account of Christ creating the universeCol. 1:16; and compare John 1:3; Heb. 1:3). Thus, God the Father has created all things through his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. We owe our existence to God the Father and therefore live for him. c. And one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom all things are. Notice that Paul calls Jesus Lord but not God. At the same time, he intimates that Jesus is divine through the work of creation and redemption. Here Paul treads softly, so that he will not be accused of contradicting his earlier statement that God is one. Yet, he teaches Jesus divinity and eternity by stating that all things in creation came into being through Jesus Christ. d. And through whom we live. Of these lines, the last part relates to the redemption Christ has given us. Christ has created and redeemed us, so that we live through him. In a few short parallel lines, Paul teaches the doctrines of God, Christ, creation, and salvation. By inference, we conjecture that these doctrines were known to the Corinthians. Presuming that Paul composed these lines, we have no difficulty seeing that they were easily learned, memorized, and adopted by his readers. The parallelism is striking indeed, and in their simplicity they convey deep spiritual truths that strengthen the Christian's faith. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 8:4–6 Verses 4 5 [Greek] with the repetition of [Greek] (see v. 1), Paul resumes his discussion prompted by the Corinthians query on food offered to idols. The Majority Text, reflected in at least three translations -2 _ftnref15 (KJV, ) -2 _ftnref16 (NKJV, ) -2 _ftnref17 (NJB), inserts the word [Greek] (other). Stronger and more widely representative witnesses lack this word; hence most scholars do not include it. [Greek] &[Greek] even if. The particle [Greek] is intensive and enclitic. The clause is concessive; nevertheless, the truth of the principal sentence is stoutly affirmed in the face of this one objection. [Greek] -2 _ftnref18 [Greek] Paul puts it as an extreme case. Verse 6 [Greek] the preposition denotes origin but the relative pronoun refers to God, from whom. In the combination [Greek] (through whom), the preposition signifies agency, but the pronoun refers to Christ. [Greek] the definite article strengthens the adjective to make the concept all-inclusive. 3. Conscience 8:7–8 7. However, not everyone has this knowledge. Because they are accustomed to the idol even now, some people eat food as if offered to idols. And their conscience, being weak, is defiled. a. However, not everyone has this knowledge. The first word is a strong adversative. It reveals that not every believer in Corinth had full knowledge of the doctrines of God, Christ, and creation which Paul had just expounded. Paul has in mind those Christians who recently had come out of paganism and whose faith in the Lord was weak because of ignorance. As a pastor and teacher, Paul is responsible for the entire membership of the church. Although he wrote that in general all of them have knowledge (v. 1), he now asserts that the weak Christians lack particular [Greek] -2 _ftnref19 [Greek] We assume that Paul learned about the lack of knowledge among some of the believers from the Corinthian delegation (Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus [16:17]). Now he addresses their need. b. Because they are accustomed to the idol even now, some people eat food as if offered to idols. This sentence seems almost out of place if we consider that Paul calls the Corinthians sanctified and holy (1:2). He tells them that they are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives within them (3:16; 6:19). Yet in the present verse he reveals that the weak Christians in Corinth are accustomed to idols. The contradiction vanishes when we realize that in the Greek Paul uses the word idolsin the singular. If he had used the plural, he would have shown that some of the weak believers were still serving the gods of paganism. With the use of the singular, however, Paul refers to the pagan environment out of which the believers recently had come. The customs of their Gentile relatives, friends, and acquaintances were integrally tied to an idol. And these customs continued to have a conceptual influence on the weak [Greek] -2 _ftnref20 [Greek] Even though they no longer worshiped and served idols, they were not yet released from the influence of their own past. The believers who were strong said that idols were nothing but wood and stone. Yet every time the weak Christians came in contact with something that related to an idol, they were confronted with a conflict. They were like a former addict who fights an inner battle every time he comes in contact with drugs. With the words even now,Paul acknowledges the spiritual problems the weak Christians are encountering. The association they have had with the idol until their conversion remains with them to the present even after their conversion. Paul ministers to these people by showing his understanding of their plight and thus displays his love. He knows that in their associations with Gentiles, they no longer worship idols. Later in this context he exhorts them to continue their efforts to shun idolatry (10:14). But now he deals with their problem of eating food which might have been offered to idols. c. Eat food as if offered to idols. The spiritually strong Christians could declare that food which might have come from a temple remains ordinary food, but those who were spiritually weak were unable to say so. For them, the associations with the practices of paganism made them cringe when they ate meat that probably had come from an animal sacrificed in a temple. Any link with paganism became a stumbling block for the weak Christians. They probably were acquainted with the decree of the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:29). Although the strong might even enter a temple and eat meat that had been sacrificed (v. 10), the weak would not even think of buying this meat at the marketplace and preparing it in their [Greek] -2 _ftnref21 [Greek] Beside staying away from the temples, they refused to consume sacrificial meat even in their own houses (see 10:27–28). d. And their conscience, being weak, is defiled. Paul is describing the subjective experience of the weak believers when he writes about their conscience being defiled. If they ate food that derived from a pagan temple, they thought that they had participated in idol worship in some way. What is the meaning of a person's conscience being defiled? Those who are weak lack definitive principles of conduct. When they eat meat that is tainted by idolatry, they are burdened by a conscience that similarly has been stained. Their conscience is weak because knowledge of themselves is deficient in comparison with fellow [Greek] -2 _ftnref22 [Greek] They lack knowledge and self-confidence. A person's conscience must be well informed to function properly. If this is not the case, he or she needlessly stumbles at various places on life's pathway (vv. 10 12). 8. But food will not bring us close to God. We are neither losing anything if we do not eat nor gaining anything if we do eat. a. Text.If we compare a few translations, we immediately notice two differences. One concerns the verb tense in the first sentence; some translations have the future, will not bring -2 _ftnref23 (RSV, ) -2 _ftnref24 (NRSV, ) -2 _ftnref25 (NEB, ) -2 _ftnref26 (REB), and others emphasize the present, does not bring -2 _ftnref27 (NIV, ) -2 _ftnref28 NAB, NJB . The manuscript evidence favors the future tense, which scholars explain in relation to the judgment day. The question is whether the Corinthians are concerned about their coming to God in worship or about the effects of the final judgment. The other difference influences the word order in the second sentence. Does the negative precede the positive or should the order be reversed? A few translators begin with the positive -2 _ftnref29 (Phillips), whereas the others have adopted the order we prefer. Gordon D. Fee surmises that the order of the negative followed by the positive is the more difficult reading and hence the [Greek] -2 _ftnref30 [Greek] b. Origin.This particular chapter lists a few quotations from the Corinthians to which Paul responds. In this verse we also seem to have a statement that the strong Corinthians used in their conversations with the weaker members of the church. Because the next verse (v. 9) definitely is Paul's response, the present verse appears to come from the Corinthians [Greek] -2 _ftnref31 [Greek] c. (Meaning.But food will not bring us close to God. What the strong Corinthians are saying is that food in itself has no religious significance. Paul readily agrees with that opinion. In another epistle he writes, For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinkingRom. 14:17). In other words, these Corinthians are telling their weaker brothers and sisters not to worry about consequences when they eat food that may have been offered to an idol. Do not be burdened by a guilty conscience, say the strong, for God will not hold you responsible in the day of [Greek] -2 _ftnref32 [Greek] The Corinthian slogan Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food (6:13) expresses the same thought. We are neither losing anything if we do not eat nor gaining anything if we do eat. The second part of the quotation from the letter written by the Corinthians emphasizes the first part. Since food by itself has no moral value, the strong believers were saying that they are not losing or gaining anything. They eat or obtain food and show their obedience to God (Phil. 4:12). Notice that they are not using the expression food offered to idols;instead they talk about ordinary food that is eaten. Perhaps by their choice of words, the Corinthians wish to indicate that even meat offered to an idol is only common food. Paul would have to agree with those Corinthians who championed the cause of Christian liberty. But he had to take issue with them for their lack of love and compassion for weaker brothers and sisters. By calling all foods common, they refused to see the point of view of those whose conscience bothered them when they ate food that had been sacrificed to an idol. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 8:7–8 [Greek] note the strong adversative that follows the preceding verses but refers to the first verse (v. 1). [Greek] this noun features a causal connotation, because of custom. The word has strong manuscript support, but this is equally true for the alternate reading. However, textual scholars hold that the alternate reading, [Greek] (conscience), apparently arose through assimilation to the following [Greek]. [Greek] -2 _ftnref33 [Greek] [Greek] in the future active tense from the verb [Greek] (I bring before). It is a legal term and refers to court proceedings. Like the noun [Greek] (v. 7), it has the support of the stronger manuscripts and is preferred to the reading with the present tense, [Greek]. 4. Sin 8:9–13 9. But beware that this right of yours not become a hindrance to those who are weak. With an adversative, Paul indicates that although he agrees with the general sentiment of the quotation (v. 8), he rejects the context in which it is used. In preceding verses (vv. 1 2), he had told the Corinthians that knowledge and love must go hand in hand. Knowledge by itself results in arrogance, but when it is accompanied by love, it edifies. And Paul, discovering an absence of love in the conduct of some Corinthians (Rom. 14:15), now registers a pastoral objection. Paul detects a dangerous attitude that will undermine the unity of the church. He commands the readers to beware of their own conduct. He drafts the phrase (this right of yours,in which the pronoun thisreflects a trace of his dislike for the apparent haughtiness of some CorinthiansLuke 15:30). Moreover, this is the second time the word weakoccurs in this chapter (see v. 7). If this expression comes not from Paul but from these spiritually strong Corinthians, a measure of arrogance seems [Greek] -2 _ftnref34 [Greek] They aggressively claim for themselves the right to Christian liberty. However, just as knowledge without love produces pride, so freedom without love generates arrogance. The Corinthians have the right to assert their freedom to eat food, for Paul himself teaches that no food is unclean in itself (Rom. 14:14). Yet Christian liberty must always be observed in the context of love for one's neighbor in general and the spiritually weak brother or sister in particular. The right that a Christian legitimately exercises should never become a hindrance to a fellow believer. Paul uses the word stumbling blockto describe a specific obstacle a Christian can place on someone's pathway. And the hindrance here is eating sacrificial meat, which was an offense to others in the church. The freedom which a Christian enjoys must always be asserted in the context of serving one another in love (Gal. 5:13). His attitude should not be a hindrance to the weaker members of the church. Paul is not saying that those who are weak take offense but rather that those who are strong give offense. The members who promote their right to be free are exerting undue pressure on those whose conscience restricts them from eating certain kinds of meat. Paul, therefore, alerts the freedom-loving Corinthians to demonstrate love by not offending their fellow church members. 10. For if someone sees you who have knowledge dining in an idol's temple, will not the conscience of someone who is weak be emboldened so that he will eat food offered to idols? We make these observations: a. Dining.Taking a situation from daily life, Paul envisions the possibility of a spiritually strong Corinthian who sits and eats in the temple of an idol. This believer might be asked to come to a celebration held in one of the many dining rooms of the temple. There the meat of an animal sacrificed to an idol would be consumed. He could reason that the idol was nothing more than a piece of hewn stone and the meat was ordinary food. His faith in God remained strong. Further, he would refuse to break bonds of family or friendship. He would feel obligated to attend a feast to which he was invited and would consider the meal an occasion for fellowship with relatives and friends. Because of his firm knowledge of the Christian faith, he would not see any harm in his presence at a festive meal in a temple dining room. Although Paul provides an illustration by using the singular (you,his intention is to portray the reality of a common occurrence. The possibility is not unreal that Erastus, for example, who was the city's director of public works in CorinthRom. 16:23) and a member of the local church, might attend such functions. Maintaining Christian liberty, Paul does not reprove a person who eats in a temple dining room. He correctly observes that a spiritually strong believer is not worshiping an idol but only enjoying the company of family and friends. By contrast, in a later passage (10:19–20) Paul comments on idolatry and there delineates the sin of worshiping an [Greek] -2 _ftnref35 [Greek] Now he calls attention not to the eating in a dining room but to the effect this action may have on a weaker brother. This action has the potential of leading a weaker brother into idolatry. b. Conscience.The weak brother is probably not a Jew, for a Jew would not think of entering a temple to eat meat that was sacrificed to an idol. Instead, the weak brother is likely a Gentile who recently converted to Christianity, whose spiritual knowledge is limited, and whose conscience is [Greek] -2 _ftnref36 [Greek] Paul now asks the strong Christian a question that probably conveys a touch of irony: Does the act of eating in a temple embolden the conscience of the weaker brother? [Greek] -2 _ftnref37 [Greek] By his conduct, the one who is strong is leading the weak one; but the fact is that he leads his brother astray. If a spiritually weak person enters the dining room and eats, his conscience is defiled instead of strengthened (see v. 7). Hence, not the weak brother but his weak conscience is emboldened. The inner voice of his conscience no longer keeps him in [Greek] -2 _ftnref38 [Greek] At the beginning of his discussion of this subject, Paul noted that knowledge leads to pride and love leads to edification (v. 1). Paul now reiterates the same thought in different words. Conduct without love and consideration can be disastrous, especially for the spiritually weak who follow the example of the strong person to lead the way. The full responsibility for the spiritual health of the brother rests on the shoulders of the person who has knowledge. His inconsiderate conduct constitutes a sin against [Greek] -2 _ftnref39 [Greek] 11. For the weak brother for whom Christ died is destroyed by your knowledge. When the weak brother eats sacrificial meat in a pagan temple, he associates his act with idol worship. His confidence is destroyed because of his qualms of conscience. Instead of being built up he is torn down. Paul looks at the consequences of the conduct of the knowledgeable brother who intentionally overrides the objections that the weak brother raises. Paul knows that the insensitive conduct of the brother with knowledge destroys the weak brother for whom Christ died. What the apostle is saying in this verse concerns the spiritual life of the weak Christians. Here is a threefold explanation of Paul's point of view: First, with the word order, Paul makes every word count in this text; he stresses especially the verbs to destroyand to die. These two verbs are key words. In this sentence, the verb to destroyis in the present tense to indicate that the action already is [Greek] -2 _ftnref40 [Greek] The weaker brother is being destroyed. With the present tense he conveys progressive action but not the thought that the weak brother has been lost. Next, the immediate context (v. 12) features the verb to injure, woundin the present tense. This verb is a synonym Paul uses to explain the meaning of to destroy. And last, the parallel passage in Romans 14:15and its context shed light on the present verse. If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. If Christ paid the supreme sacrifice by dying for this weak brother, then the least a strong brother can do is to demonstrate neighborly love to fellow Christians by not eating certain foods. The intent of this verse is to depict the contrast between the death of Christ and the callousness of the strong Corinthians. Two additional observations on this passage. First, Paul is not teaching that a strong Christian can cause a spiritually weak brother to perish, for he writes brother instead of sinner or man. He implies that Christ continues to protect this person from harm and will enable him to stand (Rom. 14:4). In brief, loving this brother so much that he died for him, Christ will also make him withstand temptation. Second, some translators introduce the helping verb could -2 _ftnref41 (JB) or would -2 _ftnref42 (SEB) to convey the probability of experiencing ruin but not the actuality of being lost eternally. The weak brother is stunted in his spiritual growth by the lack of love from fellow [Greek] -2 _ftnref43 ([Greek] Nonetheless, Christ has redeemed and sanctified him (1:2) and regards him as his brotherHeb. 2:10–11). Paul no longer speaks in generalities but addresses the strong Corinthians personally. He writes, yourknowledge, and calls attention to the loveless attitude of these Corinthians who are puffed up by knowledge (v. 1). Also, the use of the personal pronoun youseems to reveal that the current problem involved a number of people. By contrasting Christ's death as an illustration of the greatest love imaginable with the loveless knowledge of some Corinthians, Paul encourages his readers to express their love to the weaker members of the church. 12. Thus you sin against Christ by sinning against your brothers and by wounding their weak conscience. Conclusively, the apostle comes to the heart of the matter. He writes the verb to sintwice in the same sentence. In the Greek, he accentuates this word by having the form sinningnear the beginning of the sentence and the form sinat the very end. Note these terms: a. Sin against Christ.By writing the present tense of the verb to sin,Paul notes that the Corinthians are in the process of committing the sin of lovelessness against Christ. The present tense points out the relevance and seriousness of their insult to Christ, even though their insensitivity is directed against their own brothers in Christ. When Paul was blinded by heavenly light near Damascus, Jesus asked why he persecuted him. In bewilderment, Paul queried Jesus who he was. The reply was, I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting (Acts 9:5; 22:8; 26:15). Jesus and his brothers and sisters are one, so that an offense against a believer is an offense against Jesus (Matt. 25:41–46). b. (Against your brothers.The strong Corinthians are sinning against their own brothers, that is, the church. They commit sin by their attitude toward fellow members in Christ. And consequently, not their fellow members but they themselves are culpable and will face judgment. Soldiers fighting a war ought not to aim their weapons at fellow soldiers. Christian brothers who sin against fellow Christians sin against God and meet him as judge who is able to save and destroyJames 4:12). c. Wounding their weak conscience.Here is a literal translation of this phrase: striking their conscience that is in a weakened condition. Believers who are expected to encourage and instruct fellow members repeatedly strike their weakened conscience. What requires the tenderest handling is brutally treated, so that its sensibility is numbed. [Greek] -2 _ftnref44 [Greek] From an objective point of view, the strong Corinthians continually wound the weak conscience of a brother by inducing him to eat sacrificial meat. They hit him not physically but spiritually; they strike an already weak conscience that becomes numb. From a subjective point of view the wounded conscience of the believer causes a lack of [Greek] -2 _ftnref45 [Greek] 13. Therefore if food causes my brother to stumble into sin, I will never eat meat again that I may not cause my brother to stumble. The conclusion to this part of the discussion is that Paul himself will provide leadership in the Corinthian church even while he is physically absent. If the spiritually strong Christians fail in their responsibility to strengthen the weak, Paul will set the example. This verse is a conditional sentence that expresses reality and certainty. The readers can be assured that Paul indeed will do that which he is telling them. Paul writes the general word (foodinstead of the term sacrificial meat,which was at the center of the discussion (see vv. 1, 4, 7, 10). The matter of eating food should not become a stumbling block to anyone in the church. Paul himself scolded both Peter and Barnabas for their refusal to eat with Gentile Christians in AntiochGal. 2:11–14). He and his associates delivered the letter of the Jerusalem Council to the Gentile Christians (Acts 15:29). Jewish Christians even refused to buy meat in a local Gentile market for fear of eating food that had been offered to an idol. They fully kept the law of Moses (Acts 21:20). Gentile Christians, too, were careful in dining with Gentile friends. For the sake of his Christian brother, Paul says, I will never eat meat again that I may not cause my brother to stumble. In the next chapter of this epistle, he states unequivocally that to those who are weak I became weak to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that at least I might save some (9:22). Paul was willing to forego eating certain foods so that he might advance the cause of Christ, the spread of the gospel, and the growth of the church. Did Paul suggest that every Christian should become a vegetarian? No, not at all. But Paul is willing to go to any extreme to avoid hurting the conscience of anyone for whom Christ [Greek] -2 _ftnref46 ([Greek] And if that extreme means not to eat meat for some time, Paul readily adapts. He submits even his Christian liberty to the principle of love. What he is asking every believer to do is to show genuine Christian love to fulfill the summary of the Decalogue: to love God with heart, mind and soul, and to love one's neighbor as oneselfMatt. 22:37–39). Indeed, Augustine expresses a comment to this effect: As long as you love God and your neighbor, you may do whatever you wish and you will not fall into sin. Additional Note on 8:10 The Jerusalem Council stipulated that Gentile Christians were to abstain from food sacrificed to idols (Acts 15:29). But in Corinth, Paul allowed Christians to enter a temple and participate in feasts held in one of its dining rooms. Paul's consent in this chapter appears to be contradictory, especially because he forbade the eating of sacrificial meat in 10:14–22. Is Paul lax in the one chapter (8:10) and strict in the other (10:18–22)? Hardly. What Paul is trying to do is walk the thin line between allowing Christian liberty and strengthening the consciences of the weak. To put it differently, in chapter 8 Paul addresses the strong but in chapter 10 the weak. Sacrificial meat in itself is not harmful. If Christians should attend a feast where this meat was served, they were free to partake provided they did not hurt the conscience of weaker Christians. But whenever the eating of meat was directly associated with idolatry, Paul condemned this practice (10:7, 14). When a Christian became a participant in idolatry (10:18, 20), he would forge a spiritual association with an idol and thus become an idolater. Whenever Gentiles were worshiping an idol, a Christian should have nothing to do with them. He ought to know that God is a jealous God (Exod. 20:4; Deut. 5:8). In the words of James, You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God (James 4:4). Practical Considerations in 8:12 In today's world, sin is taken lightly. Often it is considered something amusing, especially when it relates to sexual immorality. When the news media mention sexual escapades of prominent people, the expression used is not sin but rather character weakness. Indeed, the thinking seems to be that the term sinshould not be applied to anyone because it might damage a person's reputation. Although the consequence of sin is evident, people like to pretend that there is nothing wrong. In many parts of the world, sin is an embarrassment for the offender when his deed becomes common knowledge. Disgrace can be removed by a restorative action of presenting the offended party an appropriate gift. If the offense remains undetected, the guilty person continues to act as though nothing has happened. In the Greco-Roman world of Paul's day, sin was a matter of frustration. Sin was compared to an archer who misses the mark and thus experiences failure. Sin, therefore, was a lack of skill that continual training could overcome. It was not something that was taken seriously. The Scriptures, however, teach that sin is a personal affront to God and a transgression of the laws he has established. Sin is stepping over the legal boundaries within which we should live and work. Sin is an insult to God because we choose no longer to serve him but an idol. And idolatry is nothing but spiritual adultery. God loves his people like a bridegroom loves his bride. Instead of loving him as our spouse, we turn to idols and commit adultery. Sin can be forgiven only through the shedding of blood in the Old Testament era the blood of animals foreshadowed that of Christ. In the New Testament era, the sinner is cleansed through Christ's blood shed at Golgotha. As the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews aptly puts it: and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness (Heb. 9:22). Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 8:9–13 Verses 9 10 ! [Greek] the word order of this phrase is emphatic: this right of yours. The noun [Greek] refers to the liberty of some Corinthians to eat sacrificial meat (also compare 9:4–6, 12, 18; 11:10). [Greek] the conditional sentence with the aorist subjunctive expresses probability: for if someone should see you. Yet the context of this passage seems to indicate that eating in a temple dining room was a frequent occurrence. [Greek] with this negative particle, Paul poses a rhetorical question that demands a positive answer. The clause itself discloses a shade of irony. [Greek] &[Greek] this present infinitive of purpose expresses the effect on the weak brother embolden him to eat. Verse 12 [Greek] the present tense of this participle with the present tense of [Greek] (striking) and the present tense of the verb [Greek] (you are sinning) all convey an impression of frequency. [Greek] this conjunction is used in the explicative sense to particularize and explain that which has been [Greek] -2 _ftnref47 [Greek] [Greek] notice that Paul uses not the adjective [Greek] (weak) but the present active participle in the feminine accusative singular of the verb [Greek] (to be weak). The participle depicts descriptive action. Verse 13 [Greek] a combination of [Greek] (therefore) and the enclitic particle [Greek] which adds intensive or extensive force. Here it stresses the connection of the clauses [Greek] -2 _ftnref48 [Greek] [Greek] the particle introduces a simple-fact conditional sentence that expresses reality and certainty. The noun is purposely chosen to indicate any kind of solid food. Summary of Chapter 8 The letter Paul had received from the Corinthians contained many questions. He answers the query concerning food offered to idols and discloses the insufficiency of declaring that an idol is nothing. The Corinthians know that there is but one God, the Father, who created all things; and they know there is one Lord Jesus Christ. Although God and Jesus Christ are known, the fact that idols are nothing is not fully known. Some people are still burdened by idolatry, idols, and foods offered to them. These people have weak consciences that become defiled. Yet food by itself has no religious value. The freedom which some Corinthians exercise, however, may be a stumbling block to the weak. Paul warns them not to lead a brother astray when they eat food in the temple of an idol. If they crush the conscience of a weak brother, they sin against their brothers and against Christ. Paul himself is willing to abstain from eating meat to keep a weak brother from falling into sin. -2 _ftn1 1 Bauer, p. 446. -2 _ftn2 2 E.g., Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), p. 365; and the versions (GNB, NRSV, REB). -2 _ftn3 3 Jerome Murphy-O Connor, Freedom of the Ghetto (1 Cor., 8, 1 13; 10, 23 11, 1), RB85 (1978): 545. -2 _ftn4 4 John Calvin, The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, Calvin's Commentaries series, trans. John W. Fraser (reprint ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), p. 172. -2 _ftn5 5 G. G. Findlay, St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians, in vol. 3 of The Expositor's Greek Testament, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, 5 vols. (1910; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961), p. 840. Although Fee opts for a shorter reading of the text and a different meaning, he lacks the support of the translators. First Corinthians, pp. 367–68. -2 _ftn6 6 Consult Gordon D. Fee, EidMlothytaOnce Again: An Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 8 10, Bib61 (1980): 172–97. -2 _ftn7 7 Hans Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, ed. George W. MacRae, trans. James W. Leitch, Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975), pp. 15, 140. Among scholars who ascribe Gnosticism to some Corinthians, see Walter Schmithals, Gnosticism in Corinth: An Investigation of the Letters to the Corinthians, trans. John E. Steeley (New York: Abingdon, 1971), pp. 225–37; R. A. Horsley, Consciousness and Freedom among the Corinthians: 1 Corinthians 8 10, CBQ40 (1978): 574–89; and Gnosis in Corinth: 1 Corinthians 8. 1 6, NTS27 (1981): 32–51. -2 _ftn8 8 Literally, An idol is nothing in the world. In the Judeo-Christian context, the word worldwould relate to createdness and serve as a substitute for existence. Many versions choose a form of this substitute. Consult Murphy-O Connor, Freedom of the Ghetto, p. 546. -2 _ftn9 9 See Bruce W. Winter, Theological and Ethical Responses to Religious Pluralism 1 Corinthians 8 10, TynB41.2 (1990): 209–26. -2 _ftn10 10 (See, e.g., Pss. 82:1, 6; 95:3; 96:4; 97:9; 136:2; 138:1. ) -2 _ftn11 11 Refer to John Albert Bengel, Bengel's New Testament Commentary, trans. Charlton T. Lewis and Marvin R. Vincent, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1981), vol. 2, p. 208. -2 _ftn12 12 E.g., see Fee, First Corinthians, p. 374; Archibald Robertson and Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, International Critical Commentary, 2d ed. (1911; reprint ed., Edinburgh: Clark, 1975), p. 168. -2 _ftn13 13 For instance, Jerome Murphy-O Connor, 1 Cor. 8, 6: Cosmology or Soteriology, RB85 (1978): 253–67; R. A. Horsley, The Background of the Confessional Formula in 1 Kor 8.6, ZNW69 (1978): 130–35. -2 _ftn14 14 (E.g., Acts 2:33; Rom. 1:7; 6:4; 8:15; 15:6; Eph. 1:2; I Peter 1:2; I John 1:2; Rev. 1:6. See also Mal. 2:10. ) -2 _ftn15 KJV King James Version -2 _ftn16 NKJV New King James Version -2 _ftn17 NJB New Jerusalem Bible -2 _ftn18 15 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research(Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 1026. -2 _ftn19 16 Wendell Lee Willis avers that the words we knowin verse 1a are part of a quotation on knowledge which then contrasts the knowledge of verse 7. However, we are not persuaded that the words we knowbelong in the quotation. See Idol Meal in Corinth: The Pauline Argument in 1 Corinthians 8and 10, SBL Dissertation Series 68 (Chico, Calif.: Scholars, 1985), pp. 68, 88. -2 _ftn20 17 A few translations reflect the Majority Text which has the reading conscience in the place of custom. Of the two readings, the second is the harder to explain and therefore is preferred. -2 _ftn21 18 Consult Bruce N. Fisk, Eating Meat Offered to Idols: Corinthian Behavior and Pauline Response in 1 Corinthians 8 10, TrinityJ10 n.s. (1989): 49–70. -2 _ftn22 19 Consult Paul D. Gardner, The Gifts of God and the Authentication of a Christian, Ph.D. diss., Cambridge University, 1989, p. 49; Claude A. Pierce, Conscience in the New Testament(London: SCM and Naperville, Ill.: Allenson, 1955), pp. 75–83; Colin Brown, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 352. -2 _ftn23 RSV Revised Standard Version -2 _ftn24 NRSV New Revised Standard Version -2 _ftn25 NEB New English Bible -2 _ftn26 REB Revised English Bible -2 _ftn27 NIV New International Version -2 _ftn28 NAB New American Bible -2 _ftn29 Phillips The New Testament in Modern English, J. B. Phillips -2 _ftn30 20 Fee, First Corinthians, p. 377 n. 6. -2 _ftn31 21 Consult the list that John C. Hurd, Jr., has compiled in The Origin of I Corinthians(Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1983), p. 68. -2 _ftn32 22 Jerome Murphy-O Connor, Food and Spiritual Gifts in 1 Corinthians 8:8, CBQ41 (1979): 292–98. -2 _ftn33 23 Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 3d corrected ed. (London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 557. -2 _ftn34 24 Consult Roy A. Harrisville, I Corinthians, Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament series (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1987), p. 141. -2 _ftn35 25 Fisk, Eating Meat Offered to Idols, pp. 62–64. -2 _ftn36 26 Paul W. Gooch, St. Paul on the Strong and the Weak: A Study in the Resolution of Conflict, Crux13 (1975 76): 10–20. -2 _ftn37 27 Bauer, p. 558; R. St. John Parry, The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1937), p. 133. -2 _ftn38 28 F. W. Grosheide, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes, New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p. 196. -2 _ftn39 29 Consult Harold S. Songer, Problems Arising from the Worship of Idols: 1 Corinthians 8:1 11:1, RevExp80 (1983): 363–75. -2 _ftn40 30 The Majority Text has the future tense that is placed in an interrogative sentencePhillips; and GNB in a declarative sentence . -2 _ftn41 JB Jerusalem Bible -2 _ftn42 SEB Simple English Bible -2 _ftn43 31 Consult F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians, New Century Bible (London: Oliphants, 1971), p. 82. -2 _ftn44 32 Robertson and Plummer, First Corinthians, p. 173. -2 _ftn45 33 Consult Paul W. Gooch, Conscience in 1 Corinthians 8and 10, NTS33 (1987): 244–54. -2 _ftn46 34 John C. Brunt, Rejected, Ignored, or Misunderstood? The Fate of Paul's Approach to the Problem of Food Offered to Idols in Early Christianity, NTS31 (1985): 113–24. -2 _ftn47 35 Friedrich Blass and Albert Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans. and rev. Robert Funk (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), #442.9. -2 _ftn48 36 C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek, 2d ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960), p. 164. 9. Apostles and Rights (9:1–27) Outline (continued) 9:1–27 C. Apostles and Rights 9:1–12 1. Apostolic Rights 9:1–2 a. Marks of Apostleship 9:3–6 b. Defense 9:7–12 c. Service 9:13–18 2. Surrender of Rights 9:13–14 a. Remuneration 9:15–18 b. Reward 9:19–27 3. Apostolic Freedom 9:19–23 a. Paul's Strategy 9:24–27 b. Paul's Illustrations C. Apostles and Rights 9:1–27 9 1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 2 If I am not an apostle to others, at least I am to you. For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. 3 My defense to those who examine me is this: 4 Do we not have the right to eat and drink? 5 Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife as also the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas do? 6 Do Barnabas and I not have the right to refrain from physical labor? 7 Who serves in the army at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat its fruit? Or who tends a flock and does not drink from its milk? 8 I am not speaking these things according to man, am I? Or doesn't the law say these things? 9 For in the law of Moses it is written, Do not muzzle the ox while it is threshing. God is not concerned with oxen, is he? 10 Or is he actually speaking on account of us? For on account of us it is written, because the plowman ought to plow in hope and the thresher ought to thresh in hope of sharing the crop. 11 If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap a harvest of material things from you? 12 If others share in this right [of support] over you, don't we have it all the more? However, we did not use this right, but we endure all things so as not to hinder the gospel of Christ. 13 Do you not know that those who administer the holy services eat the food from the temple? And those who regularly serve at the altar share in the offerings that are on the altar? 14 Thus also the Lord directed those who preach the gospel to get their living from the gospel. 15 But I have not used any of these privileges. And I do not write these things that in this way it may turn out for my benefit. For I would rather die than.& No one shall render void my reason for boasting. 16 For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast about. I am compelled to preach, for woe to me if I do not proclaim the gospel. 17 If I do this of my own choice, I have a reward. But if I do so under compulsion, I simply fulfill the stewardship entrusted to me. 18 What then is my reward? When I preach the gospel, I offer it free of charge so as not to make full use of my authority in the gospel. 19 For though I am free from all men, I was a slave to all to win as many people as possible. 20 To the Jews I conducted myself as a Jew to win the Jews; to those who are under the law I became as one under the law, though I myself am not under the law, to win those under the law. 21 To those who are without the law I became as one without the law, though I am not without the law of God but under Christ's law, to gain those who are without the law. 22 To those who are weak I became weak to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all means I may save some. 23 And I do all things for the sake of the gospel that I may jointly share in it. 24 Do you not know that they who run in a race are all running, but only one receives the prize? So run the race that you may win. 25 And everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all respects. They do this to receive a perishable crown, but we an imperishable crown. 26 Indeed I run in such a way as not losing aim; I box in such a way as not beating air. 27 But I treat my body roughly and enslave it, so that after I have proclaimed the gospel to others, I myself do not become disqualified. Chapter 9 appears to be an interlude or a deviation from the discussion in chapter 8 and 10:14–30, but on closer examination, we observe that in 8 10 Paul develops the concept of freedom of choice or right, which he explicitly mentioned in the preceding chapter (8:9). The theme of this chapter is Christian freedom of choice, and in it Paul relates the concept to his apostleship, social life (9:4–5), and service in the church (9:12, 18). Paul possesses Christian freedom of choice, for he has apostolic rights. But for the sake of the gospel he often declines to exercise his freedom. He wants the believers in Corinth to act similarly and to live in such a way that the Lord is honored and their fellow church members are edified. Paul also wants to prevent his readers from saying that he is detached from and fails to speak to the problems in the community. To be precise, some of the Corinthians even called his words insignificant (II Cor. 10:10). 1. Apostolic Rights 9:1–12 a. Marks of Apostleship 9:1–2 1. Am I not free? Am I not an apostle?^[1] Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? Paul poses a series of four questions that relate to his life and apostleship and that demand affirmative answers. The initial question, Am I not free? forms a natural bridge between the last verse of the preceding chapter (8:13) and this verse.^[2] This question has nothing to do with the matter of the slave and the freedman (7:21–23). Rather, it concerns the freedom that Paul enjoyed in Jesus Christ. He defends himself against anyone who wishes to take issue with him by asking a question that requires a positive response. From Paul's associations with the Corinthians in the past, they had to acknowledge his freedom, particularly in his eating and drinking with them (Gal. 2:11–16). Am I not an apostle? (compare 1:1). Indignantly Paul confronts criticism of his apostolic status. Since his conversion, he knew that his opponents had criticized him. They said that he could not fulfill the apostolic requirements drawn up when the apostles cast the lot to appoint Matthias as successor to Judas. An apostle had to have followed Jesus from the time of his baptism in the River Jordan to his ascension at the Mount of Olives and had to be a witness of Jesus resurrection (Acts 1:21 26). Paul was not numbered among the Twelve and he lacked the instruction Jesus had given them. But he knew that Jesus had called him to be an apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; 22:21; 26:16–18). Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Paul defends his apostleship on the basis of his experience on the road to Damascus, an experience that confirmed Jesus resurrection. No one in Corinth could claim ignorance of Paul's conversion experience and Jesus personal appearance to him (Gal. 1:12, 15 16). We assume that they were thoroughly familiar with that account. In this sentence Paul chooses his words carefully. He writes the word Jesus, not Christ, to refer to the historical Jesus of Nazareth.^[3] When Paul uses the single name, he depicts the earthly Jesus (II Cor. 4:10–14; Eph. 4:21; Phil. 2:10; I Thess. 4:14). And Paul adds the descriptive title our Lord to emphasize that only the Lord is able to appoint someone to apostleship. The pronoun our demonstrates that Paul and the Corinthians have a common bond in Jesus. Are you not my work in the Lord? The Corinthians themselves had to admit that if Paul had not proclaimed Christ's gospel, they would still have been living in spiritual darkness. As Gentile Christians, they themselves were proof positive that Paul was an apostle to the Gentiles. The work of founding a church is not a human endeavor that can be executed apart from the Lord; it can be done only in the Lord. 2. If I am not an apostle to others, at least I am to you. For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. As a former persecutor of the church, Paul realized that the Christian church would question his apostleship (II Cor. 10:1–11; 12:11–21; 13:1–10; Gal. 1:1, 22 23). In his absence from the Corinthian congregation, the question was raised whether he was an apostle or an imposter. Who were these people that sowed doubt in the hearts of believers? Were they Judaizers who instigated tension among the Corinthians and refused to acknowledge Paul's apostleship?^[4] We would have expected Paul to provide further details (Gal. 1:6–7; 5:10), but conclusive evidence is lacking. Whoever they may have been, those whom Paul calls others are not members of the church in Corinth. He is not an apostle to them, but he decidedly is an apostle to the Corinthians. John Calvin paraphrases Paul's intent: If there are some who have doubts about my apostleship, that should not be so in your case, however, for, since I planted your church by my ministry, either you are not believers, or you are bound to recognise me as an apostle. ^[5] Paul's certainty lies in the seal of his apostleship which he received in the Lord. With the word seal he identifies the Corinthian church. Its members confirm his apostolic authority and are the seal of his authentic apostolate. Indeed, they are his letters of recommendation (II Cor. 3:2).^[6] Paul's credentials are valid because the Corinthian community itself certifies them. Moreover, with a conditional sentence If I am not an apostle to others, at least I am to you Paul states the reality of the situation. Once more Paul writes the prepositional phrase in the Lord (see v. 1). He notes that the Corinthian believers abide in the sphere of the Lord. By implication, if the Lord appoints Paul to be an apostle, then they who are in the Lord inevitably validate his apostleship. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:1–2 [Greek] instead of the negative particle [Greek], which he used for the first two questions, Paul now writes [Greek] to accentuate a sharper tone in the third question. [Greek] the preposition is not instrumental; it is locative and denotes relationship. [Greek] the adversative [Greek] and the particle [Greek] modify the tone of the apodosis in this simple-fact conditional sentence: to you at least I am. b. Defense 9:3–6 3. My defense to those who examine me is this: 4. Do we not have the right to eat and drink? a. Textual division. The word this may refer to either the preceding two verses (vv. 1 2) or the verses that follow (vv. 4 5). Scholars who connect verse 3 to the preceding verses apply the term this to Paul's apostleship that is sealed by the Corinthian church.^[7] Conversely, those who see verse 3 as the beginning of a new paragraph place a colon after the term this and apply it to Paul's apostolic rights.^[8] Of the two interpretations, the second is preferred because the general context stresses Paul's rights. b. Defense. A second difficulty relates to Paul's words my defense. Is he writing about a court of law to which he has been called to give an account (Acts 22:1)? The fact that the wording is borrowed from the field of law seems to demand an affirmative answer. But in view of the geographical distance that separated Paul from his questioners (from Ephesus to Corinth), we presume that Paul spoke figuratively. In the context of the epistle, why does Paul speak of defense? Because Paul was a Jew and not a Gentile, the Gentile Christians in Corinth considered him to be bound to the Mosaic food laws. By stating that he would forego eating meat, he effectively precluded the possibility of consuming sacrificial meat. He defends his freedom to not exercise his rights. Succeeding verses provide the answer that Paul has the right to food, drink, companionship, and support (vv. 4 5, 12). Yet he refuses to press this right because he desires to further the cause of the gospel. He encourages table fellowship but declines to eat sacrificial meat to avoid hurting the conscience of a brother. As a Christian redeemed by Jesus Christ, he enjoys freedom from the Mosaic law but chooses not to avail himself of this freedom. He has the right to have a wife to accompany him, but he opts to remain single so that nothing may hinder him in preaching and teaching the gospel. According to the Lord's command that a worker deserves his wages (Luke 10:7; I Tim. 5:18), the Corinthians who received Paul's teachings were obligated to support him financially. But when Paul resided in Corinth at the home of Aquila and Priscilla, he plied his tentmaking trade to support himself (Acts 18:2 3). With respect to preaching Christ's gospel, Paul unequivocally informed the Corinthians that he offered his services free of charge (v. 18). c. Doubts. The fact that Paul declined to exercise his rights caused some Corinthian believers to raise questions about his conduct. Paul's response to these questions was that he figuratively faced a trial during which interrogators presented inquiries concerning his behavior. Perhaps these faultfinders were looking for an apostle whose conduct peerlessly met all their expectations. They were the vocal minority in the congregation, but they failed to intimidate Paul, who boldly presented his defense and advanced the cause of Christ. Paul asks his opponents whether he has the right to eat and to drink. This question demands an affirmative reply. That is, the church had to provide room and board for him as recompense for the labors he performed in their midst.^[9] Although there is valid reason to link this verse (v. 4) to 8:9, where the word right occurs in a discussion about freedom to eat meat, we are inclined to look at the succeeding rather than the preceding context. Paul speaks no longer of sacrificial food but of eating and drinking at the expense of the church in Corinth. In the following verses he informs his readers that he has refrained from using his privilege of financial support (vv. 15 18). We lack sufficient information about specific charges Paul's opponents are leveling against him. Our explanations, then, rest not on specific evidence but on conjecture. 5. Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife as also the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas do? a. Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife? A literal translation of the Greek is a sister (in the Lord), a wife, which in a polished translation becomes a believing wife. Paul asks the Corinthians whether he has the right to travel with a believing wife. They will have to agree that he has the right to be married and have a wife as his travel companion.^[10] Whether Paul was married at one time is difficult to determine. But in view of his knowledge of the intimacies of married life (see the commentary on 7:1–9), it is plausible to suppose he had been married. The intimacy of husband and wife is strengthened by the common bond they possess as believers in Jesus Christ. And a missionary couple give themselves completely to the work of extending the church. If Paul had had a wife to accompany him, she would have suffered shipwreck; she would have experienced a lack of food and drink and would have had insufficient clothing (II Cor. 11:23–28). b. As also the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas do? Even though Acts is known as the Acts of the Apostles, the book relates accounts of only two apostles: Peter and Paul (John is mentioned incidentally). We know nothing from Scripture about the lives and travels of the others who belonged to the Twelve. When Paul mentions the rest of the apostles, he implies that he was well informed about their travels and family circumstances, and so were the Corinthians. Apart from tradition, which says that Thomas journeyed as far as India, we know little about the work of the apostles. We assume that Paul is thinking of the Twelve and not about a broader circle of apostles that included Barnabas, Andronicus, and Junias (Acts 14:3, 14; Rom. 16:7; I Thess. 2:6). The brothers of the Lord are those whom Matthew and Mark mention in their respective Gospels: James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3). They are the half-brothers of Jesus, who, as John reports, did not believe in Jesus during his earthly ministry (John 7:5). But after his resurrection, Jesus appeared to James (I Cor. 15:7). On the day of Jesus ascension, his brothers with their mother, Mary, and the other women met with the eleven apostles in the upper room (Acts 1:14). The Book of Acts and the epistles of James and Jude aside, we are ignorant of the work of Jesus brothers. The name Cephas, of course, is the Aramaic name for Peter (John 1:42). The Gospel writers describe Jesus healing Peter's mother-in-law in Capernaum (Matt. 8:14–15; Mark 1:29 31; Luke 4:38 39). Now Paul relates that Peter took his wife along on missionary journeys. We are unable to verify whether Peter had been in Corinth at any time. Because Paul mentions him repeatedly in this letter^[11] and now even refers to his wife, we assume that Peter had visited the church in Corinth. 6. Do Barnabas and I not have the right to refrain from physical labor? If we interpret Paul's first question concerning eating and drinking to mean that the church was obligated to supply the apostles with food and drink, then it corresponds with this third question. Here Paul asks whether Barnabas and he have the right to do exclusively spiritual work, and the answer to this query is a resounding yes. If Paul and Barnabas are thus engaged, the church will have to support them financially. But how does the second question fit in the context? Had Paul been married, the church would have been obligated to support him and his wife an extra monetary burden for the church. Why does Paul mention Barnabas? Paul had had a disagreement with Barnabas in Antioch of Syria (Acts 15:39 40) that caused a separation between these two co-workers. Yet Paul mentions Barnabas in his letter to the churches in Galatia (Gal. 2:1–13). If we say that Paul wrote this epistle after the unpleasant episode in Antioch, we infer that Paul's relations with his colleague Barnabas were restored. Barnabas was Paul's companion on his first missionary journey to Cyprus and southern Asia Minor. (During Paul's second journey to Asia Minor, Macedonia, and Greece, Silas accompanied him.) We have no proof that Barnabas ever visited Corinth. But we have every reason to believe that with the healing of the breach between these two friends, they met each other again, perhaps even in Corinth. Both Barnabas as a Levite and Paul as a Pharisee had learned a trade to support themselves. We know that Paul was a tentmaker but we have no information about the trade of Barnabas. We know that Greek culture despised physical labor, yet Paul, who had the rank of teacher, worked with his own hands to generate financial support. No wonder that the clash of cultural backgrounds caused the people in Corinth to raise questions concerning Paul's conduct. He had the right to ask for sustenance, but he refused to avail himself of this right.^[12] Practical Considerations in 9:3–6 When God instituted the priesthood in Israel, he also instituted tithing. The priests and Levites would receive no inheritance in the promised land. They had to collect a tithe from their fellow Israelites for their support and for the maintenance of the tabernacle and its services.^[13] Throughout the Old Testament era, the descendants of Levi were supported by the tithes of God's people. In Jesus day, the practice of tithing was strictly observed, especially by the Pharisees (Matt. 23:23). Even the poor widow cast her two pennies into the temple treasury (Mark 12:41 44), and thus gave all she possessed. When Jesus sent out his disciples two by two, he instructed them not to take along any money, food, or bag (Matt. 10:5–9; Mark 6:7 11; Luke 9:3 5). He told them that the worker is worth his pay, which was their assurance that God would provide for them in all their needs. He gave the rule that a worker in God's kingdom should receive his income from God's people (Luke 10:7). If at all possible, ministers and missionaries should work full time in preaching and teaching God's Word. In turn, the people they serve should support them financially, so that these pastors and missionaries will be able to meet their daily needs. Although tent-making ministries have their place and purpose, God's people ought to raise the necessary funds to provide for the needs of the clergy. Last, the members of the church express their love and gratitude to the Lord when they cheerfully give their tithes and offerings (II Cor. 9:7). From Sunday to Sunday they present their gifts to the Lord as an act of worship and expect them to be used to the glory of his name. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:3–6 Verse 3 [Greek] this possessive adjective is stronger and more expressive than the enclitic [Greek] (my), especially when placed between the definite article! and the noun [Greek] (defense). [Greek] the position of this demonstrative pronoun at the end of the verse favors the interpretation that it refers to the succeeding verses. Verses 4 5 [Greek] the negative particle at the beginning of each verse introduces rhetorical questions that normally demand a negative reply. However, in both verses the main verb is negated by the particle [Greek], so that with the double negative the rhetorical questions receive affirmative answers. [Greek] the apposition of two nouns means that the first one describes the second: a sister (in the lord) as a wife. Verse 6 [Greek] in the singular, the adjective applies grammatically only to Paul. By extension, however, it also applies to Barnabas. [Greek] the particle negates the present infinitive to work. Nevertheless, because of the comparative particle $ at the beginning of the verse, the sentence depends on the negative [Greek] of the preceding verse (v. 5) and is a rhetorical question. The two negatives cancel each other so that the query receives a positive reply.^[14] c. Service 9:7–12 Scholars are not unanimous in determining paragraph divisions in this part of the chapter. Some include verse 7 with the preceding segment (vv. 3 6), others place it in a larger context (vv. 3 12), and still others have it at the beginning of a new paragraph (vv. 7 12). The preceding section (vv. 3 6) lists three rhetorical questions that demand a positive answer. Conversely, verse 7 features three rhetorical questions that call for a negative response. We include verse 7 with verses 8 12 because it is introductory to those verses. The questions relating to agriculture are strengthened by a quotation from the law of Moses (Deut. 25:4) in verse 9, and Paul reasons from these examples to tell the Corinthians about his right to expect material support from them. 7. Who serves in the army at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat its fruit? Or who tends a flock and does not drink from its milk? a. Who serves in the army at his own expense? This is the first of the three questions in this verse that demand a negative reply. A soldier received his provisions from his superior officer, who had to supply his troops with the necessities of life supplies taken either from government stores or from conquered nations. Should he fail in this task, his troops would revolt. No soldier would ever serve in an army at his own expense.^[15] That would be unthinkable. Paul is not asking the Corinthians for a salary, but with this example he defends his right to basic necessities. Wages is unfit as a translation [in this text] because &no one can pay oneself wages. ^[16] b. Who plants a vineyard and does not eat its fruit? This question also receives a negative response. An example is taken from the agricultural scene, which was familiar to the readers of this epistle. The wording is reminiscent of a proverbial saying in the Mosaic law, Has anyone planted a vineyard and not begun to enjoy it? (Deut. 20:6). c. Or who tends a flock and does not drink from its milk? Everyone responds by saying, no one. The shepherd enjoys a daily milk supply from his animals and he can feed himself and his family with the products derived from the milk. These three examples of the soldier, the gardener, and the shepherd pertain not only to the culture of the apostolic age; in Scripture God's people are often portrayed as an army, a vine, and a flock.^[17] With these three illustrations from daily life, Paul proves the unmistakable point that he deserves financial support for his labor among the Corinthians. 8. I am not speaking these things according to man, am I? Or doesn't the law say these things? 9a. For in the law of Moses it is written, Do not muzzle the ox while it is threshing. a. I am not speaking these things according to man, am I? Verse 8 refers to the world in which we move from day to day and reminds the readers of the examples Paul gave in verse 7. Examples from life are instructive, but Paul does not rest his case on self-evident observations. b. Or doesn't the law say these things? As he does repeatedly in this epistle, Paul turns to the Scriptures.^[18] God's Word is foundational, so when Paul teaches, he frequently quotes the Scriptures. The expression law is explained here as the law of Moses. Thus, from the Mosaic law Paul derives the words Do not muzzle the ox while it is threshing (Deut. 25:4; see I Tim. 5:18). c. For in the law of Moses it is written. Calvin asks why Paul did not resort to a clearer illustration from the Mosaic law, and provides the example of a hired man who lives in poverty and needs his wages. God says to the man's employer, Pay him his wages each day before sunset (Deut. 24:15).^[19] But Paul reasons from the lesser to the greater: if God wants the farmer to take care of his ox, does he not require man to take greater care of his fellow man? d. Do not muzzle the ox while it is threshing. The Israelite farmer spread his grain on an outdoor threshing floor, which was hard, smooth, and level. A flat board weighed down with stones or people was drawn over the grain by a team of oxen or horses that walked in circles around a post (II Sam. 24:22–24). At times the farmer would have the oxen or horses tread out the grain with their feet (Mic. 4:12–13). The ox was permitted to eat as much grain as it desired while it was doing the heavy pulling. If a Jew muzzled the ox, he would run the risk of a scourging in the local synagogue.^[20] 9b. God is not concerned with oxen, is he? 10. Or is he actually speaking on account of us? For on account of us it is written, because the plowman ought to plow in hope and the thresher ought to thresh in hope of sharing the crop. Note these observations: a. Concern. God is not concerned with oxen, is he? The interpretation of this question should be understood in the context of the Scriptures. As Creator of this universe, God upholds from moment to moment all that he has made. He gives food to all his creatures, both great and small. He makes grass grow for the cattle and plants for man to cultivate.& The lions roar for their prey and seek their food from God (Ps. 104:14, 21). He provides food for the cattle and for the young ravens when they call (Ps. 147:9). Therefore, when Paul asks whether God is concerned with oxen, he is not saying that God takes care only of people and neglects animals. God gives man the command to permit an ox to eat grain. Man puts the animal to work for him, but God stipulates that man must care for the ox because it belongs to God's great creation (Prov. 12:10; 27:23).^[21] God is concerned about man's behavior toward his creation, for he wants man to be a wise steward. b. Address. God is addressing men, not animals. Paul asks his readers, Or is he actually speaking on account of us? The answer to this question is emphatically affirmative. This does not mean that Paul disregards the intention of God's precept not to muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain. Rather, he teaches that if man does not take proper care of his animal, one would not expect him to provide adequately for his laborer. More specifically, how does the church take care of its ministers? The expression actually signifies that if God commands man to care for his animals, on a higher level he instructs the members of the church to care for the ministers of the gospel. c. Argument. For on account of us it is written. With the word for, Paul confirms what he has been teaching in the preceding lines. He stresses that the Scriptures are written for man and addressed to him, thus he repeats the phrase on account of us. God speaks to man and commands him to listen obediently. However, Paul says the words it is written allude to the Old Testament quotation in the preceding verse (v. 9), not to the words that follow. When he writes, because the plowman ought to plow in hope and the thresher ought to thresh in hope of sharing the crop, he no longer quotes. The Scriptures contain no such words.^[22] We presume that Paul notes a proverbial saying that originated in an agricultural community. But what is Paul trying to say? He figuratively applies these words to the Christian worker who, as a result of diligent labor, takes pleasure in sharing the produce. This worker preaches and teaches the gospel and expects rewards from a harvest. Plowing and sowing are normally followed by threshing and harvesting. Notice the emphasis on the phrase in hope, which occurs twice.^[23] The one who plows and sows ought to do so in hope of an eventual harvest. In this harvest both he and the one who threshes will have a share. In terms of expectant waiting, the plowman stands at the beginning of the growing season and the thresher at the end. Both of them are filled with hope that they may participate in the harvest and enjoy its rewards. In the end the farmer's hope becomes reality when he harvests the yield and rejoices. Growth in nature takes place in one season which in months usually can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Spiritual growth, however, takes longer and demands extra patience and care. The rewards are unending and satisfying beyond earthly measure. 11. If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap a harvest of material things from you? At first, the words of the previous verse seem to add little to the discourse. But the present text provides the needed explanation. Paul is not talking about the plowman and the thresher as such. He has in mind the spiritual workers in God's church who may participate in the material blessings that come to the members of the church. Paul applies the words of this text to himself and his fellow workers by using the personal pronoun we. Further, he writes a conditional sentence that is true to fact. He and his co-workers have indeed sown the spiritual Word of God among the Corinthians. And now they envision a spiritual and material response from the members of that church. The comparison between matters that are eternal and temporary is obvious, for the Corinthians are unmistakably recipients of the greater gifts (Rom. 15:27). If in fact Paul sowed spiritual seed, may he not expect some material gifts in return? The question demands an affirmative response. 12. If others share in this right [of support] over you, don't we have it all the more? However, we did not use this right, but we endure all things so as not to hinder the gospel of Christ.^[24] a. If others share in this right [of support] over you, don't we have it all the more? The first point we notice is that Paul writes a conditional sentence to affirm the existing circumstances in Corinth. He is saying that others are exercising their right to ask for financial support. The verb to share in is a direct translation of the Greek (see v. 10), which idiomatically can mean to enjoy. ^[25] Next, the Greek has the unadorned expression the right, but the context demands the added explanation of support. And last, the word you signifies not a subjective genitive but an objective genitive. Who are the persons to whom Paul refers indirectly? The word others discloses that they are people in the same category as Paul, namely, those who proclaim the gospel. We are perhaps to think of Apollos and Peter, who also minister. Paul writes that these men share in the right to expect remuneration for their daily work of preaching and teaching. By making this comparison, Paul is asking whether he should not have the first share in the right of support. Neither Apollos nor Peter founded the church in Corinth. Paul did, and the Corinthians consider him their spiritual father (4:15). If the others exercise the right to financial support, then certainly Paul can claim it for himself. b. However, we did not use this right. When he arrived in Corinth on his initial visit, Paul stayed with Aquila and Priscilla. These people were tentmakers, like Paul (Acts 18:2 3), and thus were skilled in leatherwork. During the week, Paul earned enough income to pay his expenses. On the Sabbaths, however, he preached in the local synagogue. For a period of a year and a half, Paul preached to and taught the Corinthians. He refused to avail himself of the right to gain support from the church he founded and served. Instead, he worked so he would not become a burden to the Corinthians.^[26] As Paul tried to formulate a course of action that would advance the cause of the gospel, he knew that he could not escape criticism. If Paul refused to exercise his right for support, his critics would charge him with being aloof. But if he accepted support, they would call him greedy.^[27] When Silas and Timothy eventually arrived, Paul became a full-time preacher of the gospel (Acts 18:5). We know that these men brought financial gifts to Paul from the churches in Macedonia, for he himself writes: And when I was with you and needed something, I was not a burden to anyone, for the brothers who came from Macedonia supplied what I needed. I have kept myself from being a burden to you in any way, and will continue to do so (II Cor. 11:9). The church in Philippi supplied him again and again with monetary gifts to aid him in his work (Phil. 4:14–16). This Macedonian church set the example for others in voluntary giving. Paul was not looking for gifts but readily credited this church for the support it gave. c. But we endure all things so as not to hinder the gospel of Christ. The adversative but strengthens and explains the adversative however in the preceding clause. With the pronoun we, Paul undoubtedly includes his fellow workers Silas and Timothy, who also may have worked at a trade to supply their physical needs. He and his co-workers endured all things, Paul writes. In the Greek, the verb to endure has the primary meaning of keeping silent out of love for others (compare 13:7, where the same Greek verb occurs). They put up with many inconveniences for the benefit of Christ's gospel. They themselves would do their utmost not to become stumbling blocks to anyone who wished to know Jesus Christ. Paul and his associates would do anything for the cause of the gospel. They desired that no prospective converts to Christ might ever say that the apostles were interested in their money. Their lifestyle, then, should never become a hindrance to the Corinthians. The word hindrance is a military term that connotes breaking up a road to impede the advance of a pursuing enemy.^[28] The word represents an interruption in a course of action, which in this case signifies the spread of the gospel of Christ (II Cor. 6:3). This gospel belongs to Christ and at the same time proclaims him. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:9–12 Verses 9 10 [Greek] the particle affirms the positive answer to the preceding rhetorical questions (vv. 9b 10a) in the sense of to be sure. ^[29] [Greek] you shall muzzle. The manuscript evidence for this reading is weaker than for [Greek] (you shall muzzle), yet on transcriptural grounds scholars prefer the weaker text.^[30] [Greek] this word can be either the conjunction that, the recitative, or the causal. The conjunction can be explanatory in the sense of that is (NEB). We can hardly take it as recitative when there is no reference to the Scriptures. Most translators give the word a causal connotation.^[31] Verse 11 [Greek] three times in three successive clauses, this particle introduces facts that are true. [Greek] note the juxtaposition of these two personal pronouns in this and the next clause (see also v. 12a). The position of [Greek] seems to emphasize the possessive idea. [Greek] this adjective describes the appearance and characteristics of flesh (see 3:3), that is, matter, and refers to material objects. Verse 12 [Greek] others of the same category; otherwise Paul could have used the adjective [Greek] (different). [Greek] the noun [Greek] governs the genitive case of the pronoun with the resultant meaning this right [of support] over you. ^[32] The noun itself is genitive because of the verb [Greek] (I share in). [Greek] the genitive is both subjective and objective. 2. Surrender of Rights 9:13–18 a. Remuneration 9:13–14 For the apostles and their helpers, God's revelation formed a unit. True, the writer of Hebrews notes that in many ways and in many forms, God spoke to the forefathers through the prophets, and in these last days he spoke to us through the Son. But it is God who through the apostles is revealing his redemptive truth to his people (Heb. 1:1–2). When Paul writes about receiving financial support from God's people, he considers the Levitical system God had instituted in connection with the temple. He sees similarity between God's command for the support of priests and Levites and the Lord's directive concerning compensation for the messengers of the gospel. 13. Do you not know that those who administer the holy services eat the food from the temple? And those who regularly serve at the altar share in the offerings that are on the altar? a. Do you not know? ^[33] This question a rebuke occurs elsewhere in Paul's first letter to the Corinthians (3:16). The readers should have known better but instead reveal a disturbing inconsistency in their religious life. Paul had given them the teachings of the Old Testament and the message of the gospel. But can we expect that Gentile Christians in Corinth were familiar with the Old Testament stipulations concerning priests and Levites?^[34] In view of the comparison in the next verse (v. 14), Thus also the Lord directed those, the answer is affirmative. The Corinthians should know from the Scriptures the divine directives that relate to the provisions for those who minister to them in God's service. And, the teaching of the Scriptures aside, the Gentile Corinthians knew that priests at the pagan temples received their income from the people who came to worship, even though this income was used for purposes other than food and clothing. b. That those who administer the holy services eat the food from the temple. This part of the sentence expresses a general statement about the work and ministry of all those who are connected with temple services. The tithes and offerings which the people brought to the temple in Jerusalem were for the priests and Levites. Because the tribe of Levi had no inheritance in Israel, God stipulated that the descendants of Levi should receive their income from the gifts the people brought to God's sanctuary (Deut. 18:1). The word food refers to the necessities of life and the expression temple alludes to the divine worship services, specifically in Israel. Calvin keenly observes the difference between services in pagan temples and the temple in Jerusalem: An argument derived from the custom of the heathen, would certainly have been a poor one, for the revenues of the priests were not devoted to necessities like food and clothing, but to costly furnishings, regal splendour and extravagant luxury.^[35] c. And those who regularly serve at the altar share in the offerings that are on the altar? Is Paul deliberately distinguishing between those working in the temple and those serving at the altar? Hardly. As elsewhere in this epistle (e.g., 7:2–3, 21 22, 27; 8:6), Paul writes a parallel statement. He alludes to the altar in the court of the priests at the temple in Jerusalem. There the priests received a share of what was offered on the altar. The Corinthians knew about these temple regulations, yet they realized that Gentile Christians did not have to observe these ceremonial laws (Acts 15:19 21). Nonetheless, they should be able to understand that the provisions for the priests and Levites are the same for the preachers of the gospel. Not the form but the principle behind these provisions must be observed. There should not be any difference. 14. Thus also the Lord directed those who preach the gospel to get their living from the gospel. Paul appeals to a word of the Lord which he places on a par with the stipulations in the Mosaic law. His appeal is to an authority higher than the apostles, namely, to Jesus himself. In the Gospels, Jesus told his disciples that a worker is worthy of his pay (Matt. 10:10; Luke 10:7; compare I Tim. 5:18). Paul expands Jesus teaching by saying that those workers who devote themselves completely to the preaching and teaching of the gospel ought to be supported by the church (Gal. 6:6). Paul writes that Jesus commanded his disciples to receive their living from the people to whom they ministered the gospel. This command calls for obedience not from the apostles but from the members of the church. Similarly God had given his instructions to support the tribe of Levi not to the priests but to the people in Israel. This verse clearly delineates the source of support for the minister of the Word. The preacher who faithfully proclaims the gospel may expect to receive his living from the gospel. But woe to that man who claims to live of the gospel without living at the same time for the gospel. ^[36] Practical Considerations in 9:13–14 A preacher is a minister of the gospel. Although he ministers the Word to the members of the church, he is a servant not of the church but of the Word of God. True, he serves the church, which provides his annual salary; nevertheless he remains a servant of God's Word. This is a significant distinction, because the Lord sends forth his ambassador to preach that Word as a full-time minister wherever possible. No one will dispute that a minister can be gainfully employed in the workaday world and excel with his skills. But a servant of the Word must devote his time to the preaching and teaching of the gospel. He has been called to that glorious task and has been ordained to devote himself completely to the ministry of the Word. The Lord has instructed the beneficiaries of this ministry to supply the preacher's needs. The support which they extend to the minister, however, may go beyond the bare necessities of life. From his salary, for instance, their minister should be able to liquidate his student debts, purchase books for his ministerial library, and subscribe to theological and pastoral journals to aid him in his work. A minister should receive an adequate salary to support himself and the members of his family. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:13–14 Verse 13 [Greek] the negative particle introduces a rhetorical question that expects a positive answer. The readers knew because Paul and his co-workers had taught them the Scriptures. [Greek] the adjective in the neuter plural signifies the holy things and pertains to everything connected with the temple.^[37] [Greek] the Majority Text omits the definite article [Greek], which in translation has to be supplied (KJV, NKJV). The evidence from textual witnesses for either omission or inclusion is strong. Paul's choice of [Greek] (temple complex) differs from his preference for [Greek] (temple the building proper). See 3:16; 6:19. Verse 14 [Greek] the dative expresses advantage and not the indirect object. The command is not given to the missionaries, but for their benefit. ^[38] [Greek] followed by the genitive case, this preposition denotes either cause or source. b. Reward 9:15–18 15. But I have not used any of these privileges. And I do not write these things that in this way it may turn out for my benefit. For I would rather die than.& No one shall render void my reason for boasting. a. But I have not used any of these privileges. Paul supported himself by his own trade during the three missionary journeys. His mention of Barnabas, who engaged in manual work to supply his own needs (9:6), refers to the first journey. Paul's manual labor in Thessalonica (I Thess. 2:9), Corinth (Acts 18:3), and Ephesus (Acts 20:34) took place during the second and third journeys (II Cor. 12:14).^[39] Paul precludes the possibility of having the Corinthians pay him for his services during a future visit. He states categorically that he has not claimed for himself the right for financial support (see 4:12). And he will continue to observe the principle of not accepting money or goods for his spiritual work. Paul is not saying that others have to follow his example in refusing to accept support from the people. And the gifts from the church in Philippi should not be understood as remuneration for services rendered but rather as tokens of love for Paul (Phil. 4:14–18). b. And I do not write these things that in this way it may turn out for my benefit. In composing his letter to the Corinthians Paul presumably relied on the services of a scribe. As he is in the process of forming his sentences, Paul realizes that some of his readers may receive the impression that he is asking the church to reimburse him for past services. He therefore makes clear that he is not asking the Corinthians for any personal benefits. On the contrary, in spite of Jesus command that the worker be remunerated for his labors, Paul preserves the principle not to ask for any support but to rely on his own resources. He is not interested in his own advancement but in the progress of the gospel. c. For I would rather die than.& From his epistles, we infer that Paul was readily overcome by emotion. Often he breaks off in the middle of a sentence and lets the reader fill in the gaps.^[40] In this passage Paul reflects on his relationship with the Corinthians and is overcome by his emotions, so that he fails to complete the rest of the sentence. When he regains composure, he starts anew with a slightly different thought. We can only surmise what the entire sentence may have been. Perhaps Paul was at the point of uttering a critical remark. We will never know. However, some ancient manuscripts give the sentence a semblance of continuity with a different reading in the Greek. This reading is reflected, for example, in the translation of the King James Version: For it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void. Such a translation gives a smooth reading, but it does not convey the emotional tension that caused the break. The force of Paul's emotions resulted in a rupture in the syntax. By keeping the break in the sentence, we reflect Paul's emotional state.^[41] d. No one shall render void my reason for boasting. What is Paul intending to say? Earlier in his epistle, he admonished the readers not to boast except in the Lord (Gal. 6:14). Now he intimates that the Christian can never boast about himself or his own accomplishments but only about his Lord.^[42] Paul can even say that his right to support from the Corinthian church is no ground for boasting. His reason for boasting, then, is that the cause of the gospel has been and is advanced free of charge. No one is able to stop him from boasting about this matter (II Cor. 11:10). Should he now receive remuneration, he would give his opponents the opportunity to make his boasting void. Even if the Corinthians should wish to pay Paul, he would refuse their aid so as not to hamper the progress of the gospel (v. 12). 16. For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast about. I am compelled to preach, for woe to me if I do not proclaim the gospel. When Jesus called Paul on the road to Damascus, he told him to preach the gospel to the Gentiles and to the people of Israel (Acts 9:15; 26:15–18). When he began his ministry, Paul proclaimed the good news to the Jews in the synagogues of Damascus and Jerusalem. He then taught in the church in Antioch and from there went to Cyprus and Asia Minor to acquaint Jews and Gentiles with Christ's gospel. As he reveals in his farewell address to the Ephesian elders, I testified to both Jews and Greeks that they turn in repentance to God and faith in our Lord Jesus (Acts 20:21). Because Paul was appointed to preach, he did not see that task as a reason for boasting. Instead, his commission from the Lord compelled him to preach. Paul wanted to complete the task which the Lord Jesus had given him, namely, preaching the gospel to both Jews and Greeks. For woe to me if I do not proclaim the gospel. Paul raises the lament which the Old Testament prophets and the New Testament apostles raised. Like Paul, these men were overcome by the urgency of uttering the message God gave them. Jeremiah said that God's Word was like a fire in his heart and in his bones (Jer. 20:9) and Amos writes that because God has spoken he must speak (Amos 3:8). Peter and John, standing before the Sanhedrin, tell this ruling body that they cannot help but speak what they have seen and heard concerning Jesus Christ (Acts 4:20). The phrase woe to me describes the greatest misery imaginable for Paul. He would bring this misery upon himself if he proved disobedient to his divine mandate to preach.^[43] He must preach the gospel of salvation in his own words to Timothy, in season and out of season (II Tim. 4:2). If not, he would incur God's wrath and its consequences. Paul is a slave of Jesus Christ, as he often notes in his epistles (Rom. 1:1; Gal. 1:10; Titus 1:1), and as such he faithfully executes his task (Luke 17:10). 17. If I do this of my own choice, I have a reward. But if I do so under compulsion, I simply fulfill the stewardship entrusted to me. This verse is obscure, and the first part fails to correspond properly to the message of the previous verse (v. 16). The second sentence fits the context, for Paul indicates that he is under divine obligation to preach the gospel. The problem, then, lies in the first part of the verse, particularly with the word reward. Paul seems to retrace his steps in the following verse (v. 18), where he asks and answers the question what his reward is. With his repeated use of the first person pronoun (four times), he calls attention to himself. a. If I do this of my own choice. If we see this verse as continuing the explanation about Paul's rights as a preacher, the difficulties remain but no longer appear insurmountable. The Corinthians cannot understand how Paul fails to defend his rights as a preacher. They view him as a preacher who has come to them of his own free will. But Paul informs them that if he had come to them of his own choice, he would have expected monetary compensation from them. Then he would have a reward. b. But if I do so under compulsion, I simply fulfill the stewardship entrusted to me. Paul writes the word stewardship to show that although he is an apostle with rights (vv. 1 6), he serves Jesus as a steward (see 4:1). In Paul's day, stewards were slaves who were given the responsibility of managing their master's household, estate, or financial affairs. Paul knows that he has received his stewardship from Jesus himself. Whether a steward does his task by choice or under compulsion, his responsibility remains unaltered. If such a person fulfills his task not of his own will but because his master assigned it to him, he is merely a steward. He is like the servant in the parable who plowed his master's field, prepared his master's supper, waited on him, and finally had a free moment to eat and drink. He received no expression of gratitude for his labors, because he was his master's servant. Similarly, God's servants should say, We are unworthy servants; we have only done our duty (Luke 17:10). 18. What then is my reward? When I preach the gospel, I offer it free of charge so as not to make full use of my authority in the gospel. a. What then is my reward? Paul realizes that in his discourse he failed to explain the word reward in the first sentence of the preceding verse (v. 17). Now he turns his attention to it and gives his explanation. Paul's desire to be obedient to his divine commission is evident in many epistles (Gal. 1:15–16; Eph. 3:8–9). He regarded his commission to preach as a privilege. As a slave of Christ he willingly obeyed his Sender and thus received a reward. This reward is not something Paul desires for himself. He proclaims the gospel free of charge (v. 18).^[44] b. When I preach the gospel, I offer it free of charge. Jesus commanded that the worker should receive his pay (Luke 10:7). In a sense, the phrase preach the gospel denotes as much the preaching as the actual living in accordance with the gospel.^[45] Those who preach the gospel should receive their income from the gospel (v. 14). But Paul refuses to avail himself of his apostolic right and calls his preference to preach the gospel without pay his boast (v. 15). He labels his action not to accept payment for his work in the ministry his reward (v. 18). Conversely, if he had been told to preach for a certain sum of money, he would have been thwarted in his purpose.^[46] The gospel would have been proclaimed, but Paul's reason for boasting would have been taken away. By not receiving remuneration for his services, Paul was free from obligation to anyone. No one could ever lay a claim on Paul because of some monetary accountability (II Cor. 11:7). In this freedom, Paul could actively proclaim the good news to everyone. The purity of Paul's motive is aptly illustrated with a parallel taken from the medical world. A physician may attend the sick from the highest motives, though he receives a remuneration for his services. But when he attends the poor gratuitously, though the motives may be no higher, the evidence of their purity is placed beyond question. ^[47] Paul preached the gospel free of charge indisputable evidence of his pure motive. c. So as not to make full use of my authority in the gospel. This second part of the sentence not only further explains the first part, but also concludes the entire segment on Paul's apostolic rights. Paul knows full well that he has the apostolic right to make his living from the gospel, but he chooses to ply the trade of the tentmaker. He uses his other rights but does not receive financial recompense. The last three words of the sentence, in the gospel, should be taken with the word authority and should not be understood as an abbreviated reference to preaching the gospel. Paul gratuitously offers his services in regard to the gospel. We raise two questions. First, why did Paul choose to preach the gospel without charge? He certainly did not do it to gain higher praise than the other apostles, who did exercise their apostolic right. Even though Paul writes that he worked harder than the others, he attributes praise and thanks to God (15:10). The thought of performing work for his own advantage was repugnant to Paul. He worked for the sake of the gospel and its increasing influence in the world. Second, is Paul asking preachers of the gospel to imitate him? The answer is a resounding no. Nowhere in Paul's epistles do we find any evidence that preachers should abrogate the command Jesus gave the workers in his kingdom. If a minister of the gospel has an independent source of income and offers his services free of charge, he is free to make that choice. But that choice is his own and he can never require it of others. In the same way, Paul made a choice to supply his financial needs by working at his trade, but he could never demand this of his fellow workers. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 9:15–18 Verse 15 [Greek] the use of the personal pronoun as the first word in the sentence denotes emphasis. It is followed by the adversative [Greek] to indicate contrast with the preceding verse. [Greek] this is the epistolary aorist; the writer looks at his epistle from the viewpoint of the readers and uses the past tense for the present: I am writing. $ the comparative particle than depends on the adverb [Greek] (rather) and needs another element to complete the comparison. But this necessary element is lacking, with the result that the syntax is broken. To resort to using the word &(truly) as a means to circumvent the break is inadvisable. Except for a variant in Hebrews 6:14, the reading &occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. [Greek] no one will empty. The manuscript support for this reading is early, strong, and has broad geographic representation. By contrast, textual support for the variant [Greek] (in order that someone may empty) is weak.^[48] The rule that the harder reading is more likely to be original applies here. Verse 16 [Greek] this clause is the protasis of a conditional sentence that conveys a concessive mode: although I preach the gospel. The apodosis affirms factual truth. [Greek] the passive voice, in which Jesus is the understood agent. The present tense discloses continuing relevance. Verses 17 18 [Greek] notice that the accusative case of the noun stewardship is retained with the perfect passive verb has been entrusted. The active verb [Greek] with the dative [Greek] and the accusative of the noun would be expected.^[49] With the passive, however, Paul indirectly refers to Jesus. [Greek] this appositional clause explains the preceding verse (v. 17). [Greek] the prepositional phrase with the articular infinitive expresses result rather than purpose. The infinitive is perfective. 3. Apostolic Freedom 9:19–27 Paul had the difficult task of working in two distinct cultures: that of Jewish Christians who lived by the Mosaic law, and that of Gentile Christians who were free from the law of Moses. He had to preach the gospel to both groups while trying to bring them together in one community of believers and serving as a faithful pastor to those Christians who had weak consciences. Paul was in the unenviable position of giving leadership by speaking to all the issues that divided the believers in Corinth. For this reason, he wanted to be free so that he could be of service to all. Having demonstrated his desire to be free as a preacher of the gospel, he discloses the strategy he employs in winning people for Christ. a. Paul's Strategy 9:19–23 19. For though I am free from all men, I was a slave to all to win as many people as possible. With the word free, Paul returns to the discussion on freedom that began this chapter (v. 1). There he implied that he was free from the dietary restrictions that the Mosaic law placed on Jews. Now he intimates that he is free from financial dependence on anyone. By not accepting compensation from the church at Corinth for his ministry, he was free from any hindrance that could obstruct his preaching. Freedom is a relative concept with its own limitations. Paul does not say that he is free from all things but free from all men. He echoes the idea that began the chapter (v. 1). There he states that he is free because he has Christian liberty. Here he asserts that he is free from all men, as an objective fact, because he has not availed himself of the complete freedom he possesses.^[50] Paul could say that he was at liberty to eat or not to eat meat, and that he enjoyed financial freedom because of his tentmaking trade. Yet he was never free from God's law, for he had freedom only within the context of that law. Augustine put it succinctly: Man is most free when controlled by God alone. As a free man, Paul is able to relate to every believer in the Corinthian church. He has full apostolic rights to be free from human control, yet he chooses to be a servant of all the Corinthian believers. He literally fulfilled Jesus words addressed to the disciples: You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave (Matt. 20:25–27). Paul imitates Jesus, who came not to be served but to serve. Being a slave to all, Paul's objective is to win as many people as possible for Christ. Let it be understood that he is not vying with other apostles to bring in the most converts. Instead, he hopes to gain more adherents with the strategy of being a slave than by any other method.^[51] Conclusively, Paul demonstrates that he is a servant of Jesus by being a servant to Christ's people (Gal. 5:13). 20. To the Jews I conducted myself as a Jew to win the Jews; to those who are under the law I became as one under the law, though I myself am not under the law, to win those under the law. a. To the Jews I conducted myself as a Jew to win the Jews. As one who is a slave to all, Paul begins with his own people and abides by the principle first to the Jew and then to the Gentile. ^[52] Paul was born a Jew and was a Hebrew of the Hebrews (Phil. 3:5). But when he writes that he became a Jew to the Jews, he implies that by becoming a follower of Jesus he is a new creation (II Cor. 5:17) and thus he is no longer a Jew or a Greek.^[53] During his ministry, Paul adapted himself to Jewish customs when he tried to win the Jews to Christ. These are a few striking examples: He had Timothy circumcised because of the Jews (Acts 16:3); he made a Nazirite vow to express thanks to God for deliverance (Acts 18:18); he joined four Nazirites in their purification rites and paid their expenses for the sacrificial offering (Acts 21:23 24, 26). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 10. Warnings and Freedom (10:1 11:1) Outline (continued) 10:1 11:1 D. Warnings and Freedom 10:1–13 1. Warnings from History 10:1–5 a. Analogy 10:6–10 b. Example 10:11–13 c. Admonition 10:14–22 2. Warnings against Idolatry 10:14–17 a. A Vivid Comparison 10:18–22 b. An Example of Symmetry 10:23 11:1–3. Freedom of Conscience 10:23–26 a. Freedom and Scripture 10:27–30 b. Freedom and Conscience 10:31 11:1 c. Conclusion D. Warnings and Freedom 10:1 11:1 10 1 For I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, that all our fathers were under the cloud and all passed through the sea; 2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 3 And all ate the same spiritual food, 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were drinking from the spiritual rock which followed them, and the rock was Christ. 5 However, God was not pleased with most of them, for their bodies were scattered over the desert. 6 Now these things became examples for us, so that we should not long for evil things just as those people did. 7 Do not be idolaters as some of them were. Just as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink and they stood up to play. 8 Nor let us practice sexual immorality as some of them practiced, when in one day twenty-three thousand fell dead. 9 And let us not test Christ as some of them did and were destroyed by snakes. 10 And do not grumble as some of them did and were destroyed by the angel that destroys. 11 Now these things happened to them as a warning and were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. 12 So he who thinks he stands, let him be careful not to fall. 13 No temptation has overtaken you except that which is common to everyone. But God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond that which you are able to bear; however, with the temptation he also will provide the way of escape that you may be able to endure it. 1. Warnings from History 10:1–13 Paul seems to introduce an entirely different subject in 10:1–13, but closer scrutiny shows continuity with the preceding passage (9:24–27). He reaches back into history to teach his readers the lesson the Israelites had to learn as they traveled from Egypt through the desert toward the promised land. In a sense, these Israelites were engaged in a contest of faith in which only two persons, Joshua and Caleb, received a blessing. The implied comparison is with the foot race (9:24) in which all the runners participate but only one receives the prize. The one runner whom the judge of the contest crowns is the counterpart of the two faithful Israelites, to whom alone it was given to enter the Promised Land. ^[1] Why did the Israelites perish in the desert? Despite the miracles God performed to lead them out of Egypt, these Israelites lacked faith in God. They crossed the Red Sea, never lacked daily food (manna), drank water from a rock, were sheltered from the scorching sun by the cloud that accompanied them, and received numerous other blessings. Instead of worshiping God, the Israelites served idols which they had taken along from Egypt (Amos 5:26). At Mount Sinai they formed a golden calf (Exod. 32:1–6) and worshiped it. These rebellious Israelites failed the test of faith, and, Paul intimates, those Corinthians who engage in idolatry similarly fail to serve God. a. Analogy 10:1–5 1. For I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, that all our fathers were under the cloud and all passed through the sea; 2. and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. a. For I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers. The conjunction for joins this verse to the preceding context (chap. 9) and indicates a continuation of that discourse. Paul also employs the address brothers, which includes the sisters, and introduces new material to his discourse. He reminds the readers of events from Israel's history and uses these incidents as effective examples. Throughout his epistles, Paul expresses his desire not to see his readers ignorant of certain facts.^[2] To dispel their ignorance he refers to either personal intentions and experiences or spiritual truths. These spiritual truths he will later apply to their question concerning eating meat which was offered to an idol. b. All our fathers were under the cloud and all passed through the sea. With this terse description, Paul mentions the exodus and the crossing of the Red Sea. God led his people by means of a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night (Exod. 13:21). Thus, they were able to travel during either the day or the night. The cloud and the pillar of fire represented God's presence hovering over his people. Although the cloud and the pillar always attended the people (Exod. 14:24; Num. 12:5; Deut. 31:15; Ps. 99:7), some in Israel's camp doubted God's nearness. Paul calls the Israelites all our fathers. He implies that the entire nation of Israel left Egypt and that this nation assumes the role of spiritual forefathers for both Jewish and Gentile Christians in Corinth. The possessive pronoun places those Gentiles who are members of the Christian community on the same level as Jewish Christians. The phrase all passed through the sea alludes to Israel crossing the Red Sea on dry land while the Egyptian forces drowned in those same waters (Exod. 14). The fact that all the people safely reached the other shore demonstrates God's faithfulness toward his people in the past and assures his trustworthiness in the present. c. And all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. Paul's reference to baptism links past and present. He projects the Christian meaning of baptism into Christ (Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:27) onto the exodus by saying that all the Israelites were baptized into Moses. He compares the Christians who place their faith in Jesus Christ to the Israelites who placed their trust in God, represented by his servant Moses (Exod. 14:31). Christ redeemed his people from sin and death, while God through Moses delivered the Israelites from oppression in Egypt and the destructive waters of the Red Sea. For the Israelites, being baptized into Moses signified that they were members of the covenant which God had made with his people (Exod. 24:4b 8). Moses served as mediator of that first covenant, which became obsolete, but Christ is the Mediator of the new covenant (Heb. 7:22; 8:6; 9:15). Just as God's people became a nation with Moses as its leader, so God's people today are incorporated into Christ, who is their spiritual head (Eph. 5:23). What is the significance of the two elements, the cloud and the sea? A study of the relevant chapters in Exodus reveals that with the cloud and the sea, God separated his people from the hostile Egyptian forces. The cloud went from the front to the back of the Israelites and remained behind them to separate God's people from the armies of Pharaoh (Exod. 14:19–20). The Red Sea became a defensive barrier for the Israelites and served as a boundary between Egypt and Israel (Exod. 23:31). The experiences of being under the cloud and passing through the sea both related to the identification of the children of Israel as a people now separated from Egypt, and under God's protection. ^[3] In short, by means of the cloud and the sea God separated to himself a people. The exodus must be seen from both a historical and a spiritual perspective. As the passage through the Red Sea symbolized an end to Israel's slavery and its beginning as a new nation, so baptism for the Christian means a separation from sin and consecration to God. The experience of being under the protective cloud and passing through the waters of the Red Sea was the Israelite's prerequisite for inclusion in God's people. Similarly, the sign of being baptized into Christ is the mark of participating in his redemption. In short, being baptized into Moses represents Israel's redemption, much as being baptized into Christ entails the Christian's incorporation into his fellowship.^[4] 3. And all ate the same spiritual food, 4. and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were drinking from the spiritual rock which followed them, and the rock was Christ. a. And all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. Five times in five consecutive clauses, Paul writes the adjective all. That is, everyone who participated in the exodus was under the cloud, passed through the sea, was baptized into Moses, ate spiritual food, and drank from the spiritual rock. God led the Israelites into the desert, away from the Egyptian granaries, and yet supplied them with bread from heaven. The people called this bread manna, which literally means, what is it? (Exod. 16:15). Every morning, except on the Sabbath, God caused manna to cover the ground (Exod. 16:2–36). This manna kept the Israelites alive until they had crossed the Jordan and ate bread baked from grain grown in Canaan. Then the daily provision of manna stopped (Josh. 5:12). The same thing was true for Israel's need for water. During Israel's forty-year sojourn in the desert, God provided drinking water for his people and for their animals.^[5] Moses struck a rock at Mount Horeb and God supplied drinking water for all the people and their cattle (Exod. 17:6). Later Moses hit a rock at Kadesh to provide water for the community and their livestock (Num. 20:11). These two recorded incidents are given as examples of God's continued care for his people. The psalmist notes that God split rocks in the desert and caused streams to come forth out of the crags (Ps. 78:15–16). In other words, God daily quenched the thirst of man and animal by giving them streams of water in the wilderness. Rabbinic sources have recorded legendary material on the rock that supplied water for the Israelites and traveled with them during their forty-year journey.^[6] We assume that Paul was acquainted with this explanation. He is interested, however, not in a legend but in God's miraculous provision of food and drink. And this supernatural act Paul describes as spiritual. ^[7] Occurring three times in verses 3 and 4, the word spiritual has a figurative meaning. The material substance of food, drink, and rock points to a spiritual source. Through his Spirit, God actively engages in providing for the basic needs of his people. As the elements of the Lord's Supper point to the spiritual significance of the presence of Christ, so the elements which Paul describes with the word spiritual ultimately point to Christ.^[8] b. For they were drinking from the spiritual rock which followed them. God miraculously supplied for the Israelites streams in the desert. As Paul demonstrated in the preceding clause, the water indicated God's faithful provision for his people, a faithfulness that was not bound to one location, either Mount Horeb or Kadesh. It followed the Israelites continually wherever they went during their wilderness travels. Yet the Israelites rebelled against God; in the Song of Moses (Deut. 32) and the Psalter, the writers delineate both God's faithfulness and Israel's rebellion. In the Old Testament the word rock appears frequently as a description of God: 1. Jacob declares him the Rock of Israel (Gen. 49:24). 2. Moses portrays him as a rock (Deut. 32:4, 15, 18, 30, 31). 3. Psalmists call him a rock (Pss. 18:31; 62:2; 78:35; 89:26; 95:1). c. The rock was Christ. Although the identification of the rock with Christ is figurative, nevertheless the Old Testament alludes to a definite link. The word rock in the Song of Moses and the Psalter is often qualified with words that apply directly to Christ's redemptive work: the Rock is [my] salvation (Deut. 32:15; Pss. 62.2; 95:1), Savior (Ps. 89:26), Redeemer (Ps. 78:35), Begetter (Deut. 32:18).^[9] Paul seems to have made a connection between the terminology recorded in Old Testament hymnody (Song of Moses and Psalter) and Christ; thus he identifies Christ with the Rock. He thereby connects an episode from the history of Israel with the current conditions in Corinth. Christ was present in the wilderness as he is present in the church today. God's rejection of those Israelites who tested and tried him (Ps. 95:7–11; Heb. 3:7–19) is a relevant lesson and reminder for those Corinthians who dabble in idolatry. 5. However, God was not pleased with most of them, for their bodies were scattered over the desert. Paul wants the readers to reflect on God's boundless goodness and mercy toward his rebellious people during the exodus and the desert journey. These people distrusted God, in spite of his wonderful daily care. They longed to go back to Egypt and served idols which they made and carried with them (Amos 5:25 26; Acts 7:42 43). No wonder that God was not pleased with these Israelites. Paul writes euphemistically when he says most of them. He actually means that only two men who were older than twenty years of age (Caleb and Joshua) pleased God and entered the promised land. The rest died in the wilderness. In graphic terms, Paul writes that the bodies of the people were scattered over the desert floor (Num. 14:16). Funerals were the order of the day, and when pestilence struck, thousands perished (Num. 16:40; 25:9). Taking the total number of men who were twenty years and older, 603,550 (Num. 1:46), and assuming that there were an equal number of women, we divide the total, 1,207,100, by 38 (the years Israel spent in the desert after the curse [Num. 14:23]). We calculate an average of about 90 deaths per day for that entire period. A grim and daily reminder of God's anger! Paul compares the people who died in the desert with the members of the church in Corinth. He wants the Corinthians to know that all the Israelites were recipients of God's daily provision, yet they perished because of unbelief. By analogy, he wants his readers to know that their reception of baptism and the Lord's Supper does not guarantee them eternal life. Without daily commitment to Christ, they lack eternal security and face spiritual death. Additional Comments on 10:1–5 Paul is not interested in providing a discourse on baptism and partaking of the elements of the Lord's table. His references to the sacraments are only incidental to the objective he has in mind. He resorts to typology, which in the identification of the rock and Christ should be understood figuratively. a. Typology. At first glance, Paul's identification of Christ with the rock in the wilderness which supplied the Israelites with spiritual food and drink appears to be a straightforward example of allegory. But that is not quite the case. We must take into consideration Paul's educational background. His writing often reflects a Jewish mode of interpreting Scripture. Jewish Christians read Scripture with the understanding that God's people are the same whether they belong to either the Old Testament or the New Testament era. In Paul's view the Old Testament reveals the work of the preexistent Christ on behalf of his people. Paul's fellow Jew and contemporary, Philo of Alexandria, explains the rock in the wilderness as the wisdom and word of God. So God demonstrated his faithfulness to his people by providing for them the necessities of life from the source of his law. For Philo, manna represented God's gift in the form of his revelation. And he interpreted the Song of Moses to denote that the flinty rock (God) provided both food and drink for the Israelites (Deut. 32:13). Indeed, Philo's interpretation is distinctly allegorical.^[10] Although Paul was influenced by the educational methodology of his day with respect to interpreting Scripture, he prudently adopted scriptural terminology. And even though at times he resorted to allegory, as he himself admittedGal. 4:21–31; see especially v. 24 , he refrained from providing correspondences at every point in his discourse. Instead, Paul presented God's inspired revelation. b. Responsibility. The death of all Israelites who were twenty years and older, with the exception of Caleb and Joshua, stands in stark contrast to Paul's fivefold use of the adjective all in the exodus account. They all enjoyed God's favor, yet only two responded in faith. The writer of Hebrews also uses the adjective all when he queries, Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? (Heb. 3:16). God revealed his trustworthiness in various ways to all the Israelites, yet these same people failed to put their trust in him and rebelled against God ten times (Num. 14:22). This failure should not be attributed to God, who daily revealed his faithfulness, but to the Israelites, who refused to honor him. In the first century, many Christians likewise were in danger of drifting away from the living God because of unbelief and disobedience. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 10:1–5 Verses 1 2 [Greek] by placing the adjective all after the pronoun our, Paul stresses the noun fathers rather than the adjective. Otherwise he would have placed the adjective before the noun. [Greek] the aorist passive of the verb [Greek] (I baptize) enjoys substantial textual support. Yet a variant reading with the aorist middle [Greek] has equal support. Nonetheless, many scholars prefer the aorist passive, which reflects the Christian mode of baptism; the middle reflects Jewish baptismal practices.^[11] Verses 3 4 [Greek] and [Greek] both verbs are aorist active and must be seen as constatives that describe the duration of the Israelites eating and drinking in the desert. Note that the verb [Greek] is in the imperfect tense to describe action. The aorist states the fact and the imperfect describes the manner.^[12] Verse 5 [Greek] the verb [Greek] (he was pleased) takes the preposition [Greek] to complete the construction in Greek. The definite article and comparative adjective apparently mean the majority. ^[13] [Greek] the second occurrence of this preposition has a local sense as the dative of place. b. Example 10:6–10 After giving the readers an analogy from Israel's forty-year experience in the wilderness, Paul lists five historical examples taken from that same period.^[14] Some of the incidents overlap: 1. coveting food (Num. 11:4) 2. engaging in idolatry (Exod. 32:4, 6, 19) 3. committing immorality (Num. 25:1–9) 4. testing the Lord (Num. 21:5) 5. grumbling (Num. 14:2, 36; 16:1–35) Each of these five examples appears in the form of either a phrase, a sentence, or even a quotation. These brief notations seem to indicate that the readers were familiar with the historical account of Israel's experiences. Hence, the Corinthians should be able to see their own reflection in the mirror of these historical events. 6. Now these things became examples for us, so that we should not long for evil things as those people did. a. Now these things became examples for us. The adverb now introduces a summary statement that relates to the preceding paragraph. These things are the historical events which Paul has mentioned previously: the cloud that guided and protected the Israelites, the passage through the Red Sea to safety, the provision of food and drink, and the sin of unbelief and disobedience. In short, all these things are the benefits which the people received, and sins which they committed. ^[15] Paul calls these things examples, or in Greek, typoi, from which we have the derivative types. But in the context of the first five verses of chapter 10, the literal translation types raises questions: For example, are most of the Corinthians going to perish as the Israelites did in the desert? That interpretation would put a predictive connotation on the word types. Conversely, the translation examples needs further elucidation. In the light of verse 5, this word conveys a sense of warning, a sense which many translators have adopted (RSV, NEB, REB, GNB, JB).^[16] We do well to understand the word in question as pictures painted by an artist, [to disclose] what sort of judgement threatens idolaters, fornicators, and others who despise God (compare v. 11).^[17] Paul writes that the examples are for us. By writing the first person plural, Paul clearly includes both his readers and himself. He continues his sentence with the pronoun we. b. So that we should not long for evil things just as those people did. This first reference to a historical incident calls to mind the scriptural account concerning the rabble that complained about food. Tired of their daily manna, they said, If only we had meat to eat! We remember the fish we ate in Egypt &also the cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions and garlic. But now we have lost our appetite &(Num. 11:4–6). These discontented Israelites tested and tried God (Ps. 106:14), who in his grace sent them an abundance of quail. Yet the Lord also punished them with a severe plague, so that they died with the meat still between their teeth (Num. 11:31–34). They were buried in a place which the Israelites called Kibroth Hattaavah (graves of craving). These people had been possessed by greed, and, as Paul states elsewhere, greed is idolatry (Col. 3:5). Paul issues an admonition to the Corinthians and tells them what not to do. He alludes to the tenth commandment: You shall not covet (Exod. 20:17; Deut. 5:21). This commandment is the capstone of the Decalogue, for the sin of covetousness gives rise to all other sins (James 1:14 15). 7. Do not be idolaters as some of them were. Just as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink and they stood up to play. The second reference is to the time Aaron allowed the people to make an idol in the form of a golden calf (Exod. 32:1–20). Israelites broke the second commandment, You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me &(Exod. 20:4–5; Deut. 5:8–9). In the sight of God, idolatry is a heinous sin because worshipers displace the living God with a graven image. Paul issues a direct warning: Do not be idolaters. He refrains from including himself in the admonition but addresses the Corinthians in the second person plural. (In verses 6, 8, and 9 he uses the first person plural.) In this verse, he specifically links the rebellious people in Israel and some of the Corinthians. The Israelites who worshiped the golden calf at Mount Sinai and the Corinthians who participated in the rites at pagan temples all transgressed the second commandment. The people sat down to eat and drink and they stood up to play. This quotation Paul has taken verbatim from the Septuagint translation of Exodus 32:6. The passage gives us a vignette: a feast was often followed by games of one kind or other. Such commonly accepted practices were normally above criticism. But in pagan rites, people ate and drank to honor an idol who represented a god. The dances that followed the meal often degenerated into debauchery. Hence the Greek verb paizein, which I have translated to play, can have a negative connotation and mean to sin sexually (NCV). Those Corinthians who entered temples at the time of pagan festivals exposed themselves to situations that might cause them to sin. Then they were in the same category as the Israelites who got up and indulged in pagan revelry. 8. Nor let us practice sexual immorality as some of them practiced, when in one day twenty-three thousand fell dead. The third allusion is to an event that occurred near the end of Israel's desert journey. At the instigation of Balaam, the Israelites worshiped Baal-Peor, observed Canaanite fertility rites, and indulged in sexually immoral practices (Num. 25:1–9; 31:16). This was a blot on the pages of Israel's annals and is noted a number of times in Scripture (Deut. 4:3; Ps. 106:28–29; Hos. 9:10). The Israelites now sinned against the seventh commandment: You shall not commit adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). One person who indulged in sexual immorality is mentioned by name and by tribe: Zimri, the son of Salu of Simeon's tribe, brought a Midianite woman into his tent and was killed by the grandson of Aaron (Num. 25:6–8, 14). God struck the Israelites with a plague as punishment for their faithlessness. Immediately after the plague, God instructed Moses and Eleazar son of Aaron to conduct the second census on the plains of MoabNum. 26:1–2; the first census took place thirty-eight years earlier in the desert of Sinai [Num. 1:1–3] . The statistics show that the number of men twenty years and older in the tribe of Simeon during the second census (22,200) was less than half of what it was in the first census (59,300). We presume that most of the men who were killed during the plague belonged to the tribe of Simeon (Num. 1:22; 26:14). Paul writes that twenty-three thousand people died because of Israel's sin against God. But the historical account of Moses features a total of twenty-four thousand (Num. 25:9). The figure that Moses gives is supported by other sources (the Septuagint, Philo, and the rabbis).^[18] Attempts to explain the discrepancy cover a wide range: Paul's memory failed him; the writers in Numbers and I Corinthians used round numbers; Paul followed a variant reading. John Calvin is of the opinion that Moses gave the upper limit, Paul the lower, and so there is really no discrepancy. ^[19] For lack of information all such explanations remain hypotheses. Paul, with his thorough training in the Scriptures, had available more information than we have perhaps further details from oral tradition. For instance, the Jewish historian Josephus presents a lengthy account of this incident with speeches of Balaam, Zambrias, Moses, and others. He also writes about the slaying of those who were guilty and the destruction caused by the pestilence. However, he concludes with the remark that there perished from the ranks no less than fourteen thousand men. ^[20] In short, we lack information that Paul apparently possessed. 9. And let us not test Christ as some of them did and were destroyed by snakes. The fourth reference to the history of Israel is the incident of the snakes (Num. 21:4–9). Overconfident after defeating the king of Arad, the people of Israel were unwilling to travel around the kingdom of Edom. They displayed impatience, blasphemed God, denounced Moses, loathed manna, and clamored for water. In response, God sent poisonous snakes into the camp. When the people repented of their sin, Moses prayed for them, fashioned a bronze snake, and put it on a pole. The people who were bitten looked at the snake and lived (John 3:14 15). Paul writes, And let us not test Christ. A number of translators have the reading Lord^[21] instead of Christ. ^[22] The oldest Greek manuscript (P46), the Western text, numerous witnesses, versions, and the church fathers have the word Christ. This is the primary reading that goes back to the second century, was the accepted text throughout the Mediterranean basin, and is well attested.^[23] Hence, the term Christ, which fits the context (see v. 4), is the preferred reading. And Paul teaches that the preexistent Christ accompanied the Israelites during their desert journey. Two additional observations. First, Paul again uses the first person plural (see v. 8) to show that the Corinthians and he are not exempt from God's judgment. They are like the Israelites in the wilderness. Israel's victorious warriors demonstrated their impatience by refusing to accept divine guidance; they received their just reward. Accordingly, believers in New Testament times (including Paul and the Corinthians) ought not to follow their own inclinations. They have to wait for answered prayer and God's providential leading. Next, in three successive verses (see vv. 8, 9, 10), Paul specifies that only some of [the Israelites] fell into sin and died. With respect to the people who suffered snakebites, only some died. The rest looked at the bronze snake and lived. 10. And do not grumble as some of them did and were destroyed by the angel that destroys. A survey of Israel's history discloses the people's habitual vice of grumbling against God, Moses, and Aaron,^[24] and the frequency of their grumbling makes it difficult to determine the exact passage from which Paul takes this fifth reference. In light of this entire verse, two incidents are likely prospects. First, after hearing the reports of the spies who had returned from the promised land, the entire community grumbled against Moses and Aaron (Num. 14:2). Paul, however, declares that some of them grumbled, and this qualified statement agrees with the account in (Numbers 14:37 38. Only the ten men who spread a bad report about the promised land died instantaneously of a plague, while Joshua and Caleb lived. The other choice is the narrative that describes the insolence of Korah, Dathan, Abiram, and On, who together with 250 leaders rose up against MosesNum. 16:1–35). Not only did all these people perish, but because of the grumbling of the entire community 14,700 persons died of a plague that God sent among them (see vv. 41, 49). Yet even these two passages do not fully coincide with Paul's wording, for he speaks of an angel that destroys. There is no mention of an angel of destruction in Numbers, although we find references to the destroyer in a few other places (Exod. 12:23and Heb. 11:28; II Sam. 24:16and I Chron. 21:15). Interestingly, in the Wisdom of Solomon 18:20–25, the writer relates the account recorded in (Numbers 16:41 50. He describes Aaron the high priest stopping the destroyer from inflicting further damage on Israel. Such language meshes with Paul's usage, for he supplies a definite article and calls the angel the destroyer. He thus follows the practice of the rabbis who said there was one particular angel of destruction.^[25] We presume that Paul reflects the Jewish teaching of his day and has in mind the destruction of the men with Korah and the plague that struck down Israelites by the thousandsNum. 16). Although some manuscripts have the reading let us not grumble, the preferred text is in the second person plural, do not grumble. These words are addressed to the Corinthians who might be induced by some arrogant leaders to grumble against Paul. With this example taken from Israel's chronicles, the apostle adroitly points out the perils of registering complaints about God and his servants. Without threatening the Corinthians, Paul teaches them lessons from sacred history to instill within them a respect for spiritual leaders (Heb. 13:7, 17, 24). Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 10:6–10 Verse 6 [Greek] this neuter plural pronoun in the nominative is followed by the verb [Greek] (these became) in the plural instead of the singular (compare v. 11). [Greek] the genitive can be either objective or subjective. Many scholars prefer the objective genitive. [Greek] the prepositional phrase with the particle [Greek] and the infinitive constitute a negative purpose clause which verges on a negative command. For this reason, I have included this directive with the four negative imperatives in four following verses (vv. 7, 8, 9, 10). [Greek] the verb [Greek] (I desire, long for) occurs also in the tenth commandment of the DecalogueExod. 20:17; Deut. 5:21, LXX . See also James 4:2. Verses 7 8 [Greek] the particle appears in this verse and the next three and is followed respectively by four verbs in the present imperative. [Greek] to play. However, the Hebrew equivalent, c%q (Exod. 32:6), denotes licentiousness. This meaning is substantiated in three other passages (Gen. 26:8; 39:14, 17).^[26] [Greek] the Majority Text, Merk, and Souter insert the preposition [Greek] to strengthen the dative of time of the phrase in one day. The better manuscripts lack this preposition. Verse 9 [Greek] the compound form of this verb denotes intensity and signifies willfully put to the test or boldly challengePs. 77:18, LXX; Ps. 78:18in the Hebrew . The direct object is [Greek]. [Greek] the imperfect passive of the verb [Greek] (I destroy) denotes continued action in the past. However, in the next verse (v. 10), the same verb appears in the aorist tense, which describes a single action. Verse 10 [Greek] just as. This conjunction, which is a combination of [Greek] and the intensive enclitic particle [Greek], occurs in the New Testament only in Paul's epistles (Heb. 4:2).^[27] [Greek] the noun with the definite article appears once in the New Testament as the destroyer. Paul takes the word from the Old TestamentExod. 12:23, LXX; Hebrew hammash%it . He employs the noun [Greek] (destruction) in connection with the incestuous man whom he delivers to Satan for destruction of his flesh that his spirit may be saved (5:5, author's translation). c. Admonition 10:11–13 In a few familiar verses (vv. 12, 13), Paul applies the historical lessons to the believers in Corinth. At the same time he discloses that God always provides help when believers face trials and temptation. 11. Now these things happened to them as a warning and were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. a. Now these things happened to them as a warning. Numerous translations give a slightly different reading by inserting the adjective all, that is, Now all these things. ^[28] The adjective, however, may have been added to emphasize the historical incidents mentioned in the preceding verses (vv. 6 10). Verse 11 echoes verse 6, Now these things became examples for us. The historical examples of idolaters, fornicators, rebels, and grumblers are pertinent reminders of God's anger toward sinners who willfully put him to the test. With the imperfect tense of the verb to happen, Paul depicts the recurrence of these incidents; with the phrase to them he clearly alludes to the Israelites on their forty-year journey through the Sinai Peninsula. God has seen fit to record these events as instructive lessons to warn his people in successive generations and in other cultures. God is a God of history who expects his people to take note of biblical history. b. And [these] were written for our admonition. God's Word has lasting authority for believers in every generation. Indeed, God has given us both the Old and New Testaments to admonish us to live in harmony with his precepts (see 9:10). The term admonition appears in another letter of Paul, where he instructs fathers to bring up their children in the training and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:4) that is, they should teach their children the truths of Scripture. Likewise, God diligently admonishes his people to adhere to his written Word, and he warns that failure to obey him results in dire consequences (Heb. 10:31). Let no one think that God presents himself in the Old Testament only as an avenger of evil (Ps. 139:19) and in the New Testament only as a God of love (I John 4:16). God both hates sin and loves the sinner who repents. He never changes. He loves his people; both the patriarch of Bible times and the recent convert experience the joy of God's forgiving grace. With unwavering steadfastness God fulfills his promises in the lives of the saints every sincere believer can testify to this truth. c. Upon whom the ends of the ages have come. What does Paul mean when he writes the ends of the ages? He is not saying that God's people have come to the consummation, but instead that the end times have now begun. Other New Testament writers similarly affirm that we are now living in the last period of history (Heb. 9:26; I John 2:18). Within the end time, which arrived with the coming of Christ, some periods in history have been completed. For example, the Old Testament era ended with the fulfillment of the messianic promises; Greek and Roman culture encountered Christ's gospel and subsequently disappeared. Writes F. W. Grosheide, As often as a nation comes in contact with the gospel, an age finds its end. ^[29] Even though Paul states that the ends of the ages have arrived, we are unable to discern the end of the period in which we live. Jesus tells us that the end comes when the gospel has been preached as a testimony to all nations (Matt. 24:14). In these end times, therefore, we must hasten the day of Christ's return by living holy and godly lives (II Peter 3:11–12) and by advancing the spread of Christ's gospel to every part of the world and every sector of society. When that task has been accomplished, the consummation of all things will come about. Together with the Corinthians, every believer must heed God's admonitions in the days that are known as the end time. The events recorded in the Old Testament Scriptures are there for the express purpose of telling Christians to avoid the pitfalls of sin and to hasten the day of the Lord. 12. So he who thinks he stands, let him be careful not to fall. Here is an aphorism that anyone can take to heart. Indeed, we frequently choose this Scripture passage to tell someone to avoid misplaced self-reliance and inordinate pride. With the word so Paul concludes his survey of Israel's history and applies its lessons to the Corinthians. He directs his application to all the readers but especially to those people who proudly think that they have the freedom in Christ to do anything or to go anywhere. He implicitly refers to the Corinthians who visit pagan temples (8:10). These so-called strong believers should take note of the history lessons from the Old Testament, for in these lessons God is addressing them. In effect, Paul is drawing the people of Israel and the Corinthian Christian together through these Old Testament lessons. The people of Israel took pride in their standing before God. They alone were God's people, and they thought that God would always be on their side. They felt spiritually secure because God had made a covenant with their father Abraham, a covenant he promised to keep for generations to come (Gen. 17:7). Yet the Scriptures relate that because of their disobedience to God and his Word, untold descendants of Abraham fell in the desert (Rom. 11:20). Says the writer of Hebrews, See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin's deceitfulness (Heb. 3:12–13). The word fall points to a false security. When Paul uses this word, he refers to those Corinthians who place their trust in either church membership or baptism and communion but not in Jesus Christ. These Corinthians rely on their own insights and the wisdom derived from fellow men (3:18). With hearts that are not right with God, they are self-confident. Instead, Paul advises that they with childlike confidence are to trust in God from day to day. Their spiritual security should come from true faith that relies on God to fulfill his promises. 13. No temptation has overtaken you except that which is common to everyone. But God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond that which you are able to bear; however, with the temptation he also will provide the way of escape that you may be able to endure it. a. No temptation has overtaken you. What an encouragement to every believer! What a relief to know that God has set limits! Paul is taking time out from his argument, so to speak, to reassure his discouraged readers with a pastoral word. As a corollary to his directive to stand firm and not to fall (v. 12), he encourages them to view their life realistically. In truth, Paul addresses every person who has come to grips with the daily problems of life. As is true of all languages, Greek has words that have several meanings. The expression temptation is one of them, for it can also denote trial. In his epistle James says, God does not tempt anyone (1:13). True, yet Jesus teaches his disciples the sixth petition of the Lord's Prayer, And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one (Matt. 6:13). He leaves the origin of temptation an open question; a succinct distinction is that temptations are from Satan but trials are from God. Does Paul intend to say temptation or trial in verse 13? Perhaps he wishes to convey both meanings. To illustrate, Satan appears before God in heaven, and God allows him to tempt Job, to put his faith on trial. But God uses Satan to demonstrate that Job is able to endure his trials, for in the end Job's faith triumphsJob 1, 2, and 42 .^[30] b. No temptation has overtaken you except that which is common to everyone. The main verb in this sentence is in the perfect tense and connotes a lasting condition. It also conveys that tempting or testing takes possession of people.^[31] The degree and extent of any temptation is limited by what is common to everyone. By contrast, at both the beginning and the end of his earthly ministry, Jesus withstood Satan's temptations beyond what is common to everyone. The hellish agony which Jesus withstood in Gethsemane and at Calvary no ordinary human would ever be able to endure. No believer will have to be subjected to the same experiences. We ought not to ask to which temptations the Corinthians were subjected. Paul gives no details but only speaks a general word of encouragement that is valid for all Christians. c. But God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond that which you are able to bear. God's faithfulness to his people is perfect, even though man's faithfulness to him is imperfect. Scripture proves that not God but man is a covenant breaker. Biblical writers extol the divine attribute of God's faithfulness that reaches to the sky. With variations, the theme God is faithful is a recurring refrain in Paul's epistles and elsewhere in Scripture.^[32] How does God demonstrate his faithfulness to believers? God promises that he will not permit anyone to be tempted beyond the point of human endurance. Even if believers knowingly place themselves in circumstances where temptations are rampant and inevitable, God demonstrates his faithfulness by coming to their rescue. Take Lot as an example. He took up residence in Sodom and had to put up with the dirty lives of evil people, yet God helped him and rescued him from sudden destructionII Peter 2:7, NCV .^[33] In brief, as a faithful shepherd rescues his wandering sheep, so God watches his people and delivers them from predicaments which they encounter. Paul implies that God sets the limits for man's temptation in accordance with what he can bear. d. However, with the temptation he also will provide the way of escape that you may be able to endure it. The adversative however is influenced and strengthened by the word also. God sets limits to human temptations and he himself comes to help his people during their trials. He encourages believers to persist and eventually overcome. He becomes personally involved in the trial by opening a way of escape for those who are tempted and tried. In the Greek, Paul writes the definite article the in the phrase the way of escape. That is, for every trial God prepares a way out.^[34] A period of temptation and testing may be compared with a ship approaching a rocky shore and facing inevitable shipwreck. But, suddenly and, to the inexperienced landsman, unexpectedly, [it] slips through a gap on the inhospitable coast into security and peace. ^[35] The purpose for the way of escape is that you may endure [the temptation]. The main verb which Paul uses conveys the meaning to bear up under the temptation. Believers endurance prevents them from falling and makes them stand firm in the faith.^[36] God's abiding faithfulness sees his people through their trials and causes them to triumph. Doctrinal Considerations in 10:12 Jesus told Peter that he had prayed that Peter's faith might not fail (Luke 22:32). Yet, Peter declared three times in succession that he had never known Jesus. Did God fail Peter by not answering Jesus request? Or did Peter's fear of persecution and suffering undermine and even nullify his faith? The answer is that not God's provision but only Peter's responsibility was at stake. Faith is not a static virtue but a spiritual gift. Faith either diminishes when not exercised or increases when tried. True faith shines brightly when believers stand firm in times of testing (Gal. 5:1; II Thess. 2:15). Scripture teaches that withstanding the attacks of Satan is an enduring struggle of faith (Eph. 6:10–18; Phil. 4:12–14). In this struggle, Christians are either strong or weak; their faith can either increase or decrease (Rom. 14:1; II Cor. 10:15). True faith is firmly anchored in God. And through Christ Jesus, God gives believers necessary strength and ability to stand. When Paul writes that he who thinks he stands [should] be careful not to fall, he ascribes doctrinal significance to the two verbs stand and fall. Standing firm means to be fully dependent on God in Christ. David asks, Who may stand in [God's] holy place? And he answers, He who has clean hands and a pure heart.& He will receive blessing from the Lord and vindication from God his Savior (Ps. 24:3–5). The verb to fall in the context of salvation means a loss, which translates graphically into rejecting divine grace. For example, the Israelites experienced their downfall when they defiantly challenged God. They rejected the manna which he daily supplied and the leadership which he had divinely appointed. They rejected grace by willfully disobeying God. By contrast, if someone loves God, he is known by God (8:3). The person who loves God demonstrates genuine evidence of possessing eternal security by believing his Word and by obeying his precepts. The believer, then, finds comfort in knowing that God will never, no never, no never forsake the soul that on Jesus has leaned for repose. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 10:11–13 Verse 11 [Greek] this adverb, translated a warning, occurs only here in the New Testament. Because of its strong manuscript support, many scholars prefer this reading to the one that has the word [Greek] (types, examples) and its corresponding Greek verb [Greek] (happen) in the plural. [Greek] it was written is in the singular, yet [Greek] in the preceding clause is in the plural. The preposition [Greek] denotes purpose: for our admonition. And the pronoun [Greek] is not the subjective genitive but the objective genitive. Verse 12 [Greek] this consecutive conjunction functions in a co-ordinate construction and means therefore. [Greek] after the verb to be careful, this particle serves as a conjunction that negatively introduces the aorist active subjunctive [Greek] (not to fall). Verse 13 [Greek] the perfect tense of the verb [Greek] (I receive, take) indicates action begun in the past with lasting significance in the present. [Greek] with the definite article in the genitive case followed by two infinitives, this construction is a purpose clause.^[37] The phrase lacks the subject you which in some manuscripts is supplied. Note that the second infinitive is a constative aorist from [Greek], which considers the action of the verb from beginning to end. 2. Warnings against Idolatry 10:14–22 14 Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to the wise: judge for yourselves what I say. 16 The cup of blessing for which we give thanks, is it not participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf. 18 Consider Israel according to the flesh. Are not all who eat the sacrifices partakers at the altar? 19 What then am I saying? That food offered to an idol is anything or that an idol is anything? 20 No, however, the things they sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God. I do not wish that you become partakers of demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons, and you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? We are not stronger than he, are we? In chapter 8, Paul initiated his discussion on idolatry. In that chapter, he discussed the matter of eating food that had been offered to an idol (vv. 4, 7) and dining in the temple of an idol (v. 10). Paul expressed his concern for the weaker brothers who were wounded in their conscience by the actions of the stronger Corinthians. Already in the first part of chapter 10, Paul returned to the subject of idolatry (vv. 6 10) and alluded to Israel's idol worship at Mount Sinai (Exod. 32:1–20). By reflecting on the desert experiences of the Israelites, Paul suggested the basic unity of God's people through both the Old and New Testament eras. With descriptive examples of God's people in the desert, Paul admonished everyone who belongs to God's family. Now in the second part of chapter 10 Paul addresses all the Corinthians, especially those who consider themselves strong Christians. He calls their attention to the implications of participating in sacrifices offered to idols. Although in chapter 9 he interrupted his discussion on idolatry with a discourse on apostolic rights, he implied that he had more to say. This discussion had its origin in the letter that Paul received (e.g., see 7:1), in which the Corinthians asked him about food sacrificed to idols. In chapter 8, Paul begins as he does because of the way the Corinthians had made their points. In chapter 10, Paul works more from his own agenda. ^[38] In his epistle, Paul often digresses either to clarify his message with pertinent illustrations (e.g., see 7:17–24) or to speak a word of encouragement or admonition. But now he is ready to resume his discussion on idolatry. a. A Vivid Comparison 10:14–17 14. Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. The first word in this verse, therefore, joins not the preceding admonition but the allusions to Israel's idol worship (vv. 6 10) to Paul's discourse on feasting at the temple of an idol and celebrating the Lord's Supper. Paul summarizes his teaching with a command that is addressed to all the readers. Because the command is direct and forceful, he tempers it with the address my dear friends. At times, Paul uses an endearing term to draw his readers close to himself but at the same time he gives them a command (e.g., 4:14). The injunction to flee from idolatry is similar to Paul's previous order: Flee immorality (6:18). He is addressing the Corinthians who say that they are sufficiently strong to withstand temptation when they attend feasts in pagan temples. Paul instructs them to flee from that environment as a refugee escapes from threatening external conditions. He bids them to stay as far away as possible from pagan temples and their concomitant feasts held in honor of their gods. Does Paul's injunction to flee idolatry contradict his earlier statement, where he seems to allow the strong Corinthians to eat in a dining hall of a pagan temple (8:9)? No, not at all. First, notice that in the context of 8:9, Paul limits Christian liberty. He permits freedom as long as it does not become a hindrance to fellow believers (see also 10:24, 32). Second, in 8:10 Paul speaks about the act of eating in an idol's temple but in this verse he calls attention to idolatry itself. Even though an idol is an inanimate object of wood or stone, its environment is religious and implies worship. Here, then, is the danger of transgressing God's explicit command not to worship an idol (Exod. 20:4–6; Deut. 5:8–10), and hence Paul's imperative to flee from idolatry (I John 5:21). When the Corinthians enter a pagan temple and participate in festivities that are related to the worship of an idol, they sin against God. They must know that their presence in a pagan temple at the time of a feast constitutes an affront to God. With the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, God prepares his own table at which he is the host and the believers are his guests. The table in a dining room of a pagan temple and the table of the Lord belong to two diametrically opposed religious contexts. 15. I speak as to the wise: judge for yourselves what I say. Paul says that he is addressing the wise. In another context he had ridiculed the Corinthians wisdom (4:10), but not now. The wise are those believers who obediently fulfill the will of the Lord. But the foolish, relying on their own insight and human wisdom, come to utter ruin (Matt. 7:24–27). The wisdom of the prudent Corinthians lies precisely in being obedient to God's command not to worship an idol.^[39] This means that they should not allow themselves even a semblance of such worship. The Corinthians must now decide to judge wisely. They are mature Christians who should be able to discern what is central to this matter and what is peripheral. In succeeding verses, Paul gives them relevant instructions on measures they should take when they are invited to a meal in the home of unbelievers (see vv. 27 30). He wants them to be attentive to what he is saying and thus be instructed in the school of Christ. ^[40] 16. The cup of blessing for which we give thanks, is it not participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not participation in the body of Christ? We note the following points: a. Questions. Paul now reminds his readers of celebrating the Lord's Supper, where the Lord is the host and they are guests. He puts this reminder in the form of two rhetorical questions which every believer must answer in the affirmative. When the Corinthians drink from the cup and eat of the bread during the Lord's Supper, they indeed have communion with Christ. Because they have fellowship with Jesus Christ, they ought to have nothing to do with idols. No one can serve two masters (Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:13). b. Setting. The institution of the Lord's Supper took place in the upper room on the night before Jesus death on the cross. There he articulated the purpose for this celebration by saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you (Luke 22:20; see I Cor. 11:25). The term new in this formula calls to mind the old covenant that was ratified by the Israelites at Mount Sinai. Moses sprinkled blood on the altar, the Book of the Covenant, and on the people. He said, This is the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words (Exod. 24:8). Immediately after the ratification of that covenant, Israel's leaders (Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and seventy elders) went up Mount Sinai to meet God. These leaders not only saw God but also participated in a covenant meal with him (Exod. 24:9–11). Centuries later, God announced through Jeremiah that he would make a new covenant with the houses of Israel and Judah (Jer. 31:31). This prophecy was fulfilled when Jesus, on the night of his betrayal, instituted a new covenant and participated in a covenant meal with his disciples. c. Sequence. In the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, Jesus first broke the bread and then poured the wine (Matt. 26:26–28; Mark 14:22 24). But in Luke's Gospel, he takes the cup and gives it to his disciples; then he breaks the bread; and afterward he takes the cup (Luke 22:17 20). The explanation is that during the Jewish Passover meal, the participants drank at stated intervals from four cups.^[41] The third cup was known as the cup of blessing, and in time the term became a technical one. At the presentation of this third cup, Jesus instituted the Lord's Supper. Paul writes that he himself received from Jesus the formula for celebrating the Lord's Supper (11:23–26): first breaking the bread and then drinking from the cup. But in verse 16 Paul reverses the order because he wants to use the concept bread as an introduction to the next verse, in which he draws a parallel between the one loaf and the one body.^[42] d. Meaning. The cup of blessing for which we give thanks. In this verse Paul writes the Greek verb eulMges (I bless),^[43] which is translated two ways. Several versions (e.g., NKJV, NRSV) give a literal translation, the cup of blessing which we bless, while others (e.g., NCV, TNT) read, we give thanks for the cup of blessing. Scholars who choose the latter translation interpret the verb in the light of Jewish culture and understand it as the act of giving thanks to God. This verb has a theological connotation; it must be understood in the sense of thanking God the Father for the redemptive work of his Son on our behalf. When we celebrate communion, we express our gratitude to him. God is the bestower of blessings and we are the recipients who render thanks and praise to him. When Jesus fed the multitudes, he took the bread and gave thanks to God the Father. When he instituted the Lord's Supper, he gave thanks when he broke the bread (Luke 22:19). He set the example of giving thanks to the Father for his gifts to us. Hence, the term eucharist, which derives from the Greek verb eucharisteM (I give thanks), means gratitude or the act of giving thanks. [The cup] &is it not participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not participation in the body of Christ? The word koinonia in this verse sometimes translated sharing in or communion, is here rendered participation in. ^[44] Believers participate in a vertical relationship with Jesus Christ as Paul earlier wrote, we have fellowship with God's Son, our Lord Jesus Christ (I John 1:3). Believers also participate in a horizontal relationship with one another, as was evidenced by the fellowship that the early Christians experienced in the days following Pentecost (Acts 2:42). These vertical and horizontal relationships meet in the church, for the believers together form the body of which Christ is the head (Eph. 5:23). In this verse, the words cup and bread signify participation in the blood and body of Christ. By their participation believers receive God's favor in the form of untold spiritual and material blessings. But this participation also entails the Christian's responsibility of reverential obedience to Jesus Christ. When they celebrate the Lord's Supper, believers also affirm a covenant relationship. This cup is the new covenant in my blood are the words Paul received from the Lord (Luke 22:20). The same thing holds true for his reference to Jesus body (Luke 22:19). We see a striking parallelism in the way the two words cup and bread are explained:^[45] cup = participation in the blood of Christ (10:16) bread = participation in the body of Christ (10:16) the new covenant in my blood (11:25) my body which is for you (11:24) e. Conclusion. Paul uses the personal pronoun we in this verse and the next: We give thanks &for we all partake. This pronoun does not apply only to Paul and fellow apostles who administer the sacrament of communion. It is not restricted to the clergy who serve at the table of the Lord. No, all believers who come to the table are the Lord's guests and he is the host. This interpretation becomes evident from a study of the next verse. 17. Because there is one loaf, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf. a. Translations. The Greek text itself is rather simple, with a limited and even repetitive vocabulary. But simplicity is not always the equivalent of clarity. The first part of this verse can be translated in two different ways: For we, being many, are one bread and one body (NKJV) or Because there is one loaf, we, though many, are one body (REB). What then is the difference? In the first translation, the conjunction and has to be supplied because it is lacking in the Greek text. This absence should serve as a caution to the translator not to treat the terms bread and body as synonyms. If believers are described as bread, how then can they partake of bread? Accordingly, the second translation is preferred because it avoids tautology.^[46] b. Links. The causative conjunction because links verse 17 to the preceding verse, where Paul discussed believers participation in the breaking of communion bread. The apostle emphasizes that every believer partakes of the one bread. (The translation in this commentary uses the idiom of one loaf rather than the generic, one bread. ) Eating bread together at a meal links the participants and forms a bond of unity. c. Unity. The church in Corinth consisted of Gentiles who had become believers and Jews who had converted to the Christian faith. Yet these two groups formed one body, so that Paul could say, we who are many are one body. Indifferent to racial barriers, they were all one in Christ. Together they all partook of the bread when they celebrated the communion service. When contemporary believers partake of the one bread, they too show that they are one body and belong to the fellowship. This text, then, reveals the unity that prevails on the horizontal level. d. Partaking. In this verse, Paul twice uses causal conjunctions: because and for. The two causal clauses, because there is one loaf &and for we all partake of the one loaf, reinforce one another; both stress the significance of the one loaf. The body of believers partakes of the one substance, bread. Partaking of the elements of the Lord's Supper rules out that any member of the church may go to a pagan festival in the temple of an idol or that any pagan may come to the Lord's table.^[47] Here, then, is Paul's purpose for stressing the fact that believers partake of the one loaf: Christianity and paganism are mutually exclusive (see v. 21 for his explicit statement). Practical Considerations in 10:16–17 Some Greek words have crept into our vocabulary and are quite often used in descriptive names for churches. I mention only two: agap and koinonia. So we have the agape church and the koinonia fellowship. The first title means the church that practices love. The second one is redundant because koinonia means fellowship. Why resort to the use of foreign words, when we have lucid expressions in our own language? This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 11. Worship, part 1 (11:2–34) Outline (continued) 11:2 14:40 E. Worship 11:2–16 1. Man and Woman in Worship 11:2–6 a. The Man and the Woman 11:7–12 b. Glory 11:13–16 c. Man and Woman Again 11:17–34 2. The Lord's Supper 11:17–22 a. Excesses 11:23–26 b. Institution 11:27–34 c. Preparation E. Worship 11:2 14:40 11 2 I praise you because you remember me in all things, and you guard the traditions just as I delivered them to you. 3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. 4 Every man who prays or prophesies with something on his head dishonors his head. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head. For she is one and the same as a woman whose head is shaved. 6 For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off. But if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or shaven, let her cover her head. 7 For a man ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God. But the woman is the glory of man. 8 For man does not come from woman but woman from man. 9 Indeed, man was not created for the sake of the woman but woman for the sake of the man. 10 For this reason the woman ought to have authority on her head because of the angels. 11 However, in the Lord, woman is nothing apart from man, and man is nothing apart from woman. 12 For as the woman is from the man, even so is the man through the woman, and all things are from God. 13 Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14 Does not nature itself teach you that it is a disgrace to a man if he lets his hair grow long, 15 but if a woman lets her hair grow long, it is her glory? Because her long hair has been given to her as a covering. 16 But if anyone is inclined to be contentious, we do not have such a custom, nor do the churches of God. 1. Man and Woman in Worship 11:2–16 In the next four chapters (chaps. 11 14), Paul instructs the Corinthians in the matter of worship. He begins with worshipers, both male and female, who pray or prophesy, and then explains proper conduct at the Lord's table. Between a lengthy discussion on the gifts of the Spirit and speaking in tongues, he places his letter of love. He concludes with an exhortation to prophesy, a command not to forbid tongue speaking, and a rule to maintain order. a. The Man and the Woman 11:2–6 Paul fully understands his people and approaches them as a seasoned pastor. He knows that they are still babes in their spiritual lives and need much corrective advice. But before he admonishes them, Paul praises them for their efforts to follow his teachings. 2. I praise you because you remember me in all things, and you guard the traditions just as I delivered them to you. a. I praise you. No other passage in this epistle has words of praise for the Corinthians (contrast vv. 17, 22), except for the introduction section in which Paul gives thanks to God for the grace extended to them (1:4–9). Immediately following this introduction, he reproves the readers for their factionalism in the church (1:10–12). Similarly, in the current chapter Paul praises the Corinthians for their remembrance of him and the traditions he had entrusted to them. But subsequent to these commendations, he instructs them in the proper conduct of men and women, especially in public worship. b. Because you remember me in all things. Why does Paul praise the Corinthians? Because they have remembered (the Greek verb has the perfect tense) and continue to remember him in all things. This means that numerous Christians in Corinth have fond memories of Paul and follow his instructions. But many of the Corinthians did not keep Paul's teachings, as is evident from the succeeding context. For that reason, some translators prefer the temporal adverb always or its equivalent^[1] for the phrase in all things. With this translation, they eliminate possible disharmony between this verse (v. 2) and the rest of the chapter. In the Greek, however, Paul is consistent in writing the phrase in all things (he also used it in two preceding verses, 9:25 and 10:33). Because of Paul's earlier usage, we hold to this translation. c. And you guard the traditions just as I delivered them to you. The second part of verse 2 explains the phrase in question. All things are those apostolic teachings that Paul had delivered to the Corinthians in earlier times; they are the traditions that the apostles had received and subsequently transmitted to others. For instance, Paul writes that he received information from the Lord and passed it on to the Corinthians (II Tim. 2:2). At this juncture in the epistle, we have no definite indication that Paul is trying to answer a question which the Corinthians had raised in their letter. Chapter 11 does not have the formula Now concerning the things you wrote about that in both full and abbreviated form occurs elsewhere (7:1, 25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12). Probably the letter contained a question regarding Christian conduct in the multicultural society of Corinth. And Paul addresses that problem in the following verses (vv. 3 16). 3. But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. a. Construction. After verse 2, Paul begins a subject he has not mentioned elsewhere. He teaches his readers about the relationships of Christ to man, man to woman, and God to Christ in a sequence of three clauses: Christ is the head of every man the man is the head of a woman God is the head of Christ Note that Paul begins and ends with the word Christ and that the first and third clauses are balanced. Also note that the sequence of the first two clauses is smooth. But the progression of these three clauses with the repetitive word head raises questions that center on the meaning of that single word. b. Meaning. Commentators are divided on the meaning of the Greek word kephal (head). Some interpret it to mean source, ^[2] while others maintain that it signifies authority. ^[3] Some scholars have examined the evidence and discovered that the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, records a number of places where the term head figuratively means chief or ruler. Two examples are, You have preserved me as the head of nations. People I did not know are subject to me (II Sam. 22:44), and, For the head of Aram is Damascus, and the head of Damascus is only Rezin.& The head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is only Remaliah's son (Isa. 7:8, 9). The accumulated evidence from the Septuagint, Philo, and Josephus is impressive. Still other scholars question whether the Hebrew word rosh (head) metaphorically denotes chief or ruler. They state instead that kephal means source in Greek literature,^[4] and that the expression head derives from Greek usage that connotes source. In fact, one writer asserts that there is simply no basis for the assumption that a Hellenized Jew would instinctively give kephal the meaning one having authority over someone. ^[5] The question scholars face is whether Paul addressed the Corinthians from a Jewish perspective (that head means authority) or a Hellenistic point of view (that head means source). Did Paul speak from his own background or did he accommodate himself to the Hellenistic culture? One scholar who examined the debate on this matter concludes, The upshot of this discussion is that a Hellenistic Jewish writer such as Paul of Tarsus could well have intended that kephal in 1 Cor[inthians] 11.3 be understood as head in the sense of authority or supremacy over someone else. ^[6] c. Interpretation. One interpretation of this passage that head means source or source of life is based primarily on three passages in Paul's epistles (Col. 1:18; 2:19; Eph. 4:15). As Christ is the source of man's being, so man is the source of woman. The interpretation that man is the source of woman is strengthened by Paul's assertion that the woman came from man (vv. 8, 12). The conclusion is drawn that Paul teaches not a doctrine of subordination but of the unique relationships that are predicated on one's being the source of the other's existence. ^[7] Further, the creation account teaches that God made Eve out of one of Adam's ribs (Gen. 2:21–23), so that Adam is the source of Eve. But if we view verse 3 in terms of strict parallelism, difficulties arise. We certainly reject the thought that God created Christ, for Christ is eternal and uncreated. Even though Scripture reveals that God became his Father (Ps. 2:7; Heb. 1:5; 5:5), and it is from God the Father that Christ, as Son, derives his eternal being, ^[8] Christ was not physically created from a piece taken out of God. ^[9] Nor is man physically taken out of Christ. Conclusively, if we seek to interpret the expression head as source, the parallels to other Scripture passages and those within verse 3 itself break down. When we understand the expression head to mean authority, however, the parallels hold true. Christ has authority over man, man over woman, and God over Christ. Yet this authority does not necessarily imply the superiority of one party and the inferiority of the other. Even though God has authority over Christ (see 15:24–28), Christ is not inferior to God the Father. In a similar manner, the authority of man over woman does not imply the inferiority of woman or the superiority of men. ^[10] On the contrary. Just as Christ in his essence is equal to God the Father, so woman in her being and worth is equal to woman. And, last, the Greek is unclear whether Paul has in view the husband-wife relationship or that of man and woman. On the basis of the parallel, For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church (Eph. 5:23), we opt for the first interpretation. Doctrinal Considerations in 11:3 In a discussion on the word head in the current text, we ought to look at the other places where Paul uses this term. In his epistles it occurs seventeen times, of which seven instances have the literal meaning of the word and ten the figurative connotation.^[11] When Paul develops his teaching of Christ's authority over the church and all creation, he expounds the headship of Christ. In (Ephesians 1:22, Paul introduces Christ's headship with a reference to his heavenly exaltation far above all rule and authority, power and dominion. The text itself speaks of the execution of Christ's divine authority: And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him head over everything for the church. The theme that Christ is the head of the church also occurs in Ephesians 4:15; 5:23; and Colossians 1:18; 2:19. Christ is called the head over all thingsCol. 2:10). In one passage, Paul parallels the headship of Christ and the church with the husband as the head of the wife. In this particular text we have a parallel that is instructive for interpreting (I Corinthians 11:3. This is the reading: Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the SaviorEph. 5:22–23). The analogy of husband and wife to Christ and the church is clear. The wife submits to the husband as the church submits to Christ. But headship has its own unique quality, as the text indicates: Christ is the Savior of the church, which is his body. The church, then, has its existence in him. Likewise, on the basis of the account of Eve's creation (Gen. 2:21–23), the husband acknowledges that the woman is from man and is dependent on him. Thus, headship signifies authority but it also includes a reference to origin that affects a continued relationship.^[12] We infer from the parallel of I Corinthians 11:3and Ephesians 5:22 23that Paul presents Christ's headship as a model. Just as Christ is the head of every man and of the church, so the husband is the head of the wife. As Christ submits to God the Father, so the wife submits to her husband.^[13] 4. Every man who prays or prophesies with something on his head dishonors his head. a. Qualification. Before we begin the explanation of this verse, we should realize that dress codes vary from culture to culture and from age to age. The city of Corinth had a mixed population of Greeks, Romans, Jews, and a number of people of other nationalities. When Paul discusses hairstyles and head coverings, we have to keep in mind that he was telling his readers to adopt Christian practices in a pagan world. Paul objected to blurring the genders but wanted the Corinthians to demonstrate visually the clear distinction between men and women. b. Interpretation. The translation of this text is simple; its interpretation is not. For example, does the man pray and prophesy at home or in church, in private or in public? How do we explain the verb prophesy? What does something on his head mean? And, do the two occurrences of head mean the same thing or does the second instance refer to Christ (see v. 3)? First, the praying and prophesying appear to take place in a public worship service. Why should Paul write about someone praying in the privacy of his home? And in respect to prophesying, in another context Paul says that the person who prophesies edifies the church (14:4). This verse, therefore, refers to public worship. Next, when Paul writes every man who prays or prophesies, he alludes to audible prayer uttered in a worship service. He links the verbs pray and prophesy with the particle or, and in a later chapter discloses that the gift of prophecy should be eagerly desired (14:1, 39). He leaves the impression that prayer is common, but prophecy occasional. But what is the meaning of the verb to prophesy? This word signifies preaching, teaching, or explaining God's revelation. In effect, this is what Priscilla and Aquila did when they invited Apollos to their home to explain to him God's Word more accurately (Acts 18:26). Similarly, both Simeon and Anna the prophetess spent their time in the temple courts worshiping God with prayer and praise and explaining God's revelation in Jesus as the salvation and redemption of his people (Luke 2:25 38). Third, what does something on his head mean? Paul literally says, having [something] hanging down from the head. If he had written the word something, which is supplied, the text would have been clearer. The supplied word is needed to understand Paul's phrase. The words that Paul uses occur in the writings of the Greek author Plutarch (b. a.d. 46 or 47 some forty miles from Corinth) and refer to something that is resting on the head. Greek literature contemporary with the New Testament demonstrates that the phrase kata kephal can clearly mean on the head. ^[14] In their native land and in their colonies the Romans covered their heads during private and public devotions. Offering sacrifices, praying or prophesying, they would pull their toga forward over their heads. This devotional practice may have penetrated society in Corinth, which was a Roman colony. So when Paul reminds Christian men to pray and prophesy with head uncovered, the recommendation fits the context of shunning the worship of idols. ^[15] Paul wanted the Corinthians to separate themselves from pagan customs and be distinct in their Christian practice. Last, does the second occurrence of head have the same meaning as the first (the physical head) or does it allude to Christ (the spiritual head)? Commentators are divided on this point. The preceding verse (v. 3) teaches that Christ is the head of man and the husband is the head of the wife. By extension, then, the man with a covered head dishonors Christ and the wife with an uncovered head dishonors her husband. However, if we take the second occurrence to refer to Christ, then the message of verse 7 seems to be redundant. The succeeding context, moreover, seems to indicate that the woman who prays or prophesies with an uncovered head dishonors not only her husband but also her own head. If this is so, a literal interpretation for verse 4 is not altogether out of place.^[16] We do well, therefore, to accept both the literal and figurative explanations. Paul wishes to maintain a clear distinction between the sexes, so that no man and no woman will bring dishonor to the church. He does not want a man to cover his head at a public worship service, for that act reflects pagan practice and implicitly rejects the creation order (see the commentary on vv. 5 6, 13 15). Correspondingly, he does not want a woman to come to the worship services without a head covering. 5. But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head. For she is one and the same as a woman whose head is shaved. 6. For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off. But if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or shaven, let her cover her head. a. But every woman who prays or prophesies. Verses 4 and 5 are parallel and reveal the equality of men and women in the church. In the Old Testament era, not the woman but the man received the sign of the covenant (Gen. 17). He served as representative for the woman. But in the New Testament era, male and female are one in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3:28). That is, both man and woman are equal before the Lord. This becomes evident when Paul ascribes the religious functions of praying and prophesying to both man and woman. Both men and women know that their prophesying consists of teaching and preaching God's revelation or exhorting and counseling others from the Scriptures (Acts 18:26). b. With her head uncovered dishonors her head. The interpretation of this verse depends on verse 3, where Paul says that the man is the head of woman, which in the family circle means that the husband is the wife's head. If the Corinthian woman puts aside her head covering in public, she thereby renounces the subordination to her husband that God intended her to show. She appropriates to herself authority that belongs to her husband.^[17] When in the Corinthian church a woman goes against the structure of creation, she dishonors her husband. In Paul's day, a woman should cover her head. If she failed to do this, she dishonored not only her own head but also showed disrespect to her husband. She ought to have respected her husband by wearing a head covering in public. But, we ask, does she have to have her head covered when she neither prays nor prophesies? In the privacy of her home no; in public, yes. c. For she is one and the same as a woman whose head is shaved. At first glance, this remark appears to be tactless and harsh. But we must consider these words in the cultural context of first-century Corinth. Paul explains himself in succeeding verses, where he notes that nature itself teaches that long hair is the glory of a woman (v. 15). For a woman to have her head shaved was and still is a mark of disgrace and humiliation. Whether Paul is thinking of the practice of humiliating an adulterous woman by cropping her hair is difficult to say. First-century Roman author Dio Chrysostom mentions that, on the island of Cyprus, a woman who had committed adultery was shorn by the authorities to identify her as a prostitute.^[18] The message Paul conveys to the Corinthian women is that they should honor their husbands by observing the cultural standards of their day. Writes David W. J. Gill, What Paul may be saying is that if women in the church will not wear a veil, then they will be seen as dishonouring their husbands which might affect their place in society. If the wife insists on being unveiled then she might as well wear a sign of humiliation by having her hair cut. If she does not wish to bring such shame to her husband, herself and her family then she should be veiled.^[19] The principle was for the wife to honor her husband; the application of this principle was to wear a veil in public. To not wear a veil was a sign of rebellion on the part of a wife. d. For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off. Paul presents a logical approach to the whole matter by saying that a wife who is unveiled in public is as much a shame to her husband as a shorn and shaven head is to herself. e. But if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or shaven, let her cover her head. The emphasis in the last part of this verse is on the word disgraceful. Paul puts the wife in the uncomfortable position of having to make a choice: if she wants to go without a veil in public, let her be shaved and consort with disreputable women; if she objects to being shorn and shaved, let her wear a veil and associate with respectable women. Notice that not the husband but the wife must make the decision. And the decision is a matter of her willingness to have a submissive relationship with her husband by the ordinance of creation. ^[20] Practical Considerations in 11:4–6 Cultural standards differ from country to country and change in the course of time. When we consider hairstyles and head coverings, the variations are especially striking. Hair can be either long or short, and in many cultures the covering of the head relates to religious observances (e.g., Judaism, Islam, and branches of Christianity). In the Christian church, head coverings were considered a necessity in colder climates. During the Reformation, John Calvin and his colleagues wore skullcaps to ward off the cold. But would they wear these caps during a worship service or follow Paul's prescription not to pray or prophesy with a covered head? Writes Calvin, For we should not be so hide-bound by conscientious principles as to think a teacher is doing anything wrong in wearing a skull-cap on his head, when he is speaking to the people from the pulpit. But all that Paul is after is that it may be made clear that the man is in authority, and that the woman is in subjection to him, and that is done when the man uncovers his head in the sight of the congregation, even if he puts his skull-cap on again afterwards so as not to catch cold.^[21] Two centuries later, in 1741, the German New Testament commentator John Albert Bengel had to face a different cultural development: What to think of wigs? He remarks that wigs are substitutes for hair that is too thin. Therefore the head of a man is scarcely more dishonored by them, while he prays, than while he does not pray. ^[22] Yet Bengel is of the opinion that if he would be able to ask Paul, the apostle would persuade people not to wear wigs because they are unbecoming to men, especially those who pray. During the first half of the twentieth century, women adhered to the custom of wearing hats in church. But in the second half of this century, those ladies who adorn their heads with hats in Christian churches are few indeed. How do we apply Paul's words on head coverings, or the lack of them, today? Is Paul reflecting cultural patterns of his day in the Corinthian church and elsewhere (v. 16), patterns which are no longer in vogue? And are cultural patterns that are subject to change actually indicators of basic and abiding principles? Paul proclaims Christ's gospel that sets people free from the Jewish civil and ceremonial laws. He rejects the idea of asking Gentiles to adopt Jewish customs as a step in becoming Christians (Gal. 5:1–6). Similarly, Paul does not intend to tell believers everywhere throughout the centuries to adopt the customs he wants the Corinthian Christians to follow. What he does stress in this segment is that in the marriage relationship the wife honors and respects her husband and the husband loves and leads the wife. This is the basic principle that may be applied in diverse ways in the varying cultures throughout the world. The principle remains the same, even though its application varies. If Paul allows women to pray or prophesy in a worship service, is he not contradicting himself with respect to the wife submitting to the authority of her husband? No, not necessarily. Within the marriage relationship the wife must honor her husband by being submissive to him. But in the church, the Holy Spirit filled both the men and the women and thus both prayed and prophesied. Before the Lord, both men and women were recipients of the gifts of the Spirit. However, Paul is not abrogating the distinctive roles of each gender. Although men and women are new creatures in Christ, the husband-wife relationship remains intact.^[23] Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 11:2–6 Verses 2 3 The Majority Text includes the term [Greek] (brothers) after the introductory words I praise you. Bruce M. Metzger observes: If the word were present originally (as at 10.1 and 12.1, where no witness omits it), its absence from [early and other major manuscripts] would be inexplicable. ^[24] [Greek] this perfect middle from [Greek] (I remember) functions as a continuative present. [Greek] the neuter plural is an accusative of respect, in all respects. ! [Greek] A [Greek] Christ is the head. The definite article appears with both the subject and the predicate nominative. This means that the nouns are interchangeable and identical. By contrast, the clause [Greek] A [Greek] has one definite article to indicate that man is not affirmed to be woman's head in quite the same sense that Christ is man's head. ^[25] Verses 4 5 [Greek] the literal translation is having down from the head but the participle needs an object, a covering. Hence, the suggested version is, with a [covering?] on the head (i.e. down upon). ^[26] [Greek] the neuter pronoun refers to an unveiled woman as an example but not as a particular person: she is one and the same as a woman whose head is shaved. Verse 6 [Greek] this particle twice introduces conditional sentences with the indicative mood to show reality with the logical deduction of Paul's argument.^[27] [Greek], [Greek] to be cut, to be shaven. The first infinitive is the aorist middle and the second the present middle. In the middle voice, the infinitives denote permission: a woman allowed her hair to be cut or shaven. b. Image and Glory 11:7–12 The Gospels, especially that of Matthew, portray Jesus as a teacher who repeatedly appeals to the Old Testament and at times asks his audience whether they have read the Scriptures (Matt. 12:3; Mark 2:25; Luke 6:3). He proves his teaching from God's Word. Writing to the Corinthians, Paul follows Jesus example and bases his instruction on the Old Testament Scriptures. We would expect the Jewish Christians to be familiar with the content of the Old Testament, and that those Christians who came out of paganism would lack a firm grasp of the Scriptures (see the Introduction). Paul, however, is the teacher who opens God's Word and takes his instruction from the first two chapters of Genesis in the next few verses. 7. For a man ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God. But the woman is the glory of man. a. For a man ought not to cover his head. The first word, the causal conjunction for, connotes that the entire present passage is an explanation of the preceding verses (vv. 5 6) that alludes to the creation account (Gen. 1:26–27; 2:18–24). Paul writes a general principle that applies to prayer and prophesying when he says that a man ought not to cover his head. (This does not mean that a person may not protect himself against inclement weather and wear a hat or a cap). Paul calls attention to the key concept that man is God's image and glory. b. Because he is the image and glory of God. We only have the word image, but not likeness, which we would have expected to find in an allusion to the first chapter of Genesis (Gen. 5:1; 6:9). An image is the exact representation of someone or something: a statue of a famous leader, the head of a ruler on a coin, or a picture on a television screen. Man in his authority relation to creation and to his wife, images the dominion of God over the creation and the headship of Christ over his church. ^[28] We would also expect Paul to state that both the woman and the man are created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26–28); instead, with the word glory Paul provides not a parallel but a comparison. Man is the image and glory of God, while a woman is the glory of man but not the image of man.^[29] Paul has stated that God is the head of Christ, Christ the head of man, and man the head of woman (v. 3). Because of his teaching on man's headship, he is not now interested in discussing Eve being created in God's image. Instead of likeness, Paul writes the word glory, which some versions translate with the supplied verb reflect or the noun reflection.^[30] In fact, one translation even omits the expression glory altogether, since [man] is the image and reflection of God, but woman is the reflection of man. ^[31] It is true that man reflects God's glory. This is evident from Psalms 8:5, where man is described as crowned with glory and honor. But from another point of view, man ascribes and brings glory to God.^[32] Persons were created for God's glory. The chief purpose of man is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever, as a well-known seventeenth-century catechism puts it.^[33] Man attributes honor to God. The phrase glory of God can be interpreted subjectively, objectively, or both. Subjectively, God confers his glory on man; objectively, man renders glory to God. Likewise, subjectively, the husband loves and protects his wife and, objectively, the wife brings glory to her husband by being his helper (Gen. 2:8, 20). c. But the woman is the glory of man. The last part of verse 7 begins with the adversative but to set this clause off against the preceding sentence. The woman is the glory not of God but of man, that is, her husband. Created to assist her husband, she seeks to honor him by recognizing his headship. The word glory appears once more in this context when Paul appeals to nature and remarks that long hair is the woman's glory (v. 15). Why should the woman bring glory to her husband? Paul answers this question in the next two verses. 8. For man does not come from woman but woman from man. 9. Indeed, man was not created for the sake of the woman but woman for the sake of the man. Paul supports his teaching with facts taken from the creation account (Gen. 2:18–24): God created both Adam and Eve. Adam did not create Eve. God first made Adam and then Eve. God made Eve out of Adam. God created Eve because of Adam. As God simultaneously created animals male and female, so in one creative act he could have made Adam and Eve from the dust of the earth. But he did not do so. God first made Adam and then, declaring that it was not good for man to be alone (Gen. 2:18), supplied him with a helper suitable to his needs. From one of Adam's ribs he fashioned Eve to be Adam's wife. God presented her to Adam, and Adam sang his wedding song: This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man. [Gen. 2:23] Many people today seem to think that the creation of Adam and Eve is a story from the dawn of human history and has little, if any, present significance. However, at creation Adam was formed first, then Eve (I Tim. 2:13). God made this distinction for all times, and with it he reveals his design and purpose for the sexes. Although man and woman are equal before God and in Christ (Gal. 3:28), they have been given different roles. The husband takes primary responsibility in his headship, and the wife fulfills her role as helper. This relationship cannot be reversed, because the creation story teaches a non-reversible orientation of the woman towards the man as the reference point for her life. ^[34] The fact that Eve was created to assist Adam suggests that she is subject to him. When God created Eve as Adam's helper, he assigned to her a supportive and submissive role (Gen. 2:18). By appealing to the creation account, Paul is able to write that man was not created for woman but woman for man. 10. For this reason the woman ought to have authority on her head because of the angels. a. For this reason. Paul continues his discourse, tightly connecting this verse to the preceding ones (vv. 7 9). The conjunction for (v. 8) explains verse 7, and the word indeed (v. 9) shows that verse 9 gives additional support to verse 8. The conjunction in verse 10 serves to bind the verse to the larger argument. b. The woman ought to have authority on her head because of the angels. The translation of this part of the text is problematic, as is evident from these representative versions: a sign of authority (NIV) the sign of her authority (REB) a sign of submission (NAB) a covering over her head to show that she is under her husband's authority (GNB). It is obvious that translators are forced to interpret the Greek text. The wording in the original is terse and obscure. At the head of this section, I present a literal translation, which I readily admit lacks elegance and clarity. My version omits the phrase a sign of and fails to indicate whether the expression authority means the woman's authority or that of her husband. When we try to clarify this passage, we must consider the preceding and the succeeding context. Thus far Paul has stated the principle that man is the head of woman just as Christ is the head of man and God the head of Christ. He has given directions on how men and women should conduct themselves while praying or prophesying. Paul has told women to cover their heads so they do not shame their heads, namely, their husbands. And he has defended his words by appealing to the creation account in the first two chapters of Genesis. Now Paul concludes this segment of his discussion by saying that the woman ought to have authority on her head because of the angels. This verse has been the subject of study by numerous scholars, yet every writer has to admit that his or her explanation of the text displays weaknesses. In spite of all the suggestions that have been offered, the text remains enigmatic and fails to communicate. These are some of the proposed interpretations: 1. When a woman in public worship prays or prophesies, she displays the new freedom she has in Christ. The woman derives her authority from God, and with her headcovering she is able to demonstrate that power.^[35] The weakness of this suggestion is that a discussion on equality fits Galatians 3:28but in the current passage Paul says nothing about freedom. 2. A sign of authority. Many translations have enhanced the reading by adding the phrase sign of or simply veil.^[36] Numerous commentators assert that the word authority relates not to the authority of the woman but to that of her husband. The context speaks of the husband being the wife's head, and this interpretation leaves the impression that the term authority is equivalent to submission. In Greek, however, the term exousia never has an objective or a passive sense, that is, being under someone else's authority. It always has a subjective or an active sense relating to one's own authority. And last, with this interpretation the Greek preposition epi, which means on, now has the meaning over. The husband has authority over his wife. Paul has said as much earlier (v. 3), but he is not saying this in verse 10. 3. The expression authority has been linked to the creation account of Adam and Eve in Genesis 1:26 28. This passage states that both male and female received the mandate to rule (have authority over) the fish, birds, and every living creature on this earth.^[37] This ingenious explanation makes the woman an active participant with man in exercising authority, but the text itself gives the explanation insufficient support. 4. While praying or prophesying in a worship service, a woman receives spiritual authority. Instead, she ought to accept the position assigned to her since creation, to recognize her husband as head. She is unable to pray in the Spirit when rebelling against the order of creation hallowed by God's Spirit. ^[38] Here is a plausible explanation that does justice to the concept authority. Nonetheless, this concept must relate to the last phrase in the text, because of the angels. 5. Could it be that Paul with his rabbinical training is asking women to be covered with a veil because of the angels? With the evidence gleaned from Qumran, we know that an unveiled woman in a sacred assembly is like a bodily defect which should be excluded. ^[39] The reason for this exclusion is that holy angels who are present at worship services are offended by defects. This approach may shed some light on the reference to the angels, but it does nothing for interpreting the meaning of authority. All these suggestions are helpful in understanding aspects of the problems we encounter in verse 10, yet all show weaknesses. Scholars must conclude that a satisfactory explanation is not available. In all humility, I confess that I really do not know what Paul intended to say in this verse. c. Because of the angels. This short verse has two causal expressions: the first one is translated for this reason and the second one because. Some translators combine these two causal expressions with the word and or also. Whether we supply a connection or follow the Greek word order, the fact remains that scholars simply do not know what the reference to angels means. In I Corinthians, the word angels occurs four times (4:9; 6:3; 11:10; 13:1). But a study of this word in the context of these passages fails to give us an idea what Paul has in mind. Interpreters must admit that, all the research aside, they have no acceptable explanation for this particular clause. Although translators encounter a mystery in verse 10, we nevertheless must see it in the light of the preceding and succeeding context. Paul writes that man was not created for the sake of the woman but woman for the sake of the man (v. 9) and for this reason, the woman ought to have authority on her head because of the angels (v. 10). In verse 11, which begins with the adversative however, Paul changes the discussion to emphasize an important point: In the Lord neither is woman [anything] apart from man, nor man [anything] apart from woman. This verse is a continuation of verse 9, where Paul speaks of the creation account. In verse 11, Paul implies spiritual recreation and says that man and woman depend on each other in the Lord. Between these two verses, Paul places the enigmatic words of verse 10 that ascribe authority to a woman. She may pray or prophesy provided her head is covered (vv. 5, 13). Thus, a woman possesses authority as she shows respect in the presence of God's angels.^[40] 11. However, in the Lord, woman is nothing apart from man, and man is nothing apart from woman. 12. For as the woman is from the man, even so is the man through the woman, and all things are from God. a. Structure. These two verses balance two earlier verses (vv. 8 9) and reveal an almost perfect parallelism, provided we view verse 10 as a parenthetical comment. Thus we see the crosswise structure in the subjects of verses 8 and 12. Verse 8a, b Verse 12a, b For man does not come For as the woman is from woman but from the man, even so woman from is the man through man. the woman. Similarly, verses 9 and 11 show contrast, especially with the adversative however. They also have a crosswise structure. Verse 9a, b Verse 11a, b Indeed, man was not created However, &woman is nothing for the sake of the woman apart from man, but woman for the sake and man is nothing of the man. apart from woman. b. Intention. What is Paul trying to communicate with the literary structure of this passage? First, verse 8a contrasts verse 12b, while verses 8b and 12a correspond. Paul asserts that through natural birth man (and for that matter also woman) has his biological origin through a woman. Only Adam can say that God gave him life; all other men and women receive their life through birth. With this remark, Paul does not undermine the creation order. Indeed not, for in verse 12a he repeats what he says in 8b (woman is from man). With these two verses, he conveys the thought that in respect to natural birth men and women share equality. Next, the content of verses 9a and 11b, strengthened by the adversative however, is a forceful reminder of reality. And, verse 11 has a significant statement, in the Lord, which I have placed at the beginning of that text. With these two qualifiers in mind, let us look carefully at these verses. Paul is saying, Indeed, man was not created for the sake of the woman (v. 9a), which is in accord with the creation order. However, he continues, in the Lord, &man is nothing apart from woman (v. 11b). This is a candid statement, to be sure! The second part is equally revealing: Woman [was created] for the sake of the man (v. 9b), which is followed by the rejoinder, However, in the Lord, woman is nothing apart from man (v. 11a). Paul points out the interdependence of both the husband and the wife, who in the Lord wonderfully complement each other. Even though the husband is the head of his wife, he is dependent on her in numerous ways. In turn, a wife needs her husband just as much as he needs her. When death or divorce separates the couple, they experience a tearing apart of the fabric of marriage that bound them together. As long as the Lord grants them life, let husband and wife be bound in mutual love and service to one another.^[41] Paul is not in the least diminishing the force of God's creation order. He adds a second qualifying statement to these two verses: and all things are from God. He means to say that the husband has no advantage over the wife because Adam was created before Eve. In the Lord, both parties show reciprocity and complementary dependence and assistance, for all these things have been designed by God himself. Man and woman, everything that pertains to birth, relationships, and married life all come from God. Practical Considerations in 11:11–12 Christianity has been and remains a force that liberates women from oppression and servitude. In many other religions, women are owned from birth by their fathers and on marriage by their husbands. They lack freedom, are in bondage, and never acquire equality. Even in ancient Israel, a female was secondary to any male. In a particular line of the eighteen-petition prayer, a man renders thanks to God for making him neither a slave, a Gentile, nor a woman. Women were not considered worthy of studying the Scriptures and were denied an education. The New Testament teaches especially the basic equality of the sexes. For instance, in both his Gospel and Acts, Luke mentions men and women in the same breath: Zachariah and Elizabeth, Joseph and Mary, Simeon and Anna, Ananias and Sapphira, Aquila and Priscilla. Paul states unequivocally that in Christ Jesus male and female are one (Gal. 3:28). He commends female workers in the cause of the gospel, among whom are Phoebe, Priscilla, Mary, Tryphena, Tryphosa, Persis, and Julia (Rom. 16:1–15). History books record the missionary endeavors of numerous women and sing their praises for extending Christ's church. On the home front godly women are a quiet force to make the church strong and productive. A godly mother leads her little ones to Jesus and trains them in the fear of the Lord. Although women fill roles and functions that differ from those of men, both in the Christian home and church they enjoy equality with men. Both depend on each other (11:11), for both men and women realize that they in turn must depend on God for everything (11:12). Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 11:7–12 Verse 7 [Greek] &[Greek] these two particles disclose a definitive contrast between the man and the woman. Note that the word [Greek] (man) lacks the definite article but the word [Greek] (woman, wife) has it. [Greek] ought. Here the verb is negated and has man as its subject; in verse 10 the same verb is positive and refers to woman. Paul's choice of words and his sentence structure may be nothing more than coincidental. Verse 10 [Greek] to have authority. The four Evangelists frequently use this phrase to portray the authority of Jesus or of God the Father. In I Corinthians, however, Paul applies the word [Greek] to either Christ, himself, fellow apostles, or other Christians.^[42] A few ancient versions and patristic witnesses have the variant reading [Greek] (veil), which is meant to explain the text but is of doubtful authenticity. Verses 11 12 [Greek] the adversative particle however appears at the conclusion of an argument to summarize a main point.^[43] [Greek] &[Greek] the first preposition denotes source and the second agency. [Greek] the definite article expresses the totality of all things under God's control. c. Man and Woman Again 11:13–16 A careful study of verses 13 15 discloses that Paul uses some phraseology that is identical to that of verses 4 7. These are the words that occur in both sections: woman, uncovered, to pray, man, glory. As the first two verses (vv. 2 3) form an introduction to this entire segment of the chapter so verse 16 serves as a conclusion.^[44] In short, this segment is a beautifully constructed piece of literature that teaches an orderly development as Paul expounds the relationship of man and woman at worship. 13. Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? a. Command. Paul now makes his concluding remarks and wants to involve his readers in thinking through the matter he has discussed. He tells them to look at the facts, use their minds, and judge for themselves. In another discourse, Paul said the same thing (see 10:15). b. Question. With two rhetorical questions, Paul challenges his readers to respond.^[45] He expects a negative reply to the first one (v. 13) and a positive response to the second (vv. 14 15a). Following the sequence within the text, we now discuss the first query: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with uncovered head? On the basis of Paul's earlier remark that a woman who prays or prophesies with an uncovered head dishonors her head (v. 5a), the reader immediately answers the question in the negative. Note that Paul omits the verb to prophesy in this question, for the emphasis here is not so much on function in the worship service as on manner. Paul asks a question on propriety. Attendance at and participation in a service dedicated to worshiping God requires proper decorum. When we worship the Lord, we approach God in his holiness. The angels covered their faces in God's presence and called to one another, Holy, holy, holy is the Lord Almighty; the whole earth is full of his glory (Isa. 6:2–3). So Paul asks whether it is proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered. She was expected to follow the cultural practices of that day, come to church in acceptable and appropriate dress, and participate in the worship service. What does Paul mean with the expression uncovered head? It tells a woman that she ought to uphold her feminine honor and dignity in public by wearing a head covering. In his time and culture, women wore veils to be in marked distinction from men. God has created a distinct difference between men and women and he desires that his people mark this dissimilarity with appropriate dress. If a woman refuses to abide by these codes, she purposely negates the differentiation which God has designed. In the next two verses (vv. 14 15), Paul appeals to nature itself and demonstrates that the difference between male and female is based on regular natural order that originates in creation. In other words, Paul does not say that because Christian women are free in Jesus Christ they may abandon cultural mores. No, Paul wants them to live in harmony with the creation order and abide by the mores of their day. Is it proper for a Corinthian woman to worship God with an uncovered head? The answer is no. 14. Does not nature itself teach you that it is a disgrace to a man if he lets his hair grow long, 15. but if a woman lets her hair grow long, it is her glory? Because her long hair has been given to her as a covering. a. Does not nature itself teach you? With the word nature, Paul is thinking of the natural order that God has created. When God created male and female, he gave the male shorter hair than the female. Nature (i.e., God) has made men and women different from each other, and has provided a visible indication of the difference between them in the quantity of hair he has assigned to each. ^[46] Even the pagan philosopher Epictetus, a Stoic who taught in the second half of the first century, speaks of the difference in hair of men and women respectively. He concludes, Wherefore, we ought to preserve the signs which God has given; we ought not to throw them away; we ought not, so far as in us lies, to confuse the sexes which have been distinguished in this fashion. ^[47] Even a pagan writer acknowledges the difference God has created and made part of a creation order. b. [Does not nature teach] that it is a disgrace to a man if he lets his hair grow long? Paul poses a rhetorical question that demands a positive reply. In the cultural context in which Paul moved, long hair was a disgrace for a man but glory for a woman. Jewish men cut their hair. Occasionally they permitted their hair to grow for a stipulated period because they had made a vow (Acts 18:18; 21:24), but afterward they shortened it. From coins, statues, and paintings that depict men in the Greco-Roman world of the first century, we know that men trimmed their hair. A few centuries earlier, the Spartans on the Peloponnesian peninsula wore long hair a fact duly noted by Greek authors, who comment that in Greece men usually cut their hair while women let it grow.^[48] In Paul's day, the Corinthians followed the cultural trends of the Greeks and Romans and had their hair cropped. To have long hair, except for religious purposes or periods of mourning, was shameful to them. c. But if a woman lets her hair grow long, it is her glory. The cultural contrast concerning hair lies in the words disgrace for men and glory for women. In this part of the text, Paul balances a negative expression with a positive. The counterpart of the rhetorical question that expects an affirmative answer concerns the woman. Paul already has stated that it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off (v. 6). Now he gives the positive evaluation and asserts that long hair is a woman's glory. He wisely omits details regarding length of hair and hairstyles, for these are often subject to fads and fashions and involve personal choices. The cultural pattern in Israel, for example, was that a woman would not unloose her hair in public. Any woman who appeared in public with loose hair identified herself as a prostitute. It is not surprising, therefore, that Simon the Pharisee was horrified when a prostitute entered his home and wiped Jesus feet with her hair (Luke 7:36 50). But Paul is not talking about bound or loose hair; he states the objective fact that a woman's long hair is beautiful. Long hair is her husband's joy. d. Because her long hair has been given to her as a covering. The last part of verse 15, due to its brevity, presents problems for correctly understanding the text. What is the meaning of the words as and covering? If we take the Greek in the order in which Paul presents it, this causal clause serves as a supportive answer to the preceding rhetorical question. Paul states the reason for a woman's long hair: it has been given to her as a covering. For the passive verb has been given we supply the subject God, who as Creator endows women with a natural covering. However, a difficulty in this clause lies in the Greek word anti, which I have translated as. Anti can signify instead of. This interpretation says that one thing is replaced by another, namely, long hair replaces a veil or a covering. The clause, then, is translated Her long hair is given her instead of a veil. ^[49] My translation of this Greek word indicates that one thing is equivalent to another. Then it means for, as ^[50] (e.g., An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth [Matt. 5:38]). Because of the entire context of Paul's discussion on proper decorum, scholars prefer this second reading. But in verses 5b and 6, which are the counterpart of verse 15b, Paul tells the Corinthian women to cover their heads in public. He implies that they use a head covering in the form of a scarf or a veil. If the women refuse to do so, they renounce the authority of their husbands and repudiate the divine principle of headship (v. 3). The word covering in the last clause of verse 15 alludes to an article of clothing, that is, something made out of cloth. The second clause of verse 15 summarizes, as a general statement, Paul's contention that the Corinthians should exhibit the creational differences of the sexes in their dress code. Not men but women have long hair that serves as a covering. Women show this created difference with the hair that nature has provided. Paul urges the Corinthian women to wear a head covering in addition to long hair as a symbol of honoring their husbands and showing submission to them. In today's culture, the presence of a hat does not signify subordination of a wife to her spouse. And Paul is not asking a woman to wear a headpiece or to put up her hair. Rather, he wants a woman to be distinctively feminine in respect to hair and dress and thus fulfill the role that God has intended since creation. He wants her to be submissive to her husband in her femininity. The unique beauty of a woman is gloriously manifest in the distinctive femininity portrayed by her hair and her attendance to feminine customs. ^[51] 16. But if anyone is inclined to be contentious, we do not have such a custom, nor do the churches of God. This is the conclusion to Paul's discussion on women's proper conduct. In a discourse on matters that affect personal predilection, a speaker or writer can expect to receive reaction from his audience or readers. Paul indicates as much with a conditional sentence that states a simple fact. Yes, there are people who wish to assert their individual rights. They probably use their slogan, All things are permissible (6:12; 10:23), and clamor for personal freedom. Even though Paul promotes Christian liberty, he teaches obedience to God's ordinances and precepts. He desires that all things be done decently and in order. a. But if anyone is inclined to be contentious. By using the term anyone, Paul speaks in generalities. He addresses neither the men, the women, nor a group of people. If anyone, even with good intentions, wants to argue about this matter, he will not receive a hearing from Paul. He has no time for someone whose mind is set on debating an issue for the sake of argument. The term that Paul has chosen to describe this person is one who loves to argue. This person could be either a woman who asserts herself with respect to accepted norms and wants to be free or a man who comes to her defense to debate Paul. We are not given any details in this summary statement. b. We do not have such a custom, nor do the churches of God. Paul refuses to be challenged on his teachings that are based on the Old Testament Scriptures. He knows that the rest of the apostles support him, and therefore he confidently writes the personal pronoun we. This is not the so-called editorial we, but an inclusive pronoun that embraces other leaders in the churches. What does the word custom connote in this setting? Calvin was of the opinion that Paul objected to the habit of arguing and disputing everything.^[52] Among Jewish and Gentile Christians, such conduct may have been evident especially in regard to matters of personal conduct. However, the passage itself conveys the sense that Paul has in mind the cultural practice of that day: that women wear head coverings during public worship services. He is saying that he, his fellow apostles, and the rest of the churches abide by the rule of being properly attired at worship. In brief, Paul appeals to the witness of the entire Christian church. Quite often in his writings he refers to all the churches.^[53] He brings the unity of the church to bear on the issue at hand. And he states implicitly that the contentious person, standing alone in this dispute, will have to face the whole church. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 11:13–16 Verse 13 [Greek] this combination is used in place of the reflexive pronoun [Greek] (for yourselves).^[54] [Greek] the neuter participle connotes that which is culturally acceptable and suitable. Verses 14 15 $ the Majority Text has the particle or at the beginning of verse 14, but it lacks wide geographical support from textual witnesses. [Greek] in both verses denotes probability: in case it happens that & Verse 16 [Greek] this particle introduces a simple-fact condition. Note that in the two clauses, Paul contrasts the indefinite pronoun [Greek] (anyone) with the personal pronoun [Greek] (we) with emphasis. 2. The Lord's Supper 11:17–34 17 But in giving these instructions I do not praise you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. 18 For in the first place when you come together in the church, I hear that there are factions among you and in part I believe it. 19 For there must be dissensions among you, so that those who are proven [believers] may become evident among you. 20 Therefore, when you come together in the same place, it is not to eat the Lord's Supper. 21 For as you eat, each one takes his supper before others; one remains hungry and another is drunk. 22 For do you not have houses for the purpose of eating and drinking? Or do you despise the church of God and put to shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? In this I do not praise you. 23 For I have received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus, in the night in which he was betrayed, took bread, 24 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. 25 In the same way, also taking the cup after supper he said: This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this as often as you drink it in remembrance of me. 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes. 27 Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of [profaning] the body and blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man examine himself and thus let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he does not discern the body. 30 Because of this, many among you are weak and ill and many have died. 31 But if we judged ourselves correctly, we would not be judged. 32 When we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we may not be condemned with the world. 33 Therefore, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. 34 If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home that you may not encounter judgment. And the rest of the things I will arrange when I come. From a discussion on headship, propriety, and acceptable practice in worship, Paul now turns to the celebration of the Lord's Supper. He first examines the excesses at the meetings of the Corinthians (vv. 17 22), then the institution and formulary of the Lord's Supper (vv. 23 26), and last the preparation for worthily eating of the bread and drinking of the cup (vv. 27 32). Paul concludes this section with an exhortation to exercise restraint (vv. 33 34). a. Excesses 11:17–22 17. But in giving these instructions I do not praise you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. a. But in giving these instructions I do not praise you. Paul begins with the adversative but to separate this verse from the preceding discourse. Is the break with the previous verses complete or partial? The answer depends on the interpretation of the term these instructions. This term might look forward to what Paul is going to say about the conduct of the Corinthians when they celebrate the Lord's Supper. Then the break is complete. Or the term looks back, so that these instructions relate to what Paul had been saying earlier. Accordingly, the break is partial. The fact that the Greek text has the pronoun this in the singular, not the plural (which most translations show), gives it a general connotation. Some scholars aver that this pronoun normally refers not to succeeding but to preceding material (compare 7:6).^[55] They understand the pronoun to refer to Paul's instructions on the proper conduct of men and women in public worship services. They add that Paul's instructions for the correct observance of the Lord's Supper (vv. 28 34) are far removed from the current passage. They, therefore, opt for a partial break in the context. Considerations for a complete break predominate, however. First, the content of the passage itself reveals that Paul introduces a new subject: the Lord's Supper. Paul places the verb I praise in the negative to contrast his positive statement at the beginning of the chapter (v. 2) and to repeat the negative in verse 22. In verse 2, he praised the Corinthians for guarding the traditions; here he censures them for unruly conduct which he must correct with pertinent instructions. Paul writes two distinct sections (vv. 2 16 and 17 34), which he begins with praise and censure respectively. And the second half of this verse (v. 17) is a causal clause that refers to the Corinthians meetings which, as the rest of the chapter shows, were unruly. In short, the forward look is preferred. b. Because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 12. Worship, part 2 (12:1–31) Outline (continued) 12:1–31 3. Spiritual Gifts 12:1–11 a. The Holy Spirit 12:1–3 (1) The Christian's Confession 12:4–6 (2) Different but Divinely Derived Gifts 12:7–11 (3) Gifts for the Common Good 12:12–31 b. The Body 12:12–13 (1) The Body and the Spirit 12:14–20 (2) The Physical Body 12:21–26 (3) The Honorable and the Unpresentable Parts 12:27–31 (4) Members and Gifts 3. Spiritual Gifts 12:1–31 12 1 Now concerning the spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant. 2 You know that when you were Gentiles, you were led astray to the mute idols, in whatever way you were led. 3 Therefore, I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, Jesus is cursed, and no one is able to say, Jesus is Lord, except by the Holy Spirit. 4 Were are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 And there are varieties of ministries, but the same Lord. 6 And there are varieties of activities, but the same God is working all things in all [people]. 7 But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8 To the one is given a word of wisdom through the Spirit and to another a word of knowledge according to the same Spirit. 9 To another is given faith by the same Spirit and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit. 10 And to another are given activities that elicit miracles, to another prophecy, and to another distinguishing of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another interpretation of tongues. 11 The one and the same Spirit works all these things, apportioning them to each one individually as he desires. 12 For as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, thus also is Christ. 13 For indeed by one Spirit all of us were baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and all were made to drink of one Spirit. 14 For indeed the body is not one member but many. 15 If the foot should say, Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body, for this reason it ceases not to belong to the body. 16 And if the ear should say, Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body, for this reason it ceases not to belong to the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole body were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? 18 But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body just as he desired. 19 And if everything were one member, where would the body be? 20 But now there are many members but one body. 21 The eye is not able to say to the hand, I have no need of you. Or again, the head to the feet, I have no need of you. 22 By contrast, the members of the body that appear to be weaker are even more indispensable. 23 And whatever members of the body we deem less honorable, on these we place greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty. 24 And our respectable parts have no need of this. However, God has combined the members of the body by giving greater honor to those that lack it, 25 that there may be no division in the body but that the members may have the same care for one another. 26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it. If one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it. 27 You are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 28 And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, next prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helpful deeds, administrations, kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all [workers of] miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But eagerly desire the greater gifts. And I will show you an even more excellent way. a. The Holy Spirit 12:1–11 Paul moves from a discussion on the proper celebration of the Lord's Supper to other aspects of worship. Chief among them is the matter of spiritual gifts that the church members have received for the benefit of the Christian community. The Holy Spirit has endowed these members with gifts that enhance and promote the life of the church. He works through individual believers and uses them as instruments to fulfill God's purpose. The first segment of this chapter reveals more about the work of the Holy Spirit than does any other passage in I Corinthians.^[1] Since the explicit references to the Holy Spirit in an earlier chapter (2:4–14), Paul has not yet broached the subject of the Spirit's gifts. Now he teaches the doctrine of the Trinity in which the Holy Spirit fills the prominent role of endowing believers with extraordinary gifts. (1) The Christian's Confession 12:1–3 1. Now concerning the spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be ignorant. a. Now concerning. We immediately recognize these introductory words. They often signal Paul's response to issues raised in the letter he had received from the Corinthian church. In their epistle, the people had raised a number of issues, among them marriage and virgins (7:1, 25), food offered to idols (8:1), spiritual gifts (12:1), and the collection for God's people (16:1). Paul fails to give us a quotation from this letter, as he did at earlier occasions (7:1; 8:1), so we have no knowledge of the precise wording in the Corinthian request for information. All we know is that the Corinthians wanted him to comment on spiritual gifts. He now discusses the gifts which the Spirit has given to the members of the congregation. b. The spiritual gifts, brothers. In this epistle, Paul often writes the term brothers when he discusses a sensitive topic with the Corinthians (for instance, 1:10). This address implicitly includes the female members of the Christian community, so that Paul speaks to the entire church. The topic that Paul expounds in this chapter is spiritual gifts. The Greek adjective pneumatikMn (spiritual) appears alone in the original text, so that we are compelled to add a word. We complete the thought not with the noun referring to persons (2:15; 3:1; 14:37), which some scholars prefer,^[2] but with the word gifts (compare 14:1). The Holy Spirit is the giver of these gifts, so that the translation gifts from the Holy Spirit^[3] is not only plausible but attractive. The Holy Spirit continues to provide believers with these gifts. In a previous passage (see 1:7), Paul used a synonym for spiritual gifts when he wrote the Greek term charisma (gift; that is, gift of grace). We have the English derivative charisma, which refers to personal leadership ability. But in the present chapter the word charisma points to the activities of the Holy Spirit. This is evident when Paul enumerates, among others, the gifts of wisdom, knowledge, healing, working of miracles, prophecy, speaking in tongues and interpreting them (vv. 4, 9, 28, 30, 31). c. I do not want you to be ignorant. This clause recurs in Paul's epistles.^[4] For this verse, we must ask the question, Ignorant of what? and supply the answer. Paul does not want the Corinthians to be ignorant of the proper use of spiritual gifts. Instead of using them for the benefit of fellow believers, some Corinthians displayed these gifts as badges of superiority. Of these gifts they considered the gift of speaking in tongues unique and of great importance.^[5] In the next three chapters (12 14), Paul shows the Corinthians how to evaluate and use spiritual gifts. 2. You know that when you were Gentiles, you were led astray to the mute idols, in whatever way you were led. a. Grammar. We begin with three grammatical observations. First, the sentence in the Greek is syntactically incomplete because the verb were is missing in the second clause. This clause literally reads, you being led astray. But by supplying the verb were, we achieve correct syntax. Next, for the clause when you were Gentiles, some scholars conjecture that the Greek word hote (when) should be pote (once): once you were Gentiles. Conjectures, however, are permissible only when all acceptable explanations fail. And that is not the case here, for there is no available textual evidence to support the conjecture. Last, another translation for the clause in whatever way you were led is as impulse drove you (NAB; see Moffatt). But this reading does not merit favor, because it is admittedly quite free, and it hardly improves our understanding of the text. b. Intent. You know that when you were Gentiles. How does this verse follow in sequence? The answer lies in the verb to know. Paul states that he does not want the readers to be ignorant (v. 1). Then he asserts that they know their religious past (v. 2). And finally he declares that he makes known to them how to profess that Jesus is Lord (v. 3). The term Gentiles relates to the preconversion days of those church members who had left paganism. Paul refers to their former days as he now addresses them as Gentile Christians. He had directed his earlier discourses to both Jewish and Gentile believers, but here he speaks to those Christians who formerly were pagans and worshiped idols. You were led astray to the mute idols. Is it possible that Paul has in mind the excesses that marked pagan religious festivals of that time? Were the Corinthians led astray by a demon who caused them to experience ecstatic frenzies?^[6] Scholars point out that on the basis of vocabulary and context the evidence for religious frenzies is lacking in this passage.^[7] The verb to lead astray relates more to movement than to religious ecstasy. Nonetheless, the passive form of this verb calls for an implied agent. In opposition to the Holy Spirit, the agent is Satan or one of his representatives (compare 10:20–21). Paul uses the Hebraic term mute idolsPs. 115:5; Hab. 2:18–19; III Macc. 4:16 . He intimates not merely that icons made of wood, stone, or metal are voiceless but that the gods whom they represent have nothing to say. In whatever way you were led. The Greek verb led in the imperfect tense reveals repeated occurrences. From time to time, pagans went to their temples and were being led there by an evil power. These former pagans were stumbling around in darkness. They remained in the grip of the devil until they were set free by God's Spirit and confessed Jesus as their Lord. 3. Therefore, I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, Jesus is cursed, and no one is able to say, Jesus is Lord, except by the Holy Spirit. a. Therefore, I make known to you. Some scholars consider verses 2 and 3 and their content as an aside and place them in parentheses.^[8] But the force of the conclusive adverb therefore goes back to verse 2 and the entire preceding passage (vv. 1 2). If we understand the present verse (v. 3) as a conclusive statement, then we see that Paul describes the spiritual condition of the Gentile Christians in Corinth. This does not mean that we have an explanation for this verse that is completely satisfactory. It means that in the Corinthian context we are able to separate the past (v. 2) from the present (v. 3). Paul is now speaking about the spiritual life of the believers in Corinth. He says that he is going to make something known to them (II Cor. 8:1; Gal. 1:1). b. No one speaking by the Spirit of God says, Jesus is cursed. Paul balances this assertion with the statement, And no one is able to say, Jesus is Lord, except by the Holy Spirit. If Paul had given only the second declaration, we would not have to face difficulties. But because he has written both, the question is whether Paul describes actual occurrences of cursing Jesus within the local Christian community. Who are the people that place a curse on Jesus? The answers to this question are numerous and varied. I will list those that are most commonly given: 1. Jewish leaders. Those who curse Jesus are the Jews who, knowing that he died on a cross, applied the Scriptures to the crucified Christ: Anyone who is hung on a tree is under God's curse (Deut. 21:23). By hanging Jesus on a cross, the Jewish people had handed him over to God and expected that the curse would forever annihilate him. But when the Christians proclaimed Jesus name, the Jews continued to call forth a divine curse on Jesus. In reaction to the Christian witness, Jewish leaders attempted to keep their kinsmen from becoming converts to Christianity. Thus, in their local synagogues they instructed the Jewish people to curse Jesus. Anyone associated with a Christian confessing Jesus as Lord was considered to be a sinner. In times of persecution, Christians were compelled to renounce Jesus as Lord and reject him as Savior by cursing him.^[9] But why would Paul indirectly allude to leaders in Jewish synagogues? And why would he suddenly address Christians of Jewish descent, when he is instructing believers who at one time had been pagans (v. 2)? 2. Gnostic teachers. Other scholars have suggested that Paul is opposing Gnostic teachers who taught a dualism of the material and the spiritual.^[10] The physical body of Jesus belonging to the material world had to be cursed; only the spiritual Christ was confessed as the exalted Lord. This proposal assumes that Gnosticism was firmly rooted in the Christian community of Corinth during the middle of the first century. But Paul's epistles to the Corinthians hardly support the suggestion that Gnosticism was rampant in Corinth. This assumption would gain credibility if it applied to events near the end of that century, not in Paul's day. Also, the Gnostics would ascribe lordship not to Jesus but only to Christ. 3. Paul's formulation. Another suggestion is that with the phrase Jesus is cursed Paul formulates a counterpart to the genuine confession Jesus is Lord. The objection to this suggestion is that in the syntax of the present verse (v. 3) Paul uses the declarative mood and describes not probability but reality. 4. Holy Spirit. A final suggestion is that Paul wishes to make known the meaning of the concept by the Holy Spirit, which occurs twice, once in relation with cursing Jesus and the other with respect to confessing him as Lord. The person, whether Jew or Gentile, who blasphemes Jesus name will not be uttering his curse through God's Spirit. The person, whether Jew or Gentile, who confesses Jesus lordship is filled with the Holy Spirit.^[11] In view of Paul's emphasis on the Spirit, we are confident that he is not speaking about a specific location or a particular group of people. He is stressing the absence or the presence of the Holy Spirit by which people speak about Jesus. For that reason, we favor this fourth explanation. c. And no one is able to say, Jesus is Lord, except by the Holy Spirit. Paul teaches that the believer in whom God's Spirit dwells joyfully confesses his loyalty to Jesus by acknowledging him as Lord. The confession Jesus is Lord is one of the oldest creeds, or perhaps the oldest creed, in Christendom (John 13:13; Phil. 2:11). Jews who converted to Christianity on the day of Pentecost believed that God made Jesus both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36). Converted Gentiles forsook their pagan past and pledged allegiance to Jesus as their Lord and Savior (Acts 16:31; see also Rom. 10:9). Christians of both Jewish and Gentile origin accepted Jesus as ruler of the world, as King of kings and Lord of lords (I Tim. 6:15; Rev. 1:5; 17:14; 19:16). Some people may call Jesus Lord and even perform valuable tasks in his service. But if they are not filled with God's Spirit and therefore fail to do the Father's will, Jesus dismisses them by saying: I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers (Matt. 7:23). Jesus exercises his sovereign will in this world. He recognizes only those people who, led by the Holy Spirit, acknowledge his true divinity and obediently bow to his authority. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:1–3 Verse 1 [Greek] this preposition is used in an absolute sense: as for or now about. ^[12] [Greek] although the particle can mean either but, and, or now, the translation now is preferred. [Greek] the adjective with the definite article can be interpreted either in the masculine gender, the spiritual men, or the neuter gender, the spiritual matters. This verse does not depend on the preceding chapter, so that it should be regarded as a heading for a different subject. In a heading, the neuter serves a better purpose than the masculine. Verse 2 [Greek] &[Greek] the context demands that we add the second person plural [Greek] (you were) in the imperfect tense with the present passive participle (led astray) to form a periphrastic construction. [Greek] the imperfect indicative verb of [Greek] (I lead) with the particle [Greek] signifies repetition: as you would be led [from day to day]. ^[13] Verse 3 [Greek] present participle denoting activity of speaking, and [Greek], the present indicative denoting the content of that which is spoken. See also the synonym presented in the form of the aorist infinitive [Greek] (to say). [Greek] the verb to be is lacking and when supplied can be in either the subjunctive or the indicative. The indicative is favored because of the parallelism of the confession Jesus is Lord. The neuter noun [Greek] derives from the neuter perfect participle [Greek] (that which has been set up). It refers to a votive offering to a deity for the purpose of consecration or damnation. Here the word refers to damnation, with the intention of requesting God to place a curse on Jesus. [Greek] this word relates to the Hebrew term Yahweh and signifies sovereign ruler. (2) Different but Divinely Derived Gifts 12:4–6 If we understand the first three verses of this chapter to be Paul's introduction to teaching about spiritual gifts and the Holy Spirit, then the following paragraph is the beginning of a detailed elaboration of this theme. Paul notes the varieties of gifts and asserts that they originated from the Triune God: the Holy Spirit, the Lord Jesus Christ, and God the Father. These gifts are diverse, and God is the giver of every one of them. 4. There are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5. And there are varieties of ministries, but the same Lord. 6. And there are varieties of activities, but the same God is working all things in all [people]. If we momentarily suspend the repetition of the expressions there are varieties of and but the same in order to focus attention on the nouns in these verses, we see the following arrangement: There are varieties of gifts, ministries, activities, but the same [Holy] Spirit, Lord [Jesus], God [the Father] is working all things in all [people]. We can then make three pairings: gifts and Spirit, ministries and Lord, activities and God; all things and all people together form the conclusion. To put it differently, with respect to the Spirit there are the varieties of gifts; in relation to the Lord, those gifts are ministries; and with reference to God, they are activities. Now let us look at the passage verse by verse. a. There are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. The term varieties is in the plural to reveal the comprehensive spread of God's grace to his people. It suggests that these gifts were different in function and widely distributed among the Christian community, so that every believer has some gift or gifts but never all of them (I Peter 4:10). The word varieties signifies that the church of Christ reveals unity in diversity. Think, for example, of a well-shaped tree. That tree produces a multitude of leaves, yet no two leaves are alike. Similarly, the church reflects unity in its totality but not uniformity in its parts. The church has been blessed with varieties of gifts that reflect diversity and contribute to unity. What are these gifts? In the introductory verse (v. 1), Paul mentioned pneumatikMn (spiritual gifts), but now writes charismata (gifts of grace). In this chapter, Paul notes examples of nine gifts: wisdom, knowledge, prophecy, faith, healings, miracles, spiritual discernment, speaking in tongues, interpretation of tongues (Rom. 12:6–8). Yet Paul does not intend to be exhaustive and complete. In fact, the number of gifts that are noted in New Testament books totals about twenty.^[14] The clause there are varieties of gifts is adjoined to the clause but the same Spirit. Notice that Paul does not say of the same Spirit and thus imply that the Spirit is the only one who gives these gifts. The fact is that all three persons in the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) present gifts to God's people (Eph. 4:8). Paul uses the adversative but in the second clause of this verse (v. 4) to contrast the variety of gifts and the sameness of the Spirit. The Spirit enables the members of Christ's church to receive, develop, and apply these gifts in unity. Whatever the gift may be, the same Spirit is at work in the life of the believer. Because the Holy Spirit stands behind every gift distributed to the people, there ought not to be any pride or division among the Corinthians. The Spirit does not initiate separation. Rather, he promotes unity. b. And there are varieties of ministries, but the same Lord. In this verse (v. 5), Paul teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ is responsible for the diversity of spiritual ministries in the Christian community. The Greek word diakoniMn actually means services that are performed within the context of the church. Derivatives in the English language, diaconate and deacon, breathe the spirit of service to the body of Christ. The services rendered are without limit. To mention only three ministries from an incalculable multitude: one person preaches the morning or evening sermon, another teaches a Sunday school class, and still another sings in the choir. Christ equips each person to serve him in worship, outreach, teaching, counseling, encouraging, administration, and governing to say no more. No one should boast of having received a greater gift or a higher position in the church than other members, because all gifts and positions derive from the Lord. On the night of his arrest, Jesus washed the feet of his disciples and said, I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him (John 13:15 16). Service in church and community ought to be rendered in the spirit of Jesus, who endows and empowers his people with talents and abilities. Jesus is the same for every believer and shows no favoritism. He fully acknowledges the service of each individual, whatever it may be, when it is humbly performed for him (Matt. 25:34–40). c. And there are varieties of activities. What are these varieties of activities? The Greek word energmata, which I translate activities, occurs twice in the New Testament (vv. 6 and 10). In verse 6, the word is closely connected with the concept gifts, while in verse 10 it signifies miraculous powers. The word, which has derivatives in English (energy, energetic, and energize), means action as the result of God's energizing power. To illustrate, when a pastor preaches on a given Sunday he may have a well-prepared sermon. But he can communicate effectively only when God grants him the power to preach. Completely dependent on his Sender for strength, he realizes that he serves as God's mouthpiece during the worship service. d. But the same God is working all things in all [people]. God sends forth his people into countless situations to be his servants. God's kingdom is without borders and his citizens dwell wherever he has placed them. In his service, they speak at his command whenever he tells them to do so. God places his people in every sector and segment of society, so that they make known his truth everywhere. He wants his people to minister to all hurting people men, women, and children. He gives them his power to heal a broken world that needs help physically, emotionally, spiritually, and materially. Practical Considerations in 12:4–6 The variety of gifts and the number of talents within the Christian community are astounding indeed. For example, some people have the gifts of public speaking, singing or playing musical instruments, teaching, counseling, developing creative art, or composing poetry or music. In an unobtrusive way, Christians often contribute greatly to the well-being of society. Because of their talents and skills, they are able to give leadership in many areas of public and private life. Jesus has placed his people at strategic positions throughout the world. He calls them to use their talents for the coming of his kingdom and the extension of his church. He desires that his people use their gifts for the common good of humanity. Through this worldwide ministry of his servants, Jesus makes known his name to all nations, races, and peoples, in all the languages of the world. The name that is known more than any other name in all the world is Jesus. God's people should never use their gifts and talents for personal interests and satisfaction, even though the recipients themselves may greatly benefit from them. However, they blatantly sin against God by their disobedience, if they allow such selfishness ever to occur. God asks his servants to go forth in his name and serve him wherever he places them. Many times this involves leaving behind relatives, friends, and possessions. God's promise to them is that he will give them a hundred times as much in this life and eternal life as their inheritance (Matt. 19:29). (3) Gifts for the Common Good 12:7–11 7. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. Too often, ministers of the gospel, evangelists, and missionaries are considered to be the only recipients of special gifts. Too often, a distinction is made between sacred and secular occupations. Kingdom service is frequently understood to be performed by those people who have been ordained to serve the Lord in special ministries. Paul writes that the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each believer. That is, the Holy Spirit dwells in every believer (6:19) and thus makes his presence known with some indication of gifts. In the life of every Christian, the Holy Spirit reveals himself in one way or another. This does not mean that every believer is limited to one gift. For instance, Paul himself had received the gifts of continence and of speaking in tongues (7:7; 14:18). The phrase the manifestation of the Spirit can be either objective or subjective. In an objective sense, it signifies an action that reveals the presence of the Spirit. Subjectively it means an action which the Spirit generates. Perhaps we should accept the objective interpretation of this phrase in view of the passive verb is given, which implies that God is the one who gives the various gifts.^[15] The evidence of the Spirit's presence in the life of the believer serves the common good of the entire community. The Spirit uses the gifts of the individual Christian for the edification of the church (Eph. 4:12), a theme that Paul later applies in his discussion about the use of speaking in tongues (14:4). The intent here is to promote the common good and to prohibit anyone from using a gift for personal profit. Paul does not rule out that the gift itself may benefit the individual,^[16] but God confers his gifts on his people so that all may be edified (14:26). 8. To the one is given a word of wisdom through the Spirit and to another a word of knowledge according to the same Spirit. How does the Holy Spirit manifest himself? In the gifts that God bestows on his people. Paul lists a total of nine representative gifts (vv. 8 10), a list that is not meant to be exhaustive. Whether he intended to categorize them is difficult to ascertain. Scholars attempt to make a distinction between gifts that are either temporal or permanent, verbal or nonverbal, and important or less important. An attractive threefold division of these gifts follows: 1. Pedagogical: wisdom and knowledge 2. Supernatural: faith, healings, miracles 3. Communicative: prophecy, spirit discernment, tongues, interpretation of tongues^[17] Paul uses a variety of words in the Greek text of verses 8 10. Apparently he is interested only in stylistic diversity, not in making distinctions. For instance, referring to the Spirit he employs the prepositions through, according to, and by merely for the sake of change. In addition, here are nine gifts, but the only one that is specifically called a gift is the one of healing (v. 9). Indeed, we assume that Paul exercises authorial freedom in the choice of vocabulary. a. To the one is given a word of wisdom through the Spirit. Wisdom is the first of the two pedagogical gifts. God who gives this gift of wisdom conveys its content through the agency of the Holy Spirit. A literal translation of the Greek is word of wisdom; other translators render it utterance of wisdom (e.g., NRSV, Cassirer). The gift is the ability to speak divine wisdom which believers receive through the Holy Spirit (compare 2:6–7). Divine wisdom is contrasted with human wisdom (1:17, 20, 25). Isaiah's prophecy that the Spirit of wisdom would rest on the Messiah (11:2) was fulfilled in Jesus, who increased in wisdom (Luke 2:52). Jesus promise to give divine wisdom to his disciples was exemplified in the case of Stephen, who was filled with wisdom and the Spirit (Acts 6:10). And last, James tells his readers that if anyone lacks wisdom he or she should ask God, who gives generously without finding fault (James 1:5). Believers, then, may ask in faith for wisdom and God will honor their requests. b. And to another a word of knowledge according to the same Spirit. Knowledge, the second pedagogical gift, is essentially the intimate personal knowledge of God which depends, not upon intellect but on love, and on God's knowledge of or acquaintance with &man. ^[18] The term denotes affinity and signifies a personal relationship that exists between God and the redeemed person in Christ. This knowledge, given by God through his Spirit, must be put to use within the Christian community for the benefit of all the members. It comes to expression in knowing, understanding, and explaining to his people God's revelation in the Scriptures and in creation. Wisdom and knowledge overlap,^[19] and in this verse Paul places them together and alludes to an earlier discussion on these two themes (2:6–16). Throughout I Corinthians Paul repeatedly uses the expression knowledge, ^[20] though the meaning varies in context. 9. To another is given faith by the same Spirit and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit. a. To another is given faith by the same Spirit. The third gift is faith. Together with miracles and healings, it is part of the category of supernatural gifts. Because every true believer has faith in Jesus Christ, Paul is not thinking of saving faith. He has in mind complete and unshakable trust that God will perform miracles. Jesus told his disciples that faith as small as a mustard seed can move mountains (Matt. 17:20; I Cor. 13:2). The apostles demonstrated that faith in post-Pentecost times. For instance, Peter and John courageously opposed the members of the Sanhedrin, preached the gospel, and healed a cripple in the name of Jesus (Acts 3:1 4:2). Paul accepted Jesus word to testify for him in Rome (Acts 23:11). During the storm on the Mediterranean Sea, when all aboard the ship despaired of their lives and gave up hope, Paul's faith wavered not. He encouraged the crew and passengers by saying that he trusted in God; everyone would be safe and land on some island (Acts 27:23 26, 34). Countless believers have demonstrated their trust in God and have seen their faith rewarded in miraculous ways. The writer of Hebrews presents a list of Old Testament heroes of faith (Heb. 11), which has an unwritten counterpart in New Testament times. This writer overlooks the faith of Elijah, but James mentions his name and says that he was a man just like us (James 5:17 18). The special gift of faith, therefore, is not limited to an Old Testament prophet and a New Testament apostle. b. And to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit. Faith and the gifts of healing are closely related. James writes that the prayer offered in faith by the church elders will make the sick person well (James 5:14 15). When these people claim the words written by James and trust that God will hear and answer their earnest prayer, the miracle of healing frequently occurs. We make two cautionary remarks, however: first, these elders should not expect that they have received a permanent gift to heal every member of the church who is ill; next, in spite of fervent prayer offered in faith, God may choose not to restore someone to normal health and strength. Not only apostles but also deacons received the ability to perform miracles of healing in the early years of the Christian church. At that time, all the sick who came to the apostles were healedActs 5:16b . Peter healed people even by having his shadow fall on them (Acts 5:15 16). Both Stephen and Philip performed miracles of healing in Jerusalem and Samaria (Acts 6:8; 8:6–7). At Lystra in Asia Minor, Paul healed a man who was crippled in his feet (Acts 14:8 10). But he himself was afflicted with an ailment which he called a thorn in his flesh. Although Paul pleaded with the Lord to heal him, Jesus answered him: My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness (II Cor. 12:9). Moreover, in his epistles Paul indirectly admits that he lacked the ability to heal either Epaphroditus (Phil. 2:27), Timothy (I Tim. 5:23), or Trophimus (II Tim. 4:20). Why did God not provide Paul the ability to heal his friends? Perhaps we should look for an answer in the purpose of restoring the sick. The New Testament teaches that miracles of healing were generally performed to strengthen faith and broaden the circle of believers. In some circumstances, God might not heal a patient merely to further his or her physical well-being. Believers today lack the gift of healing that the apostles possessed at the time the New Testament church was in its infancy. Presently when believers pray in faith and wait for a divine answer, they frequently learn that no healing is taking place. God may choose either to heal a person through medicines and physical care or not to heal at all. Those believers who pray for the sick and see restoration through prayer ought not to boast about possessing the gift of healing. Christians have no claim to a permanent gift but must give God all the glory and honor for healing the sick. When there is no immediate answer, believers should continue to pray and not stop asking for help in time of need (Heb. 4:16).^[21] Healing happens because God responds to prayer believers offer in faith. Believers acknowledge that God performs the miracle of healing the sick in answer to prayer. They exercise the power of prayer knowing that the prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effectiveJames 5:16b . 10. And to another are given activities that elicit miracles, to another prophecy, and to another distinguishing of spirits, to another different kinds of tongues, to another interpretation of tongues. a. And to another are given activities that elicit miracles. This is the third gift in the sequence of supernatural gifts. If the healing of the sick is a temporary gift, so is the gift to perform miracles. Throughout the Scriptures, miracles are supernatural acts that occur contrary to the laws of nature. God temporarily intervenes in nature by performing the miracle. Man is the instrument and God the agent. The Old Testament teaches that God through Moses performed miracles prior to and during the exodus from Egypt.^[22] After the exodus, the sun stood still when the Israelites conquered Canaan (Josh. 10:13). When Elijah and Elisha served God as prophets, many miracles happened.^[23] Daniel's three friends walked unharmed out of the blazing furnace, and Daniel himself was safe in the den of lions (Dan. 3:19–27; 6:16–23). In New Testament times, Jesus earthly ministry was delineated by numerous miracles which ranged from healings, exorcisms, and raising the dead, to feeding multitudes. More miracles took place during Jesus ministry than at any other time in biblical history. The supreme miracle of Jesus resurrection was followed by his ascension. Apart from narrating the occurrences of healings, temporary blindness, exorcism, and raising the dead, in his history of the early church Luke records only the miracles of releasing apostles from imprisonment (Acts 5:19; 12:6–10; 16:22–28). We make four observations. First, when Paul writes that miracles are among the supernatural gifts (see also vv. 28 29), he does not intimate that every believer receives the power to work miracles. Instead he notes that the gift of miracles was a distinctive mark of an apostle (II Cor. 12:12). Next, the New Testament teaches that in the apostolic church, God worked miracles only to confirm the message of the gospel (Acts 6:8; 8:7; 13:6–12; Heb. 2:4). Third, miracles of healing and miraculous powers seem to overlap now and then in the New Testament,^[24] although a distinction should be made between miracles in nature and those that relate to the human body. Last, at the conclusion of the apostolic era, the miracles in nature appear to have come to an end. b. To another prophecy. Among the communicative gifts, prophecy is the first, followed by spirit discernment, tongues, and interpretation of tongues. How significant was prophecy in the early Christian church, especially in Corinth? In a preceding chapter (11:4–5), Paul declared that a man who prays and prophesies should not do so with covered head; a woman, however, should have her head covered when she prays and prophesies in the worship service. Paul seems to imply that praying and prophesying go together (I Thess. 5:17–20), but he does not list prayer among the spiritual gifts. In the context of gifts, to be sure, he adds prophecy and speaking in tongues which, in a sense, is prayer (compare 14:13–17). Prophecy and prayer are not the same, but they belong very closely together. ^[25] The current passage indicates not that every believer receives the prophetic gift but that God grants it distributively to his people. God governs that person who occasionally serves as his mouthpiece either to utter predictions (Acts 11:28; 21:11) or more often to interpret God's will to the church (Eph. 4:11).^[26] Paul writes that some people in Corinth receive a revelation from God to instruct and encourage the believers (see 14:30). Yet the prophetic utterances of those people, says Paul, are subject to close examination by others (14:32). He reveals that prophets do not stand above the church but are members of that Christian community and are subject to it. The church must examine prophetic utterances in the light of the Scriptures, much as the Bereans carefully examined Paul's teachings to determine if these utterances were true (Acts 17:11). For the prophets and the church, the Scriptures are the standard. With the last book of the New Testament, God completed the canon of Scripture (Rev. 22:18–19) and gave no additional canonical revelation. Before the closing of the canon, predictive prophecies had temporal significance (Acts 11:28; 21:11). The nonpredictive prophets explained and taught the Scriptures as they exhorted the members in the churches.^[27] c. And to another distinguishing of spirits. This short clause introduces the second gift in the communicative category, and that gift is linked to the preceding gift of prophecy. Paul is saying that some believers have received the gift to distinguish spirits. In another passage (14:29), he asserts that prophetic utterances should be examined and evaluated. But these two passages do not convey the same message and should not be used to explain each other.^[28] The power and influence of spirits can be discerned by their word, deed, and appearance. First, the devil communicates false information. Appearing as an angel of light (II Cor. 11:14), Satan deceived Eve with a message that differed from that which God had given to her husband (Gen. 2:16–17; 3:1, 4 5). The prophet Micaiah revealed to the kings of Israel and Judah that a lying spirit spoke through the mouths of all the prophets in Israel (I Kings 22:21–23; II Chron. 18:20–22). Jesus discerned the voice of Satan when Peter rebuked Jesus for saying that he would die (Matt. 16:23). Paul recognized Bar-Jesus as the son of the devil (Acts 13:10) and the fortune-telling of the slave girl as words spoken by an evil spirit (Acts 16:18). And last, John told his readers to test the spirits because of the message uttered by false prophets (I John 4:1 3). Next, Satan and his cohorts are able to work miracles. Thus, Satan performs all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders through the man of lawlessness to deceive the people (II Thess. 2:9–10). Jesus predicts that in the last days great miracles will occur through false Christs and prophets to deceive the elect if possible (Matt. 24:24). And the beast that comes forth out of the earth speaks like Satan, exercises all authority, performs miracles, causes fire to descend from heaven, and deceives the people dwelling on the earth (Rev. 13:11–14). Last, the devil enters the Christian community with counterfeit teachers (Jude 4; see also II Peter 2:1–2). When the conduct of some people differs from the norms prescribed in Scripture, those who have the gift of discernment ought to take action to expose the truth from the lie. An analogy is a bank teller, who is able to detect counterfeit money by indelibly pressing on his memory the appearance of genuine currency. When a counterfeit bill or coin surfaces, the teller immediately recognizes it. Similarly, persons with the gift of discernment are filled with the Holy Spirit and instantly recognize a spirit of falsehood. As the teller uses his gift for the financial well-being of the bank, so the spiritual man uses his for protecting fellow believers. d. To another different kinds of tongues, to another interpretation of tongues. The last two gifts of communication, together with that of prophecy, seem to have caused considerable controversy in the Corinthian church. Paul lists the gifts once more in the concluding section of the current chapter (vv. 28, 30) and then devotes an entire chapter (14) to them. The word tongue can mean either a known language (Acts 2:6, 8, 11) or tongue-speech (I Cor. 14:2, 4, 28); in the present epistle, the word can signify either the meaning depends on the context. In the commercial city of Corinth, where international visitors and temporary residents were numerous and where various languages were spoken, translators were in great demand. On the other hand, the Corinthian congregation also experienced the phenomenon of tongue-speaking. Tongue-speech alludes to an act of worship directed to God; but when other believers were present in Corinth, the message had to be interpreted for the benefit of the audience. To promote reverence in the worship service, Paul demanded that tongue-speech be edifying, intelligible, orderly, and controlled. Notice that Paul writes the expression kinds of tongues. This points to both varieties of known languages (14:9–10) and tongue-speech. He attributes all these tongues and their interpretation to the work of the Holy Spirit (vv. 7, 11). Thus, he indicates that the Spirit gives the interpreter of tongue-speech ability to understand and convey the meaning of the spoken message.^[29] 11. The one and the same Spirit works all these things, apportioning them to each one individually as he desires. a. The one and the same Spirit. Throughout the first eleven verses of this chapter, Paul stresses the work of the Holy Spirit. He states that a genuine confession of Jesus lordship can come only by the Holy Spirit (v. 3). Although all three persons in the Trinity give spiritual gifts, Paul now intimates that these gifts are channeled through the Spirit. Thus, he notes that the Spirit is the agent (v. 4). He often uses the expression the same before the noun Spirit (vv. 4, 8, 9), and now in the concluding verse is even more descriptive by saying one and the same Spirit. Paul emphasizes that every one of the nine gifts has its origin in the Holy Spirit. He implies that the Spirit prohibits the recipients of these gifts from boasting about rank or recognition. b. The same Spirit works all these things. Both the gifts and the power to energize believers originate with the Holy Spirit. He stands back of the gifts and enables the recipients to use them effectively for the benefit of the community (I Peter 4:10). c. Apportioning them to each one individually. No one in the Christian community receives all the gifts and no one is without a gift. Paul clearly asserts that the Holy Spirit allocates them to each person in the church, to the one this gift and to another that gift. The Spirit neglects no one, so that the totality of talents in the church constitutes a rich reservoir of ability and proficiency. d. As he desires. With this last clause, Paul teaches that the Holy Spirit is not merely an impersonal power but a person with divine identity. The Spirit exercises his prerogative to determine and distribute individual gifts to the believers, even though the Christian has the privilege to ask for them in prayer. The Spirit of God knows what the church needs and thus distributes gifts wisely and effectively. Practical Considerations in 12:8–11 When individual Christians claim to have received either a word of wisdom, a word of knowledge, or a prophecy from the Lord, fellow believers are not always convinced. If someone declares that the Lord has told him or her what to do or what to say, this person can use a word from the Lord to silence a challenger and sway an audience. We acknowledge that the assertion of having received a word of either wisdom or knowledge is highly subjective. The reception of a word of wisdom or knowledge always occurs in the privacy of the human heart and cannot be examined objectively by others. In addition, personal messages often are influenced by human emotions. When Paul lists the spiritual gifts, he ascribes no supernatural value to the terms word of wisdom and word of knowledge. He writes common words to convey the obvious meaning that someone is able to speak wisely and knowledgeably.^[30] Scripture teaches that in answer to a believer's prayer for wisdom, God grants this particular gift without finding fault (James 1:5). God guides the believer to speak discerningly and informatively about a matter at hand. Thereupon fellow Christians listen and carefully evaluate the spoken word. When this happens, believers attest to the fact that God has granted to the speaker the gift of heavenly wisdom. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:7–11 Verse 7 [Greek] each one. When the term [Greek] occurs as a substantive, as in this passage, it refers to each individual. Paul addresses each believer individually in the universal church. For a strengthened form, see verse 18.^[31] [Greek] the preposition [Greek] with the accusative connotes leading to [the common good]. ^[32] The substantive is a present participle which signifies that which is beneficial. Verse 8 [Greek] &[Greek] these two particles portray balance in a series of entries in verses 8 10. [Greek] &[Greek] Paul employs these prepositions and [Greek] in the next verse (v. 9) to describe the action of the Holy Spirit. He uses different prepositions only for the sake of variation. [Greek] note that Paul writes the present passive indicative to convey the meaning that God continues to give these special gifts to his people. [Greek] &[Greek] these two forms in verses 8 10 occur only for variety in writing style. Verse 9 All the qualitative nouns (e.g., faith, gifts, prophecy) that occur in this verse and the next are without the article. The article is omitted for nouns that express abstract qualities.^[33] [Greek] this is the dative singular of the neuter numeral one. Some manuscripts have the reading [Greek] (the same) but the textual support favors the numeral.^[34] Verse 10 [Greek] and [Greek] other. These two adjectives are interchanged only for stylistic reasons. [Greek] this plural noun, kinds, must be supplemented with the adjective different. Verse 11 [Greek] notice the use of the two definite articles before the noun Spirit. They are part of an idiom and show emphasis. [Greek] each his own. The adjective [Greek] conveys the classical sense: his own private gift. ^[35] b. The Body 12:12–31 For the first part of this chapter, Paul wrote about the Holy Spirit and the spiritual gifts he distributes to the believers. In the second part, he speaks about the church not as individuals but as a unit. He portrays the church in terms of the human body, which in itself is among the most marvelous of God's creations. For Paul, the illustration of the human body serves to display diversity in the interest of unity. (1) The Body and the Spirit 12:12–13 12. For as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, thus also is Christ. a. For as the body is one and has many members. With the conjunction for, Paul bridges a break between the present passage and the preceding verses and elaborates on his teaching. In the previous part, Paul noted that individual members of the church received a variety of spiritual gifts. He looked at the proverbial trees but failed to call attention to the forest. Now he takes in the totality of the individual members, refers to the body, and demonstrates its basic unity. Paul compares the body, that is, the human body (see vv. 14 26), with Christ. We would expect Paul to compare the body and the church, not the body and Christ, but for him the church is the body of Christ (v. 27). Elsewhere Paul writes that Christ is the head of the church, which is his body (Eph. 1:22–23). In short, with the word Christ Paul presents a compressed theological thought of bringing body and head together. Paul uses a figure of speech, called metonymy, in which a part represents the whole unit. In other words, Christ represents the entire church. He identifies himself completely with the church, as is evident from Jesus question to Paul on the way to Damascus: Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? (Acts 9:4). Jesus taught that he and his people are one (Matt. 10:40; 25:45). b. And all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, thus also is Christ. The human body is a highly diversified organism. Each member has its own distinct function but also contributes to the working of the entire body. So it is with the body of Christ, in which every member has received some spiritual gift. In this body, the employment of each gift is designed to serve not the individual member but the entire church.^[36] 13. For indeed by one Spirit all of us were baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and all were made to drink of one Spirit. This text presents a number of difficulties that stem from the expressions by one Spirit, baptized, into one body, and all were made to drink. The combination of these terms is unique. What did Paul have in mind when he wrote that all of us are baptized by one Spirit? And what is the significance of making everyone to drink of one Spirit? We comment on the italicized terms but admit that problems remain. a. By one Spirit. The Greek text has the preposition en that can be translated either by or in. Most translators have adopted the reading by to reveal means or agency.^[37] They think that this interpretation is the better of the two, for it avoids the awkwardness of having two quite similar prepositional phrases in the same clause: in one Spirit &into one body. I prefer the translation by. Conversely, other translators believe that the Greek preposition en denotes sphere or place and thus translate it in. ^[38] They point out that in the New Testament, the Holy Spirit is never described as the baptizer. Rather, the Spirit is the sphere into which the baptismal candidate enters. The Gospels declare that Jesus baptizes his followers with the Holy Spirit (Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:8). b. Baptized. When Paul writes, all of us were baptized, is he referring to a literal or a figurative baptism? If taken literally, Paul is talking about water baptism. However, the verb to baptize often conveys a metaphorical sense. For instance, Jesus asks James and John whether they are able to be baptized with a baptism similar to his own (Mark 10:38). Jesus is alluding not to his baptism in the Jordan but to his death on the cross (Luke 12:50; Acts 1:5; and I Cor. 10:2). It is preferable to state that Paul has in mind a figurative use of baptism.^[39] Paul writes, all of us were baptized, and all were made to drink of one Spirit. These words extend to a circle that is far broader than the Corinthian community and includes all believers. This means that all true believers in Jesus Christ have been baptized by the Holy Spirit. The text teaches that regenerated Christians are incorporated into one body by the Holy Spirit but it says nothing about a subsequent baptism of the Spirit.^[40] Some scholars interpret the text as a reference to the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper.^[41] But this is difficult to maintain. First, in the present context Paul gives no indication of introducing a discussion on the sacraments. Next, the text simply does not allude to water baptism. Third, the assertion that the verb to make to drink refers to the drinking of the Communion cup cannot be sustained. And last, the Greek verb tense calls for a single occurrence of drinking, which is incongruent with the repeated observance of the Lord's Supper. The flow of this verse intimates that to be baptized means to become a living member of the church upon conversion. When spiritual regeneration takes place in individuals, they enter the body of Christ, that is, the church. Not the external observance of water baptism but the internal transformation by the Holy Spirit brings people into a living relationship with Christ.^[42] c. Into one body. Here Paul stresses the unity of the church in its diverse forms. He notes the racial, cultural, and social differences that existed in the Corinthian church: there were Jews and Greeks, slaves and free. Regardless of their status and position in life, these people came together to worship God in one church. If the church should practice discrimination, it would be in direct conflict with the law of love. All people who are spiritually renewed in Christ are equal to one another. The preposition into denotes movement from the outside to the inside. Persons who have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit leave the world when they become living members of the church. For Paul to become a Christian and to become a member of the Body of Christ are synonymous. ^[43] d. All were made to drink. In verse 13, the adjective all appears twice not to indicate two distinct stages of the Christian experience but to reinforce the new status. In fact, the verse itself rules out any interpretation of baptism which requires it to be complemented by a later rite for the impartation of the Spirit.^[44] For this reason, Paul once more writes the expression one Spirit and says that all believers were made to drink of this Spirit. We sense that the two verbs baptize and drink have much in common. By looking for a parallel, we see similar wording in one of Paul's epistles: For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3:27–28). In the Corinthian and Galatian passages, Paul stresses the unity in Christ Jesus regardless of racial, cultural, social, and sexual differences. He states that all were baptized by one Spirit into Christ. And he adds that the believers have been made to drink of the Spirit (v. 13) and have clothed themselves with Christ (Gal. 3:27). Just as Christians are clothed with Christ, so they are saturated with the Holy Spirit. The Greek verb potizoM can mean either I give to drink (Matt. 25:35) or I irrigate (I Cor. 3:6–8).^[45] The second meaning is appropriate, for Jesus also connects the Holy Spirit to the concept living water flowing from the believer (John 4:10; 7:38–39). When this spiritual saturation occurs, the individual believer enjoys a bountiful harvest, namely, the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23). Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 12:12–13 [Greek] &[Greek] the adverbs denote balance: just as and so. The first adverb occurs seventeen times in the New Testament, all but once in Paul's epistles. [Greek] the adjective [Greek] (all) is emphatic: all the members. [Greek] for indeed. Both words keep their own individual meaning.^[46] [Greek] the aorist passive of [Greek] (I give to drink; irrigate) demands a direct object in the form of [Greek] (one Spirit). The Majority Text features the preposition [Greek] (into) before the accusative case, but the manuscript support is weak (KJV, NKJV). (2) The Physical Body 12:14–20 From Paul's point of view in the middle of the first century, the human body with its numerous members was a descriptive parallel of the church universal. The body with its many members has been created to function effectively as a unit, and the church with its gifted members also forms an effective entity. Yet the worldwide church today is so diverse in language, culture, race, boundaries, tradition, history, and theology that a comparison with the human body seems simplistic. Nonetheless, in the local church especially Paul's illustration is apt. It points out that as the body functions harmoniously, so must the church of Jesus Christ. 14. For indeed the body is not one member but many. With the introductory words for indeed, Paul resumes the thought he began to develop in verse 12, where he spoke of many members and one body. He repeats the same words to illustrate that unity and diversity characterize not only the human body but all created bodies. For any living organism to exert itself productively, it must coordinate all its varied parts, function compatibly, and in its diversity show unity in purpose. Paul is thinking of the church of Jesus Christ and especially of the Christian community in Corinth. Aside from all its problems, this community has been blessed with numerous gifts and talents (see vv. 28 31). The analogy is clear, for as the human body with its numerous members has been created to function smoothly, so the Corinthian church with its many gifted people ought to perform harmoniously. As the beauty of the human body is brought out by the variety of its parts, so the glory of the body of Christ appears in the diversity of its members. ^[47] 15. If the foot should say, Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body, for this reason it ceases not to belong to the body. 16. And if the ear should say, Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body, for this reason it ceases not to belong to the body. With these hypothetical illustrations, Paul imagines parts of the human body talking to each other. Because the foot is not as skillful as the hand, it may look up to the hand and declare, Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body. But such talk is nonsense. Feet are part of the body and make it complete. Paul's implied application for the Corinthians is to eradicate all envy with respect to a particular spiritual gift that a member has not received. This one church member ought not to feel inadequate because of a lack of some spiritual gift. And no one should separate himself from the body of believers out of envy or spite.^[48] There is also a difference between the respective functions of the ear and the eye. A person who is deaf is nonetheless able to see everything, but every blind person lives in perpetual darkness. The ear may think that the function of seeing is more important to the human body than the function of hearing. Thus the ear may feel less important than the eye. For this reason, the ear may argue: Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body. But such talk is idle and useless. To function properly, the body needs all its members. Likewise, no one in the Corinthian congregation may separate himself from the church, because every member is important for the wholesome functioning of the entire body. 17. If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole body were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? With the help of a ludicrous illustration, Paul drives home the point of unity and mutual dependence. The human body which consists of many parts can never be only an eye. If this were the case, says Paul, it would see but not hear. The body would be unable to function properly. Moreover, if the whole body had have only the component of hearing, it would not be able to detect any odors, whether good or bad. Indeed, without the variety of body parts that fill their assigned roles, the body itself would rapidly deteriorate and die. Paul portrays the absurdity of nurturing jealousy because of the spiritual gifts which the individual members of the Corinthian congregation had received. He not only teaches but also strives to attain the unity of the Christian church. The members of the Corinthian church need each other. Each has received some spiritual gift on which the rest of the congregation depends. The recipient of any gift must understand that all the members of the church depend on him or her to exercise that spiritual gift. When all the members employ the talents the Holy Spirit has distributed to God's people, then the entire church functions efficiently for the benefit of all. 18. But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body just as he desired. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 13. Worship, part 3 (13:1–13) Outline (continued) 13:1–13 4. Letter of Love 13:1–3 a. Prerequisite of Love 13:4–7 b. Portrayal of Love 13:8–13 c. Permanence and Perfection of Love 4. Letter of Love 13:1–13 13 1 If I speak in the tongues of men, even those of angels, but have not love, I am only echoing bronze or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have [the gift of] prophecy and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 And if I give away all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I give up my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing. 4 Love is patient and is kind, love is not jealous, love does not brag, is not arrogant. 5 Love does not behave indecently, does not seek its own things, does not become irritated, does not keep a record of wrongs, 6 does not rejoice in evil, but rejoices in the truth, 7 covers all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. 8 Love never fails. But if there are prophecies, they shall be set aside; if there are tongues, they shall cease; if there is knowledge, it shall be set aside. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part. 10 But when perfection comes, that which is in part shall be set aside. 11 When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child, reason as a child. But when I became a man, I set aside childish things. 12 For now we see in a mirror an indistinct reflection, but then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. 13 Now remain faith, hope, love, these three; and the greatest of these is love. Inspired by the Holy Spirit, Paul gave the world a love letter without equal. Here is Paul's writing at its best on a subject that awakens everyone's interest, love. His presentation of love, however, is without sentimentality, devoid of sensuality, and free from sexuality. The world has poured a sensual meaning into the word love that centers on sex and the sex act. Another use of this word is to equate it with a degree of fondness for either an action or an object, as in I love to do it, or I love it. By contrast, the love that Paul has in mind is divine in origin and transcends earthly meanings. It is expressed in the well-known verse, For God so loved the world (John 3:16). The human mind cannot fully grasp the depth of that divine love. God commands us to love him with heart, soul, and mind, and to love our neighbor as ourselves (Matt. 22:37–39). This love is embodied in the Greek term agap, which means either God's love for man or man's love for God. Also, we are to love our neighbor, even if the neighbor is our enemy. In brief, agap originates with God, who communicates his divine love which he expects us to reflect and return to him. Paul wants his readers to live within the context of divine love and day by day demonstrate this love. He shows them that this love indeed is the more excellent way of life. He wants them to receive and employ their spiritual gifts in the setting of that love. He knows, for instance, that when a Christian prophesies or speaks in a tongue within the framework of divine love, the church will be edified and strengthened. Without this love, the believers are unable to share the benefits of these spiritual gifts. Paul looks at the six gifts of speech, prophecy, mysteries, knowledge, faith, and charity. He concludes that outside the context of love, these gifts are meaningless. In the first three verses of the chapter, Paul introduces conditional clauses that are contrasted with statements on the absence of love. And to each of these clauses, he adds conclusions of descriptive reality. The next section (vv. 4 7) is a description of love in both positive and negative terms. Paul follows this section with a discussion on the permanency of love. When prophecies cease, tongues are silenced, and knowledge disappears, perfection comes at the consummation (vv. 8 12). And last, the concluding verse profiles the triad of faith, hope, and love. The greatest of these three is love (v. 13). a. Prerequisite of Love 13:1–3 1. If I speak in the tongues of men, even those of angels, but have not love, I am only echoing bronze or a clanging cymbal. In addition to the majestic rhythm in this verse, a number of items are noteworthy. First, Paul speaks hypothetically of a possible mastery of both human and angelic speech; he resorts to the use of a conditional clause. Next, in this verse, as in verses 2, 3, 11, and 12, he refers to himself in the first person singular. Throughout the entire chapter the Corinthian Christians and their problems are never mentioned, although he includes his readers with the plural pronoun we in verse 12a. And third, in the Greek Paul places the verb to speak between the words of men and even those of angels. The position of this verb undoubtedly is meant to stress the reference to angelic speech.^[1] The verb itself signifies more the ability to speak than the content of speech. a. If I speak in the tongues of men, even those of angels. With this conditional statement, Paul indicates that he himself does not engage in tongue-speaking in public worship (14:19). He appears to be saying, Suppose that I as the Lord's apostle have the highest possible gift of tongues, those that men use, and those even that angels use how you Corinthians would admire, even envy me and desire to have an equal gift! ^[2] The word tongues can be understood to mean known languages; but in context it appears to mean tongue-speech, which some Corinthians regarded as heavenly speech. We do not know what supernatural language angels speak (II Cor. 12:4; Rev. 14:1–3) or whether angels are able to understand human speech.^[3] Conversely, angels communicate with people in human terms that are frequently recorded in both the Old and New Testaments. b. But have not love, I am only echoing bronze or a clanging cymbal. The point at issue is not the speaking of tongues, whether human or angelic, but the practice of love. Within the context of the Christian church, be it in Corinth or anywhere else, lack of love and its deplorable consequences are often painfully evident. True love reveals itself in loving the unlovable, for this is what God does. He shows us his love in the death of his Son while we were still in sin (Rom. 5:8). God always comes to us first in love before we come to him in repentance and faith. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins (I John 4:10). The apostle John tells his readers to show love to one another as God has shown his love to them. Paul now teaches that love ought to permeate the entire context of Christian living. No one can boast of having the gift of speech, whether human or heavenly, and at the same time show a lack of love. If this happens, says Paul, the noise you hear is comparable to that of echoing bronze or a clanging cymbal. The sounds of a gong and a cymbal are monotones; when these sounds are prolonged, they eventually become annoying to the human ear. We have learned that when something is said without love, even if it is expressed most eloquently, the spoken words are empty and meaningless. They are comparable to a bronze vase that echoes when struck or to a cymbal that clangs in worshipPs. 150:5, LXX .^[4] Paul applies his words not to the Corinthians but to himself. He literally says, I have become echoing brass.& The common Greek spoken by Paul often used the perfect tense for the present tense. 2. And if I have [the gift of] prophecy and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith so as to remove mountains but have not love, I am nothing. a. Prophecy. The next gift that is mentioned in verses 1 3 is prophecy, or as a literal translation would read, I have prophecy. This means more than to prophesy, for it signifies that a person has become a prophet.^[5] In the preceding list of gifts (12:28), prophecy is second and tongues last. But here Paul begins with tongue-speaking and then introduces prophecy. Paul exalts the gift of prophecy, because a prophet, in contrast with the tongue-speaker, strengthens and edifies the church (14:1–5). The prophet can be effective in his ministry as long as his prophecies are true. But, says Paul, a prophecy spoken outside the context of love amounts to nothing. The Old Testament provides striking examples of prophets who in love brought God's message to the people of Israel. Moses was God's prophet par excellence, for he regularly stood between God and his people to convey God's word to them (Deut. 5:5). Considered a very humble man as he served the people, Moses received God's revelation in visions and dreams; God spoke to him face to face. Moses demonstrated his faithfulness in God's house, that is, among the people (Num. 12:3, 6 7; Heb. 3:5–6). He watched over God's people, loved them, and prayed for them.^[6] However, a false prophet speaks words not out of love for God's people but for personal gain. A prophet who speaks presumptously in God's name or in the name of other gods must be put to death, says the Lord God.^[7] b. Mysteries and knowledge. Once again Paul speaks hypothetically by saying that even if he understood all mysteries and all knowledge, but had no love, it would be of no avail to him. Some scholars take this saying as an explanation of the word prophecy. They read, If I have prophecy, that is, know all mysteries and all knowledge &but do not have love I am nothing. ^[8] This interpretation has merit, because both the terms mysteries and knowledge depend on the verb to understand and are thus intimately connected. And another passage links prophecy and mystery (Rev. 10:7). Moreover, mysteries are truths which God has hidden from his people. If God's people want to understand these mysteries, they need divine wisdom. A true prophet receives insight into God's mysteries and explains them to the people.^[9] In an earlier passage about knowledge Paul says, We speak God's wisdom in a mystery (2:7), for he and his co-workers are stewards of God's mysteries (4:1). In the present passage, Paul refers to all mysteries; the term all mysteries may be a synonym for wisdom that receives a place next to knowledge (see 12:8). But even if Paul should possess the ability to understand all mysteries and all knowledge, without love everything would be in vain. c. Faith. And if I have all faith so as to remove mountains but have not love, I am nothing. Faith is God's gift to man, a gift which the recipient must constantly exercise, strengthen, and amplify (see 12:9). When faith lies dormant, it disappears, while unbelief and disobedience take its place. For example, Jesus disciples were unable to cast out a demon from a boy who suffered from epileptic fits. But when Jesus came, he told the demon to come out of the boy and never to enter him again (Mark 9:25). In private the disciples asked Jesus why they had failed. Jesus said, Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, Move from here to there and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for youMatt. 17:20; compare 21:21 . The remark on moving mountains is a Jewish proverbial saying that conveyed the idea of making the impossible possible.^[10] It attests to the intensity of exercising one's faith to remove insurmountable barriers. Both Jesus and Paul, in their respective contexts, allude to this proverb. Whenever a person is able in faith to do the impossible, he or she is highly respected and greatly admired within the Christian community. But faith ought to be exerted in harmony with love. Otherwise it is useless. The brevity of Paul's conclusion, I am nothing, is forthright and to the point, for indeed, faith without love is ineffectual. 3. And if I give away all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I give up my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing. a. Charity. After enumerating the gifts of tongues, prophecy, knowledge, and faith, Paul refers to his charitable willingness to part with earthly possessions. He literally says, If I dole out all my goods to feed [the poor]. We supply the object, the poor. The Greek verb psMmizM (I give out or away, dole out) in this text is revealing. It differs from Jesus command to the rich young ruler to give all his money to the poor in a single action (Matt. 19:21). Rather, Paul says that he would give away all his possessions piecemeal over a lengthy period. The obvious implication is that he would receive the praises of his fellow men. But Paul adds that if he would perform deeds of charity without love for the recipients of his gifts, those deeds would not mean anything at all. Then his motives would be self-centered and self-serving. His deed would fail to fulfill the royal law, Love your neighbor as yourself (James 2:8), and would be condemned in God's sight. b. Self-sacrifice. If I give up my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing. The better Greek manuscripts support an alternate reading, If I give up my body that I may glory, and at least one translation has adopted it.^[11] Translators have to consider the contextual evidence in addition to the testimony of manuscripts before they can make a choice. For instance, Paul repeatedly uses the verb to glory in his epistles (thirty-five times). The verb to glory can be understood either negatively or positively. When viewed negatively that is, as boasting the word hardly suits the present context, in which Paul is enumerating spiritual feats. The motive of self-glorification makes the addition of [the clause have not love] unnecessary as it is obvious that [love] is not the guiding principle behind such a motive. ^[12] When understood positively, the verb means that Paul renders glory to God through physical suffering (II Cor. 11:23–29; 12:10).^[13] If we adopt this positive explanation of the verb to glory, we encounter at least three detractions. First, attractive though the explanation may be, it still is obscured by the clause but have not love. Paul knows that glorifying God without love is useless; for this reason he says, It profits me nothing. Next, why would Paul speak hypothetically if he has in mind his own physical sufferings? And last, this explanation attempts to fill in an incomplete sentence. The introductory words, if I give my body, need a predicate to give meaning to the sentence. By comparison, the reading if I give my body to be burned is explicit and presents a complete thought. When we adopt this translation, we readily admit to difficulties that remain. Why would Paul voluntarily offer his physical body to the flames, while the three young men were forcefully thrown into the fire (Dan. 3:19–20)? And the reference cannot be to the Neronian persecution, during which Christians were burned at the stake, because that persecution had not yet commenced. What then is the meaning of this intriguing clause? If Paul intends his remark on moving mountains to be taken figuratively, we may expect that the clause on surrendering his body to the flames also is a metaphor. And this may well have been his intention provided the words if I give my body to be burned are the original text. Additional Comments on 13:1–3 The first lines in each of the three verses reveal difficult but attainable feats. The three goals of speaking other human languages (v. 1a), prophesying and understanding all mysteries and all knowledge (v. 2a), and distributing one's material possessions (v. 3a) can be achieved. Two additional goals can be reached: a person can possess faith to remove mountains, figuratively speaking (v. 2b); and, in an extreme case, he can choose to deliver his body to the flames (v. 3b). These two are attainable feats, albeit that the second implies self-glorification through suicide. (Should we adopt the alternate reading for the second part of verse 3, if I hand over my body so that I may boast [NRSV], the matter of attainability becomes irrelevant.) The one unattainable goal for human beings is to speak in the tongues of angels (v. 1a). In fact, we lack certainty as to Paul's intention in verse 3b. The suggestion has been made that he attempts to match the words of Jesus, who during the institution of the Lord's Supper said that he gave up his body: This is my body which is for you (Luke 22:19).^[14] But this suggestion is a hypothesis that faces at least one significant objection: the readers of Paul's epistle would be hard pressed to understand that the cryptic clause if I hand over my body refers to the communion formula that Paul discussed in 11:24. Surely Paul would have augmented this clause with an allusion to the Lord's Supper to make himself understood. Even though the translation if I give my body to be burned has its own difficulties,^[15] it is a complete thought and in a sense flows smoothly. This reading is attested from all other parts of the ancient Christian world and from the earliest times onwards (Tertullian, Aphraates). ^[16] Admittedly, the reading if I give my body so that I may boast is equally attested. We conclude that this textual problem is so complex that it is imprudent to be dogmatic. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:1–3 Verses 1 2 [Greek] Paul uses five conditional clauses in verses 1 3 with this particle to indicate an uncertain or hypothetical statement. The forms [Greek] and [Greek] (v. 3) are mere variations. [Greek] abstract nouns (e.g., faith, hope, love; see v. 13) often do not need the definite article to express their qualities. [Greek] echoing. This descriptive present participle modifies the noun [Greek] (brass). The adjective [Greek] (clanging) is onomatopoeic. [Greek] the particle with the present infinitive [Greek] (to remove) introduces an ellipsis. The auxiliary infinitive [Greek] (to be able) should have been added.^[17] Verse 3 [Greek] I may boast. This reading has the best manuscript support P46, [Greek], A, B, 048, 33, 1739 and on external grounds is the preferred Greek text of the three editions of the United Bible Society, and Nestle-Aland (26th ed.). [Greek] I may burn. The future subjunctive, supported by [Greek], is a grammatical monstrosity.^[18] It is the text of the Textus Receptus, Majority Text, and Souter. [Greek] I may burn. The future passive with [Greek] instead of the subjunctive occurs frequently in Koine Greek. With the textual support of C, D, F, G, L, a number of uncials, and some church fathers, this is the adopted Greek text of the British and Foreign Bible Society (2d ed.), Nestle-Aland (25th ed.), Merk, and Vogels. It is also the choice of nearly all translators. On the basis of internal evidence, translators and numerous commentators favor the weaker reading to the stronger reading. This occurs more often in the New Testament and is not at all uncommon.^[19] Unquestionably, the concept love can more easily be explained in terms of what it is not than what it is. The first line of Paul's description is positive, the succeeding lines are negative, and the concluding statement is positive. Paul describes the concept love in a poetically arranged paragraph (vv. 4 6). Love is patient and is kind. Love is not jealous, does not brag, is not arrogant. Love does not behave indecently, does not seek its own things, does not become irritated, does not keep a record of evil, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices in the truth covers all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. In sequence we count two affirmative descriptions, eight negative, and five positive attributes. We now discuss them one by one. b. Portrayal of Love 13:4–7 4. Love is patient and is kind, love is not jealous, love does not brag, is not arrogant. Many translators punctuate the sentence differently by dividing the first clause and making the noun love the subject of the second clause: Love is patient; love is kind and envies no one (NEB). Punctuation in verse 4, however, has no bearing on its meaning. a. Love is patient. The Greek verb which we have translated is patient actually means to be forbearing in respect to actual offenses and injuries one receives from others. It signifies that one is slow in avenging and slow in becoming angry.^[20] It demonstrates a willingness to take someone's unpleasant character traits in stride and to exhibit enduring patience. As God is forbearing with us, so we must tolerate our fellow man (Matt. 18:26, 29). b. [Love] is kind. In the New Testament the verb to be kind appears only here. Clement of Rome wrote an epistle to the Corinthian church in which he quotes a saying of Jesus that has the same Greek verb: As you are kind, so will you be shown kindness. ^[21] The noun kindness occurs repeatedly in Paul's epistles. For instance, after placing love as the first fruit of the Spirit, Paul lists the fruits of patience and kindness (Gal. 5:22). c. Love is not jealous. Jealousy is a vice for which we even have selected a color: green. We know that when a person is green with envy the probability for trouble is real. The Bible is filled with illustrations that portray the disastrous effect jealousy has on personal relationships. To mention but a few: Cain envied Abel and killed him (Gen. 4:3–8); Jacob's sons were jealous of Joseph and sold him into slavery (Gen. 37:11, 28); the high priest and his associates were filled with jealousy and jailed the apostles (Acts 5:17 18); and the Jews were jealous of Paul and Barnabas and expelled them from Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13:45 50). Jealousy can have a positive connotation in the sense of guarding one's honor. For instance, God is a jealous God who commands his people to worship him only (Exod. 20:5; Deut. 5:9). But in the current verse, jealousy is a vice that is the exact opposite of love. Love, however, is free from envy. d. Love does not brag. Paul uses a verb that depicts a person as a braggart or windbag.^[22] Such a person parades his embellished rhetoric to gain recognition. His behavior is marked by egotism, subservience toward superiors, and condescension toward subordinates. A braggart exhibits pride in himself and his accomplishments. But such bragging is devoid of love to God and to one's fellow man, and is a blatant sin. Further, bragging and arrogance go hand in hand. e. [Love] is not arrogant. In an earlier context, Paul told the Corinthians not to go beyond what is written, that no one of you might become arrogant, favoring the one over against the other (4:6). He instructed them to obey the teaching of the Scriptures, for then they would avoid arrogance. Some of the Corinthians were arrogant indeed and, while undermining Paul's authority, they thought that he would not return to Corinth (4:18–19; 5:2). Many of them prided themselves in possessing knowledge. Paul, however, set them straight by saying: Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up (8:1). Without love knowledge degenerates into obnoxious arrogance; with love it is a valuable asset. Arrogance is inflated selfishness, while love is genuine humility. Arrogance is devoid of love and love is devoid of arrogance; indeed both are mutually exclusive. 5. Love does not behave indecently, does not seek its own things, does not become irritated, does not keep a record of wrongs. Paul continues his description of love by presenting still more clauses that depict love from a negative perspective. a. Love does not behave indecently. We perceive the echo of Paul's advice to a man who thinks that he is acting dishonorably toward the virgin to whom he is engaged (7:36). Likewise here, Paul has in mind unbecoming, improper, and inappropriate behavior in any situation. The Greek text indicates that such conduct is not in harmony with the established norm of decency. A person who demonstrates love always strives for proper decorum in relation to others. Whether the people whom he meets occupy a high or a low position in society, whether they are friend or foe, the virtue of love is evident in his conduct. The royal law, Love your neighbor as yourself (James 2:8), demands nothing less than proper behavior that characterizes gentility. Decent behavior does not stop with words and attitude. It also pertains to one's apparel and appearance. Proper dress and a groomed look commend a person who desires to please others, for love extends to all aspects of one's demeanor. b. [Love] does not seek its own things. Translators differ on the meaning of this clause. The one says that love does not insist on its own way (NRSV), another that it never seeks its own advantage (NJB), and still another that it does not claim its rights (Cassirer). Even though their emphases differ, all these versions convey the same message. In shortened form the clause simply connotes, [Love] is not selfish (NCV). Paul himself had shown the Corinthians the example of selfless love when he served them as their pastor for a year and a half. He labored faithfully without any financial support from them (9:18). Repeatedly he instructed them to seek the welfare of others, not their own (10:24, 33). Paul showed the Corinthians that personal advantage pertains not only to financial gain. It also pertains to demanding that others fulfill one's own wishes. By contrast, love flourishes in an atmosphere where two people trust each other and know that they will promote the welfare of the other (Prov. 3:29; Zech. 8:17). c. [Love] does not become irritated. No one is immune to irritation caused by others, not even those who possess poise and grace. After leading the Israelites through the desert for nearly forty years, Moses lost his temper when the people quarreled with him for lack of water (Num. 20:2–11). He was considered to be a very humble person (Num. 12:3); nevertheless, he was unable to control his anger in the face of a grumbling population. Righteous anger is permissible and in certain instances even necessary. Thus, Jesus expressed anger at the money changers and sellers of cattle, sheep, and doves in the temple area of Jerusalem (John 2:13 17). The psalmist, however, warns the reader not to sin in anger (Ps. 4:4). And Paul expands the advice by saying not to let anger spill over into the next day (Eph. 4:26). The Greek verb paroxynein means to stir someone to anger. This was what Paul felt when he was provoked by the idolatry of the people in Athens (Acts 17:16). Similarly, members in the Corinthian community had to endure tensions that resulted in untold provocation.^[23] They had to deal with factions, immorality, lawsuits, friction in or disputes about marriage, and eating food offered to an idol. Disagreements were common and disrupted relationships. Paul himself knew from experience that the break between Barnabas and himself resulted from a sharp disagreement (Acts 15:36 41). He notes that love has no room for irritation. d. [Love] does not keep a record of wrongs. Here is a verbal portrait of a bookkeeper who flips the pages of his ledger to reveal what has been received and spent. He is able to give an exact account and provide an itemized list. Some people are keeping a similar list of wrongs that they have experienced. But love is extremely forgetful when it comes to remembering injury and injustice. When wrongs have been forgiven, they ought to be forgotten and never be mentioned again. 6. [Love] does not rejoice in evil, but rejoices in the truth. The sentence is perfectly balanced with two clauses that feature the same verb but have direct objects that are opposites: wrongdoing and truth (Rom. 1:18; I John 1:6). As love characterizes God, so evil describes the devil. Love takes notice of the evil in this world but never gloats over it. Instead it grieves over the sins that human beings commit against one another. These wrongdoings may appear in numerous forms: intentional and unintentional evils, sins of commission and omission, harsh persecution and mild neglect, and last, national conflicts and personal controversies. On the other hand, one of the characteristics of love is the constant attempt to discover good and praiseworthy words, thoughts, and deeds in a person. Love searches out the truth and rejoices when that truth is triumphing over wrong. Love and truth are inseparable partners residing in God himself. God shares these characteristics with his people. He endowed them with love and truth, which, though tainted by sin, are renewed in Christ Jesus through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. 7. [Love] covers all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Paul concludes this poetic section with a fourfold summary of the positive force of love. Love is always active, never passive, as the verbs make evident: a. Love covers all things. The translations of the first clause in this verse (v. 7) are numerous and varied: love patiently accepts all things (NCV), always supports (TNT), bears all things (NRSV), and never gives up (GNB). The Greek verb in question, stegein, can mean to endure (I Thess. 3:1, 5). But the verb also signifies to cover. Peter writes that love covers a multitude of sins (I Peter 4:8; see Prov. 10:12; 17:9). Love is the virtue that throws a cloak of silence over what is displeasing in another person. ^[24] Hence the idea of covering things with the cloak of love is fitting.^[25] Moreover, the translation covers eliminates redundancy, for the last clause in this verse endures all things. b. Love believes all things. This does not mean that a Christian filled with love lacks the qualities of wisdom and discernment and thus becomes the gullible dupe of every falsifier. On the contrary, love is always wise and discerning.^[26] The clause signifies that a Christian has faith in God, who will work out his divine plans even when all the indicators seem to point in different directions. Filled with love for God and neighbor, a believer trusts that God indeed will make his or her paths straight (Prov. 3:5–6). c. Love hopes all things. With this clause, Paul introduces hope, the second member in the triad of faith, hope, and love (see v. 13). He shows that love gives rise to both faith and hope, so that indeed love is the greatest virtue in this triad. Of these three virtues, hope is often the neglected member overshadowed by faith. Nevertheless, when a tripod loses one of its legs, its fall is inevitable. When a Christian nurtures love and faith but neglects hope, he fails and falters in his spiritual life. Paul frequently writes the verb to hope, which appears in his epistles nineteen times out of a total of thirty-one occurrences in the New Testament.^[27] Hope is patient, waiting for positive results that eventually may be realized. Hope is the converse of pessimism and the essence of healthy optimism. Hope is never focused on oneself but always on God in Christ Jesus. d. Love endures all things. The verb to endure connotes perseverance and tenacity in all circumstances. It means to endure in times of pain, suffering, deprivation, hatred, loss, and loneliness. New Testament writers repeatedly exhort us to persevere: Paul tells us that if we endure with Christ, we will also reign with him (II Tim. 2:12); Peter urges slaves to endure the pain of unjust suffering for the Lord's sake (I Peter 2:19–20); and John on the island Patmos endures exile for the sake of God's Word (Rev. 1:9). The suffering which the apostles and early Christians had to endure for the sake of the gospel is eloquent testimony of fervent love for God. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:4–7 Verse 4 ! [Greek] the definite article preceding abstract nouns is not translated in English.^[28] [Greek] this verb means to conduct oneself like a [Greek].^[29] Verses 5 6 [Greek] its own things. However, the definite article in the neuter plural may denote its own way. [Greek], [Greek] the compound in this text has the same meaning as the simple verb: rejoice. ^[30] Verse 7 [Greek] this adjective occurs four times in succession with four different verbs. It can be translated as all things, but can also serve adverbially and signify always. ^[31] The enduring character of love stands in contrast to the gifts of prophecies, tongues, and knowledge, which are temporary and will eventually disappear. However, perfection will ultimately terminate these imperfect faculties and give human beings complete maturity. When partial knowledge fades, perfect perception and full comprehension take its place. But faith, hope, and love will remain forever, and of these three, love is the greatest. c. Permanence and Perfection of Love 13:8–13 8. Love never fails. But if there are prophecies, they shall be set aside; if there are tongues, they shall cease; if there is knowledge, it shall be set aside. a. Love never fails. This clause supports the message of the preceding verse and forms a concise summary of the previous passage (vv. 4 7). At the same time the clause is introductory to the verses that ensue (vv. 9 13). Notice that the word love occurs at the beginning of this verse and reappears twice in verse 13. Between these two occurrences, Paul describes the temporary character of the spiritual gifts (vv. 8 10) and gives three illustrations to illustrate that which is immature and imperfect a child, a reflection, and knowledge (vv. 11 12). In this segment, Paul stresses immaturity, imperfection, and temporality. Love, however, is endless and never loses its validity. As God's Word never falls to the ground, so his love never fails.^[32] Love is eternal because it is one of God's attributes (I John 4:8, 16). It emanates from God to all his people throughout time and eternity. While everything else in God's creation comes to an end, love continues to be an active and lasting influence. b. But if there are prophecies, they shall be set aside. Whereas love is timeless, predictive prophecies are temporal. Love remains active, but prophecies have only partial significance; as Paul explains in verse 9, We prophesy in part (compare v. 12b). Because of their partial nature, they shall be put aside. Paul says nothing about the content of these prophecies, except that they have passing relevance. The Greek verb katargein that Paul uses four times in verses 8, 10, and 11 is the one which we translate to set aside, or to pass away, to cease. It is related to the adjective argos (Matt. 12:36); the verb means that something is put aside or has become ineffective. Prophecies and knowledge are overtaken by fulfillment and thus are put aside, much as an adult discards things belonging to his childhood days.^[33] We discard prophecies and knowledge, because we prophesy and we know in part (v. 9). c. If there are tongues, they shall cease. Paul only mentions the term tongues but does not explain it. He reserves that discussion for the next chapter (chap. 14; consult the commentary). The verb to cease in the second clause is a synonym and a variant of the verb to be set aside (vv. 8, 10, 11). There is virtually no distinction between the two Greek verbs that describe the termination of both prophecies and tongues. True, the verb with prophecies is in the passive voice (believers are the implied agents), while the verb with tongues is interpreted as the active voice. The difference is only a stylistic change and nothing more.^[34] d. If there is knowledge, it shall be set aside. Paul refrains from elucidating the meaning of the term knowledge at this point. He mentioned the gift of knowledge in the preceding chapter (12:8), where it relates to an affinity between God and his people. We assume that he refers to the Christian's ability to discern, understand, and explain God's revelation. He states that it shall be set aside in the future. 9. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. 10. But when perfection comes, that which is in part shall be set aside. a. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. These two verses form one sentence in the Greek, but this sentence in two parts raises a few questions. What specifically does Paul wish to say? If indeed knowledge is imparted for the benefit of fellow believers and so is prophecy, are these verses a circumlocution for the preaching, teaching, and explaining of God's will revealed in the Scriptures? We know God's truth only partially and proclaim it in segments, so Paul applies the words in part to both verbs to know and to prophesy. He appears to indicate that the activity of knowing God's truth and prophesying it occurs only in fragmentary form. That is, our knowledge and our prophesying are incomplete. Two matters stand out: Paul writes the personal pronoun we and the present tense of the verbs to know and to prophesy. Does the pronoun refer to Paul and his associates or does he include the readers of his epistle? Is the present tense limited to his age or is it still valid today? Paul employs the personal pronoun we only in verses 9 and 12, obviously in a general sense. And the present tense of the verbs does not appear to be limited to his own time. Notice that he contrasts verses 9 and 10 by saying that when perfection comes the partial shall be set aside. If knowledge pertains to our aptitude to comprehend and interpret God's revelation, what is the meaning of prophesying? Persons who filled the office of prophet in Old or New Testament times received divine revelation and proclaimed it to God's people. Prophets in these two eras were instrumental in writing the Scriptures. But in addition to developing and completing the canon, prophets interpreted God's Word to his people. When the books of the Old Testament were complete, the office of prophet ended. Similarly, when the New Testament canon was perfected, the number of prophets dwindled and they eventually disappeared.^[35] We distinguish between revelatory prophecy that terminated when the canon was complete and declaratory prophecy that continues even today.^[36] Scholars dispute this distinction by saying that preaching is essentially a merging of the gifts of teaching and exhortation, prophecy has the primary elements of prediction and revelation. ^[37] This observation is correct but describes only the revelatory aspect of the prophet's task and not his declaratory role. Interpreting Scripture is a prophetic function that has its roots in the postexilic period. At the Jerusalem Council, James reveals the continuity of preaching in Old and New Testament times: For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath (Acts 15:21). The rabbis could not imagine that Israel was ever without local synagogues and schools.^[38] In Old Testament times, there were countless prophets in Israel, so that no city was ever without them. These people were interpreters of the Law and spoke with the authority of the Holy Spirit. They differed from the revelatory prophets only in degree by serving God as his spokesmen. Indeed, when the Old Testament canon was complete, the rabbis in effect took the place of the prophets. In the rabbinic tradition, the prophets of the classical period were no more than interpreters of the Law speaking with the authority of the Spirit and charged to unfold only what the Law contains. ^[39] If in the Old Testament era numerous prophets expounded God's Word, so also in New Testament times prophets interpreted Scripture. From the Book of Acts we know that prophets had a ministry that was not merely restricted to receiving divine revelation. Both Barnabas and Paul, called prophets and teachers (13:1), proclaimed the Word of God (13:5; 14:21). And the prophets Judas and Silas were sent to the churches to encourage and strengthen the believers (15:27, 32). Concludes E. Earle Ellis: The prophet is the Lord's instrument, one among several means by which Jesus leads his church. As one who makes known the meaning of Scripture, exhorts, and strengthens the congregation, and instructs the community by revelations of the future, the Christian prophet manifests in the power of the Spirit the character of his Lord, who is the Prophet of the end-time (3:22). ^[40] Paul's frequent use of the verb to prophesy in his discussion on spiritual gifts points to preaching the Scriptures and encouraging the believers. The New Testament reveals that the work of a prophet consisted of encouraging and strengthening the believers (Acts 15:32; I Cor. 14:3), and predicting immediate events (Acts 11:28; 21:10–11). Hence, the verb to prophesy includes the work of those who preach and teach the message of God's revelation recorded in the Scriptures. As Paul notes, the gifts of knowing and prophesying belong to the time between Christ's ascension and the consummation of this age. A study of the verb to prophesy in the Greek text of I Corinthians shows that this particular verb always appears in the present tense. Whether it is in the indicative or the subjunctive mood, whether it is a participle or an infinitive, the verb conveys present continuous action.^[41] The use of the present tense signifies that Paul has in mind not only revelatory prophecy that came to an end with the close of the canon, but also consistent preaching and teaching of the Word. Among the list of spiritual gifts (12:8–10, 28 30), the ability to preach is absent. This fact is telling, for it implies that the gift of prophecy includes preaching and interpreting God's Word to his people. The Greek verbs euaggelizomai and krussM (I preach) do not appear in chapters 12 14, and only a few times elsewhere in this epistle. Paul writes either verb always with reference to himself and his apostolic helpers (1:17, 23; 9:16–18, 27; 15:1–2, 11 12), but not to others. His use of the verb to prophesy in the chapters on spiritual gifts alludes to those prophets who interpret the revealed Word of God. Even though a first-century prophet exhorted and taught the believers, this does not mean that every Christian functions as a prophet.^[42] Paul himself is asking the rhetorical question that expects a negative answer, Are all prophets? (12:29). In I Corinthians, prophesying embodies both receiving God's revelation and explaining it for the benefit of the believers. When the foundational period of the Scriptures ended, direct revelation ceased and the task of interpreting the Scriptures continued. As in the past, so today; God uses preachers as his mouthpieces to proclaim his will. Swiss theologian Heinrich Bullinger composed an influential confession of faith in 1566. In this confession he clearly delineates the preaching of God's Word by the ministers: We believe that the very Word of God is proclaimed, and received by the faithful; and that neither any other Word of God is to be invented nor is to be expected from heaven: and that now the Word itself which is preached is to be regarded, not the minister that preaches. Further, the confession describes the role of prophets: In former times the prophets were seers, knowing the future; but they also interpreted the Scriptures. Such men are also found still today. ^[43] God of the prophets! Bless the prophets sons; Elijah's mantle o er Elisha cast; Each age its solemn task may claim but once; Make each one nobler, stronger than the last. Anoint them prophets! Make their ears attent To Thy divinest speech, their hearts awake To human need; their lips make eloquent To gird the right and every evil break. Denis Wortman b. But when perfection comes, that which is in part shall be set aside. Paul contrasts the word perfection with the twice-used term in part of the preceding verse (v. 9). When has the time for perfection arrived or when will it come? Three interpretations are given: 1. Paul wrote at a time when the canon of the New Testament was still incomplete. With the clause when perfection comes, he looked forward to God's completed revelation in the Scriptures.^[44] When the last verse of the New Testament was written, the canon was complete and God gave no further revelation. One of the objections to this view is that we cannot expect the Corinthians in a.d. 55 to link perfection to the closing of the canon in the last decade of the first century. 2. The literature of the New Testament usually equates the Greek expression teleion with maturity. Indeed, of its eight occurrences in Paul's epistles, six are translated mature, while the seventh, adjectivally, describes the perfect will of God (Rom. 12:2).^[45] That leaves only the eighth occurrence (13:10), which some scholars see as the completed stage in the maturing process of the believer.^[46] Paul's illustration of a child becoming a man lends credence to interpreting the current text in the context of maturity. However, the conclusion to this illustration rules out the believer's maturity, for no one is able to claim full knowledge (v. 12b). Therefore, we argue that the verse instead points to the consummation. 3. When believers depart from this earthly life, they leave everything behind that is imperfect and incomplete. They enter heaven and experience the joy and peace of a sinless state. But their perfection will not be complete until Christ's return, the resurrection, and the final judgment day.^[47] At the end of cosmic time, the spiritual gifts which believers now possess in part will cease. Their imperfect spiritual gifts on earth will be superseded by their perfect state of knowledge at the consummation.^[48] 11. When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child, reason as a child. But when I became a man, I set aside childish things. The present verse is a comparison of the believer's earthly life and his subsequent perfection in the presence of the Lord. The analogy (v. 11) that Paul uses is that of a child and an adult. Notice that Paul writes the first person singular I, and depicts himself as a child who talks, thinks, and reasons. A child normally has a limited but developing vocabulary with which he or she communicates. The thought patterns of a child are immature and incomplete, and that is exactly what an adult expects from a child. Paul employs the past tense when he refers to his childhood and to his entering the state of manhood. He compares the two periods of his life and then draws the conclusion that the things that interested him as a child had no attraction for him when he became a man. He does not belittle the talking, thinking, and acting of a child these are characteristic of childhood. But when the child enters adulthood, everything takes on proper dimensions. To illustrate, the primary-school building which a child attends appears big and formidable. But when he or she visits these premises in later years, the school appears to have shrunk in size. Similarly, at present we have received God's revelation which is sufficient for our salvation. Yet we realize that our knowledge remains partial until we personally see Christ face to face. At that time we will clearly understand God's design and purpose. 12. For now we see in a mirror an indistinct reflection, but then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. a. For now we see in a mirror an indistinct reflection. Realizing that the analogy conveys his message partially, Paul adds an illustration taken from daily life: looking into a mirror.^[49] He is saying that our present life is similar to persons who see a vague image of themselves in the mirror. We must understand that a mirror in Paul's day was a piece of polished metal that was often laid flat on a table. The reflection in this metal plate cannot be compared with reality mirrors, then, remain imperfect instruments. However, a person is unable to see himself or herself without the use of a mirror. Conversely, the saying to see in a mirror a vague reflection may have been a common metaphor used by philosophers to refer to something that is puzzling.^[50] b. But then we shall see face to face. The city of Corinth was known for its mirrors. There, the expression looking into a mirror was well known to its citizens. Paul contrasts this phrase with the words face to face that appear repeatedly in the Old Testament. God uses the locution face to face when he tells Aaron and Miriam that he addresses Moses personally (Num. 12:8; see Exod. 33:11; Deut. 5:4; 34:10). To other people God often revealed his truth in oracles and prophecies, but to Moses God spoke clearly and directly. Paul conveys the comparison that with our human minds we are unable to grasp the full meaning of God's truth today. But in the future God will grant us the gift of perfect knowledge to understand his revelation. c. Now I know in part, but then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known. The first clause is a repetition of the first part of verse 9, except that currently Paul continues to write about himself in the first person singular (see v. 11). With the two adverbs now and then, he accentuates a stark contrast; the present age is placed over against the coming age. Even though Paul fails to state a specific time reference for the second adverb then, he obviously has in mind life after death. In short, the parallel with verses 9 and 10a is clear. The verb to know fully occurs twice in the last clause of verse 12, once as an active in the future tense and once as a passive in the past tense with an implied agent. These two verbs are linked by the adverb as, which means that as God knows Paul so Paul will know God. This is not to say that Paul will have knowledge that is divine, for Jesus explicitly states that no one knows the Father except the Son (Matt. 11:27). We always remain creatures who are finite, while God is infinite in light that is unapproachable (I Tim. 6:16). The term knowledge signifies that as God knows Paul as his adopted son, so Paul will fully know God as his Father when he sees him face to face. The present verse should be seen in the light of the theme of this passage (vv. 8 12), namely, love. Paul began by saying love never fails. Full knowledge must be understood in the framework of divine love, for to be known by God means the same as to have been chosen by him and loved by him. ^[51] Additional Comments on 13:8–12 A few unanswered questions remain to be discussed. Why does Paul list prophecies, tongues, and knowledge in verse 8, but only knowing and prophesying in verse 9? Have tongues come to an end before the other two gifts cease? Will knowledge and prophecy continue until Jesus returns? First, Paul writes the nouns prophecies and knowledge in verse 8 and the verbs know and prophesy in verse 9. He not only shifts from the noun to the verb but also reverses the sequence of prophecies and knowledge. It is clear that he displays variation in style and word choice. Moreover, he probably failed to repeat the word tongues (v. 9), because he would have broken the cadence: For we know in part and we prophesy in part. An additional remark on tongues would have been superfluous. Next, Paul states that tongues will cease, but he does not reveal when this will be. The New Testament shows that the matter of tongues pertained to the earlier part of the apostolic period (Acts 2, 10, 19), that it was a concern in Corinth (I Cor. 12, 13, 14), and that it disappeared in later years. When in a.d. 96 Clement of Rome wrote his letter (I Clement) to the Corinthian church, he nowhere mentions tongues in all the sixty-five chapters of that letter. The speaking of tongues is discussed in the commentary on the next chapter. Third, knowledge and prophecy will continue until the final consummation. No specific time in history is listed to reveal when the individual gifts will cease.^[52] Throughout this present age, believers will expand their knowledge of God's revelation, but always in part. Likewise, the task of preaching, teaching, and explaining God's Word will extend to the end of time. When the believer's knowledge of God is eventually perfected, both knowledge and prophecy in their imperfect state will be discarded as obsolete and useless. Then in God's presence we shall know fully his revelation. 13. Now remain faith, hope, love, these three; and the greatest of these is love. Paul returns to the word love that was mentioned last in verse 8a but which remained in the background all along. Next to this term he places faith and hope, so that these three virtues form a well-known triad that occurs frequently in the New Testament.^[53] The first word in this verse, now, can mean either for the moment or therefore. The first explanation relates to time and the second to logic. The preceding verse features adverbs of time, now and then, so that the temporal aspect fits the context of verse 13. But in the light of Paul's discourse, he differentiates the triad of faith, hope, and love from the gifts of prophecy, tongues, and knowledge. These gifts are set aside and cease, but the three virtues remain. Hence it is apparent that Paul wrote a logical conclusion to this chapter and not merely a temporal description of the present age. However, the verb in the first clause of verse 13 is difficult to interpret: So faith, hope, love abide. Does the verb signify that this triad of Christian virtues extends from the present into eternity? The Scriptures teach that faith and hope pertain to the present age, but they cease when faith becomes sight (II Cor. 5:7) and hope becomes reality (Rom. 8:24). Saving faith in Jesus Christ comes to an end, but another aspect of faith, namely, trust in him, remains forever; similarly, hope in Jesus Christ is timeless (see 15:19). Faith and hope are intimately linked, so that where there is faith there is hope.^[54] We interpret the three virtues of faith, hope, and love to endure without end, for they are present in both time and eternity.^[55] Accordingly, it is impossible not to recognize a temporal element in the word now of verse 13, yet the logical connotation predominates. Why is love the greatest virtue in the triad? We note that in this entire chapter Paul extols the characteristics of love but makes faith and hope subservient to love (v. 7). We presume that the triad was well known in the early Christian church. Indeed, Paul twice alludes to these three virtues in this chapter (vv. 7, 13). Paul singles out love but sees no need to explain the attributes of the other two virtues. For him, love is basic because of God's eternal love for his Son and through him for his people (Eph. 1:5–6). In both his Gospel and first epistle John echoes the same truth: God is love (John 3:16; I John 4:7 8, 16). In time and eternity the concept love remains foundational in divine-human relationships. Will the saints in glory extend the virtues of faith, hope, and love? Scripture is silent on the life hereafter, which in itself contains a warning not to speculate. Yet we know that God does not set aside the three virtues he has given the individual believer. Love for God and trust in Christ continue to endure in eternity. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 13:8–13 Verse 8 [Greek] the future tense in the middle voice of the verb [Greek] (I stop) has the active meaning. Throughout the New Testament, this verb is always in the middle as a deponent. On the other hand, the passive voice of [Greek] (it shall be set aside) is a true passive. Verses 9 10 [Greek] these two words translated in part are used adverbially twice in verse 9, once in verse 10, and once in verse 12a. They contrast the imperfect with the perfect. Verse 11 Notice that the imperfect tense is used four times in verse 11a to describe the activities of a child. The perfect tense [Greek] (I became) expresses a continued state and is equivalent to the present tense. Verse 12 [Greek] in Greek the noun signifies riddle but adverbially the phrase means indistinctly. ^[56] From this noun, we have derived the word enigma. [Greek] this compound verb consisting of the preposition [Greek] and the verb [Greek] (I know) expresses the perfective idea, that is, I shall know thoroughly. The middle voice is deponent. [Greek] the conjunction is ascensive and is translated even. Verse 13 [Greek] the combination can mean either and now (time) or and so (inference). [Greek] this verb in the singular has a compound subject. The neuter plural [Greek] is an appositive subject that demands a verb in the singular. [Greek] the comparative adjective serves as a superlative: the greatest. ^[57] ! [Greek] the use of the definite article calls the reader's attention to the same noun without the article in verse 13, that is, the aforementioned love. Summary of Chapter 13 In the midst of a discussion on spiritual gifts (chaps. 12 14), Paul devotes an entire chapter to the subject love. He fulfills a promise that he will show his readers the most excellent way (12:31). Love is the most important gift that the Christian must acquire and apply. In conditional sentences, Paul lists the gifts of tongues, prophecy, knowledge, faith, giving money to the poor and a physical body to the flames. But without love these gifts are nothing. Paul describes love positively as patient and kind but then resorts to saying what it is not. It cannot be jealous and does not brag. It is not proud, rude, selfish, or easily provoked; it bears no ill, and takes no delight in wrongdoing. It protects, trusts, hopes, and endures. It never fails. Although love is eternal, the gifts of prophecy, tongues, and knowledge are temporal and are set aside. Paul uses examples drawn from daily life: the words, thoughts, and reasons of a child are compared to an adult; and one's reflective image in a mirror is juxtaposed with seeing each other face to face. Paul concludes with the three virtues of faith, hope, and love; but he extols love as the greatest of these three. 1 This construction is unique and occurs only here in the Greek text of the New Testament. See D. A. Carson, Showing the Spirit: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12 14 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987), p. 58 n. 20. 2 R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul's First and Second Epistle to the Corinthians (1935; Columbus: Wartburg, 1946), p. 545. 3 SB vol. 3, p. 449. See Testament of Job 48 50. LXX Septuagint 4 Consult William Harris, Sounding Brass and Hellenistic Technology, BAR 8 (1982): 38–41; William W. Klein, Noisy Gong or Acoustic Vase? A Note on 1 Corinthians 13.1, NTS 32 (1986): 286–89; Ivor H. Jones, Musical Instruments in the Bible, Part I, BibTr 37 (1986): 101–16. 5 E. Earle Ellis, Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity: New Testament Essays (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), p. 25 n. 15. 6 Willem A. VanGemeren, Interpreting the Prophetic Word (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, Academie Books, 1990), p. 33. 7 Deut. 18:20. See also Jer. 14:14; 23:16, 26; Ezek. 13:2–3, 17. 8 Ellis, Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity, p. 52; John Calvin, The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, Calvin's Commentaries series, trans. John W. Fraser (reprint ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), p. 275. 9 Herman Ridderbos, Paul. An Outline of His Theology, trans. John Richard de Witt (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), p. 451. 10 SB, vol. 1, p. 759. 11 NRSV; SEB tries to combine both readings and has [I could] sacrifice my body, so that I could brag about it. 12 J. K. Elliott, In Favour of [Greek] at I Corinthians 13.3, ZNW 62 (1971): 298. 13 Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), p. 635. NRSV New Revised Standard Version 14 J. H. Petzer, Contextual Evidence in Favour of [Greek] in 1 Corinthians 13:3, NTS 35 (1989): 242–43. 15 A literal translation is If I give my body that I may be burned. Grammatically, the last part should be that it [the body] may be burned. 16 G. Zuntz, The Text of the Epistles: A Disquisition upon the Corpus Paulinum (London: Oxford University Press, 1953), pp. 35–36. Consult Ren� Kieffer, Afin que je sois [Greek] ou bien Afin que j en tire orgueil? (1 Cor. XIII.3), NTS 22 (1975): 95–97. 17 C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek, 2d ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960), p. 144. 18 G. G. Findlay, St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians, in vol. 3 of The Expositor's Greek Testament, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll (1910; reprint ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961), p. 898; Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 3d corrected ed. (London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 564. 19 E.g., refer to II Cor. 4:6, where [Greek] (light shall shine) has the better manuscript evidence, but translators prefer the weaker reading [Greek] (let light shine) because of internal testimony. NEB New English Bible 20 Thayer, p. 387. 21 I Clem. 13:3. 22 Bauer, p. 653. NJB New Jerusalem Bible Cassirer A New Testament Translation, E. Cassirer NCV New Century Version (The Everyday Bible) 23 Heinrich Seesemann, TDNT, vol. 5, p. 857; Hans-Christoph Hahn, NIDNTT, vol. 1, p. 110. TNT The New Translation GNB Good News Bible 24 Bauer, p. 766. Adolf von Harnack, The Apostle Paul's Hymn of Love (1 Cor. XIII) and Its Religious-Historical Significance, Exp 8.3 (1912): 385–408, 481 503. 25 Wilhelm Kasch; TDNT, vol. 7, p. 587; SB;, vol. 3, p. 766. 26 Calvin, I Corinthians, p. 278. 27 Refer to Ernst Hoffmann, NIDNTT, vol. 2, p. 241. 28 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research Nashville: Broadman, 1934 , p. 794. 29 Friedrich Blass and Albert Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans. and rev. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 14. Worship, part 4 (14:1–40) Outline (continued) 14:1–25 5. Prophecy and Tongues 14:1–5 a. Eager Pursuit 14:6–12 b. Fitting Analogies 14:13–17 c. Praying and Praising 14:18–19 d. Thanksgiving 14:20–25 e. Tongues and Scripture 14:26–40 6. Orderly Conduct 14:26–28 a. Edification 14:29 33a b. Prophets and Revelation 14:33b 35 c. Orderliness 14:36–40 d. Conclusion 5. Prophecy and Tongues 14:1–25 14 1 Pursue love, strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. 2 For the one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men [and women] but to God. For no one understands him, but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries. 3 But he who prophesies speaks to men [and women] for their edification, encouragement, and consolation. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself. He who prophesies edifies the church. 5 Now I wish that all of you speak in tongues, especially that you may prophesy. And greater is the one who prophesies than the one who speaks in a tongue, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified. 6 But now, brothers, suppose I come to you speaking in tongues, what shall I profit you unless I speak to you by revelation or by knowledge or by prophecy or by teaching? 7 In the same way, lifeless things, whether flute or harp, make a sound; if they do not produce distinct notes, how will anyone know what is being played on the flute or the harp? 8 For if the trumpet produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle? 9 So also you, unless you utter a distinct message with your tongue, how will anyone know what is being said? For you will be speaking into the air. 10 There are undoubtedly ever so many languages in the world and none without meaning. 11 If then I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to the one who is speaking and the one who is speaking in my presence is a foreigner. 12 So even you, since you are eager for spiritual gifts, seek to excel in those that edify the church. 13 Therefore, let the one who speaks in a tongue pray so that he may interpret. 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. 15 What then is the result? I shall pray with my spirit, and I shall pray also with my mind. I shall sing with my spirit and I shall sing also with my mind. 16 Otherwise if you bless [only] with the spirit, how shall the one who fills up the place of the uninformed say amen to your thanksgiving? Because what you utter he does not understand. 17 For you are giving thanks well enough; however, the other man is not edified. 18 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19 However, in the church I would rather speak five words with my mind so that I may even teach others than ten thousand words in a tongue. 20 Brothers, do not be children in your thinking, but be babes in regard to evil. Be mature in your thinking. 21 In the Law it is written, With strange tongues and with the lips of strangers I will speak to this people, Even so they will not obey me, says the Lord. 22 Therefore, tongues are a sign not for the believers but for the unbelievers. And prophecy is not for unbelievers but for believers. 23 So if the whole church comes together in one place and everyone speaks in tongues, and the novices or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your mind? 24 But if all prophesy and a certain unbeliever or novice enters, he is convicted by all and judged by all. 25 The hidden things of his heart become evident, and thus falling on his face he will worship God, declaring, God is truly among you. The previous chapter served as an interlude that stresses the abiding value of love. This virtue is basic to the well-being of the church and becomes the instrument through which the spiritual gifts listed in 12:8–11, 28 30 function properly and effectively. Indeed the last verse in chapter 12, But eagerly desire the greater gifts (v. 31), and the first verse of chapter 14, Pursue love, strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy, set the stage for Paul's discourse on prophesying and tongue-speaking. Between the apostles and the teachers Paul placed the prophets as second in rank; he lists the gift of tongues last (12:28). But now he lists prophecy first and tongues second (vv. 1 2), and as he begins this chapter so he concludes it. He writes, Eagerly desire to prophesy and do not forbid speaking in tongues (I Thess. 5:20). a. Eager Pursuit 14:1–5 1. Pursue love, strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. The three verbs in this verse are directives: the first two are imperatives (pursue love! strive eagerly!), and the third is an indirect command (that you may prophesy). All of them are in the present tense to indicate that the readers should always seek to obey these injunctions. a. Pursue love. This brief exhortation serves as a fitting conclusion to the entire discourse on love in chapter 13. Paul uses the verb to pursue elsewhere in connection with righteousness, hospitality, and peace (Rom. 9:30; 12:13; 14:19).^[1] The verb denotes that pursuing something must be done with intensity and determination. That is, we must pursue love with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength (Mark 12:30). In short, Paul exhorts the readers to put the message of his letter of love (13) into practice. b. Strive eagerly for the spiritual gifts. The second command is closely tied to the first one, so that the two imperatives in the present tense are nearly synonyms. The connection, however, depends less on these two successive verbs than on the nouns love and spiritual gifts. With the phrase an even more excellent way (12:31), Paul shows that love dominates the greater gifts. Paul now calls these gifts spiritual (see 12:1) and strongly urges the Corinthians to desire them. Perhaps the emphasis falls more on the concept spiritual than on that of gifts. c. Especially that you may prophesy. Among the spiritual gifts is prophecy, which Paul now selects for special attention. Earlier he recorded this gift between those of doing miracles and discerning spirits (12:10; and compare 12:28–29). But in the context of chapter 14, he compares it with the gift of tongues and says that he prefers prophesying to tongue-speaking (v. 5). Should everyone eagerly desire the ability to prophesy? Obtaining this gift depends first on the giver and second on the petitioner. God's sovereignty to give or to withhold does not cancel man's responsibility to pray.^[2] Paul can urge the Corinthians to pray earnestly for the gift of prophecy but he is unable to assure them that God will grant the same gift to everyone (12:11). Whatever gift the Holy Spirit confers on a believer must be employed in love for the benefit of the church. In addition, we observe that without the Holy Spirit a person is unable to prophesy. While God is calling forth today preachers, teachers, and exhorters of his revelation, Paul is urging them to respond to that call. 2. For the one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men [and women] but to God. For no one understands him, but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries. 3. But he who prophesies speaks to men [and women] for their edification, encouragement, and consolation. a. For the one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men [and women] but to God. Of the two gifts, prophecy and tongues, Paul takes the latter first and points out that speaking in a tongue is private worship directed to God (see v. 4). Speaking to God in a tongue is comparable to personal prayer: The one who prays speaks to himself and to God (v. 28) and does so within the context of love. Accordingly, speaking in a tongue without interpretation does not communicate anything meaningful, because the people are unable to understand the words that are spoken. Granted that God knows every spoken word, his people are unable to understand these words and thus are not edified. b. For no one understands him, but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries. Speaking and hearing are the two sides of the proverbial coin. When language is not understood, people cannot communicate. And a failure to communicate results in alienation for the people involved. According to the account in Acts 2:4 11, everyone present in the temple courts was able to understand the messages proclaimed in many known languages by those filled with the Holy Spirit. But in the current text, Paul refrains from writing about interpreters. Instead he notes that the message spoken in a tongue without interpretation is directed not to people but to God. The Greek word pneuma can be translated either spirit or Spirit, and translators are divided on this point. The term refers to either the human spirit or the Holy Spirit. In the setting of this chapter, Paul mentions the human spirit twice more: For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays (v. 14) and The spirits of prophets are subject to the prophets (v. 32). This provides support for the interpretation that Paul has in mind the spirit within man. However, the word spirit, both with and without the capital letter, must be studied in relation to the term mysteries. That term is the content of this last clause in verse 2. We find a parallel in 13:2, where Paul also speaks about mysteries that are closely linked to prophecy. Through the Holy Spirit, God originates both in prophecies and in tongues mysteries that are incomprehensible (I Peter 1:10–12). Nonetheless, the Holy Spirit reveals these mysteries and employs his people to express them.^[3] The Holy Spirit, then, is the agent who works within a person and relates mysteries. Paul and his associates were stewards of God's mysteries (2:7) who had been entrusted with the mysteries God reveals in Christ (4:1). Through the preaching of the gospel, they explained these mysteries to God's people. But in the current passage, Paul says that anyone who utters mysteries in the Spirit does not address himself to the people. Thus he must address himself to God, but he is unable to do so because God is the giver. The way out of this dilemma is to make these mysteries known to the believers and to explain them for their edification. c. But he who prophesies speaks to men [and women] for their edification, encouragement, and consolation. The contrast between tongue-speaking and prophecy is obvious: the tongue-speaker fails to communicate, but the person who prophesies addresses people with a message.^[4] This message has a threefold purpose: it must be instructive, encouraging, and comforting for the believers (I Thess. 2:12). It builds people in their faith, points them to Christ, and teaches them to live holy lives. Moreover, the prophetic message heartens and inspires the hearers to be able to face the burdens of their daily lives. And the spoken words comfort, nurture, and sustain God's people in periods of depression, sorrow, and heartache. According to New Testament usage, the recipients of comfort are those who grieve, who are imprisoned, and who are poverty-stricken widows.^[5] Within the setting of chapters 12 14, this passage provides a helpful description of prophecy. It delineates the functions of the prophetic word without any reference to a predictive role or permanent validity. Doctrinal Considerations in 14:1–3 The emphasis in this segment is on edification and intelligibility. This applies to the person who speaks in a tongue and the one who prophesies. If tongue-speech does not convey a message to the hearers, the church receives no benefit at all. Persons who speak in a tongue and afterward serve as their own interpreters run the risk of being asked why they do not utter intelligible words from the start (but see v. 13).^[6] Paul declares that he himself would rather speak five understandable words to instruct the church than ten thousand and not be understood (v. 19). The Old Testament prophet was an Israelite who was called by God, empowered by the Holy Spirit, and given a divine message which he proclaimed with authority.^[7] He foretold God's revelation, often pertaining to the birth and coming of the Messiah. His message embodied the hope that God would fulfill the promise of the Messiah's coming. The New Testament prophet proclaimed a message that could be either predictive or nonpredictive. For the New Testament prophet, the task of predicting the Messiah's coming had ended and that of proclaiming the gospel had begun. In I Corinthians, Paul stresses nonpredictive prophecy when he indicates that the work of prophesying consists of edifying, encouraging, and consoling the believers. Anyone who prophesies ministers to the church, proclaims God's revelation, interprets the plan of salvation, and applies the truth of the gospel. Prophesying aims to bring God's truth to bear on human lives with a view to their understanding and growth. ^[8] In effect, the work of prophesying and of teaching overlap (see the commentary on 12:28). Both the first-century prophet and the modern-day preacher and teacher aspire to edify the Christian community (vv. 5, 12). The church must constantly test the words of prophecy to see if they are authentic. Thus, Paul charges the Corinthian church with the duty of discerning the gift of prophecy, whether predictive or nonpredictive, and to shield prophecy from abuse and misuse (v. 29). For that reason, he begins and ends this chapter by encouraging his readers to strive eagerly for the gift of prophecy (vv. 1, 39). Specifically, then, the significance of prophecy in the New Testament constitutes at least three different aspects of prophecy exemplified in the four Gospels, Acts, the epistolary literature, and Revelation. First, we mention the predictive feature of prophecies by Agabus, Paul, and John. Agabus predicts a severe famine in the entire Roman world during the reign of Emperor Claudius, and many years later he foretells Paul's arrest (Acts 11:28; 21:11). We ought not to push the exact details of Agabus's words to their logical extreme, because that is not the intention of his predictions. In another instance, aboard ship on the stormy Mediterranean Sea, an angel conveys the message to Paul that the lives of all 276 people will be saved, although the ship itself will be shipwrecked on an island (Acts 27:23 26). Paul reports the news to the sailors, soldiers, passengers, and prisoners. Within a day or two, all of them are able to testify to the fulfillment of Paul's prophecy. Further, in the last book of the New Testament, John is portrayed as a prophet (Rev. 22:9). He writes a prophecy of the things that must soon take place, and thus he both predicts and proclaims God's Word (Rev. 1:3). Next, in the first century some people filled the office of prophet, which had a rank following that of the apostle (Eph. 4:11). The Holy Spirit gave the gift of this particular office to the early church. But when the work of the apostles and the prophets was completed at the close of the church's foundational period (Eph. 2:20), there were no successors to fill these two official positions.^[9] When the Old Testament canon was completed, the prophetic office ceased to exist. Similarly, upon the completion of the New Testament, the number of prophets dwindled and disappeared. First-century prophets had a preaching and teaching ministry to strengthen, encourage, and instruct the people (Acts 13:1; 15:32). They were called prophets and teachers, yet with the difference that a prophet was a teacher but a teacher was not necessarily a prophet. Both the prophet and the teacher sought to edify the church. Last, only when a person becomes the mouthpiece of the Holy Spirit can prophecy be uttered. Jesus told the twelve disciples (apostles) that in case they were arrested and had to speak, the Spirit of the Father would speak through them (Matt. 10:19–20). The apostles did appear before the Sanhedrin, where Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, spoke eloquently about obeying God rather than man (Acts 4:8 12, 19 20; 5:29–32). Stephen, who was not an apostle but a deacon known to be full of the Holy Spirit, also addressed the Sanhedrin (Acts 6:5; 7:2–53). Every believer may ask God to give him or her the right words to speak when the need arises, and God will hear and answer these petitions. Especially preachers and teachers are able to testify that, in response to their prayers, the Holy Spirit has given them the ability to utter fitting words that reflect God's revealed Word. Yet no one should ascribe infallibility to either the speakers as persons or their messages, for they proclaim nothing that can be added to the Scriptures. Such preaching and teaching of Scripture has been and always will continue to be prophecy. Prophecy has been and remains a reality whenever and wherever Bible truth is genuinely preached. ^[10] 4. He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself. He who prophesies edifies the church. a. He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself. Paul already indicated that the person who speaks in a tongue addresses not the people but God (v. 2). Now he states that the tongue-speaker edifies himself. Paul says nothing about interpreters, for he knows that without interpretation the congregation will not benefit from the spoken words. Without an interpreter the message is unintelligible. How does a person who speaks in a tongue edify himself? Some scholars interpret the verb to edify negatively, because they think that a person ought to use his gifts for the benefit of the church. They suppose that Paul resorts to sarcasm in the first part of this verse and marshal at least two arguments to prove their case. First, Paul teaches that the gifts which the Spirit gives are for the common good of the church (12:7); next, in his letter of love he intimates that gifts should never serve self-centered ambition.^[11] However, Paul seems to speak positively here, for he encourages all his readers to speak in tongues (v. 5). He also notes that private prayer to God, even when spoken in a tongue, is a matter between the believer and GodII Cor. 12:2–4; see also v. 2 and the commentary on it . Hence, no one is free to invade another's religious privacy; prayer, whether spoken or unspoken, is a two-way street. God receives praise and thanks from the speaker and at the same time grants him or her comfort and encouragement. In this chapter Paul emphasizes the concept edification, as the repeated use of the verb edify and the noun edification attest.^[12] Elsewhere Paul tells the recipients of his letter: seek to excel in [the work of] edifying the church (v. 12b). b. He who prophesies edifies the church. Paul once more stresses the fact that with respect to either tongues or prophecy, the latter is greatly preferred. The fundamental principle of loving one's neighbor as oneself, clarified in Paul's discourse on love (13), comes to expression in the voice of prophecy. The setting for prophecy is a public worship service where the members have come together for praise, prayer, and instruction. The setting can also be a small gathering of two or three in the name of the Lord (Matt. 18:20). Prophecy must always be spoken against the backdrop of love for one's neighbor. Paul notes that the person who prophesies edifies the church. In this text, he means not the universal church but the local congregation. When someone speaks to God in a tongue, the worshiper follows a vertical path; but when this person prophesies to the members of the church, he or she reaches out to fellow believers on a horizontal level. 5. Now I wish that all of you speak in tongues, especially that you may prophesy. And greater is the one who prophesies than the one who speaks in a tongue, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified. a. Wish. When Paul asserts that he would like to have all the Corinthians speak in tongues, he is not promoting tongue-speaking itself. Rather, he contrasts this sentence with the next one, in which he exalts the gift of prophecy. The allusion is definitely to the words of Moses when he was told that Eldad and Medad were prophesying in the camp of Israel. When Joshua perceived a threat to Moses leadership, he urged Moses to stop the rivals. Then Moses asked: Are you jealous for my sake? I wish that all the Lord's people were prophets and that the Lord would put his Spirit on them! (Num. 11:29). Following in the footsteps of Moses, Paul earnestly desired that the Holy Spirit might come upon God's people in full measure. Paul expresses the wish that all the Corinthians speak in tongues, yet he is not contradicting himself. Earlier he wrote that not everyone receives the same spiritual gifts (12:30). Now he wants the readers to view everything in proper perspective. Of the two gifts, tongue-speaking and prophesying, he deems prophecy the greater of the two. Paul repeats the clause he wrote at the beginning of this chapter, especially that you may prophesy (vv. 1 and 5). The repetition itself indicates that he values prophecy far above tongues, yet he considers both gifts to have edifying features. b. Differences. Although Paul judges the gift of prophecy to be superior in value to the gift of tongues, he moderates his own assessment with the qualifying conjunction unless. Paul writes, unless he interprets, so that the church may be edified. He says that tongue-speaking is acceptable provided the speaker interprets his message. He is not saying that the prophets are the interpreters.^[13] In fact, from the chapter itself we are unable to know who these interpreters are. In an earlier chapter Paul mentioned both the gift of tongues and the gift of interpretation and stated that God grants these gifts to various groups of people (12:28–31). The point Paul is making is that tongue-speaking when interpreted becomes valuable because it serves to edify the members of the church. Paul compares the prophet with the tongue-speaker and considers the prophet to be the greater of these two. But what is the meaning of the adjective greater? The same adjective appears in 12:31, where Paul writes, But eagerly desire the greater gifts. In the last verse in chapter 12, however, the apostle fails to indicate what these greater gifts are. And in the current text, Paul employs the adjective greater only to compare tongue-speaking with prophesying. The text itself appears to communicate nothing more than a mere comparison. With respect to effective communication that is beneficial to God's people, not the prophet but the words of the prophet are greater because they edify the Christian community. And when the congregation is edified, then the basic principle of love prevails. Is Paul placing interpreted tongue-speaking on the same level as the words of a prophet? At Pentecost (Acts 2:1 12), tongue-speaking and preaching the gospel were identical. But in Acts, we nowhere read that interpreters were needed to translate the messages. We assume that in cosmopolitan Corinth, where people had come from many countries, numerous languages were spoken. In addition, some Corinthians spoke in tongues and followed a practice that may have had its origin in the pagan circles from which the Corinthians had come. After their conversion to Christianity, they did not see a difference between their ecstatic experience in pagan circles and the power of the Holy Spirit working within the Christian community.^[14] Paul does not forbid them to speak in tongues (v. 39); he wants them to be receptive to this gift coming from the Holy Spirit and to use it for edifying the church in the context of love. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 14:1–5 Verse 1 [Greek] the definite article points to the same noun in the preceding chapter and verse (13:13). [Greek] this particle introduces the verb to prophesy in the present subjunctive as an indirect command. The particle and verb give content to the present imperative [Greek] (strive eagerly). Verses 2 3 A [Greek] the present active participle of the verb [Greek] (I speak) expresses the activity of speaking but not its content. [Greek] the dative as the indirect object does not differ much from the dative of advantage.^[15] However, in these two verses we prefer the indirect object. [Greek] this adversative particle stresses the difference between the one who speaks in a tongue and the other who prophesies. The verb [Greek] (v. 3) is followed by three nouns edification, encouragement, and comfort that in English syntax call for a preposition and a possessive pronoun to make the sentence complete. Verses 4 5 [Greek] without the definite article, this noun could refer to the universal church. Here, however, it signifies the local congregation. [Greek] this verb controls two verbal objects, the indirect discourse construction [Greek] (that you speak) and the indirect command [Greek] (that you may prophesy). [Greek] a literal translation shows redundancy, but it may be presumed that, without the [Greek], [Greek] would have been virtually a preposition. ^[16] See 15:2. b. Fitting Analogies 14:6–12 After the introductory verses (vv. 1 5) of a discussion on tongues and prophecy, Paul now explains that if tongues are to be valuable assets in the church, they must be beneficial to the entire membership. To make his point, he uses pertinent examples from the areas of music and languages. 6. But now, brothers, suppose I come to you speaking in tongues, what shall I profit you unless I speak to you by revelation or by knowledge or by prophecy or by teaching? a. But now, brothers. Now transmits not a temporal connotation but a logical one: but because things are so. On the basis of practices in the congregation, Paul is challenged to give his own view on tongues. He addresses the Corinthians with the word brothers, which in the parlance of that day included the sisters in the church. With the use of that term, Paul places himself on the same level as any one of them. Because the matter of tongue-speaking is a sensitive issue, Paul has to correct the thinking and the actions of the people at Corinth, and has to do so pastorally and tenderly. b. Suppose I come to you speaking in tongues. For the first part of a conditional sentence Paul writes a clause that expresses supposition or probability. By saying suppose, he invites the readers to give him their reaction should he ever appear in their midst speaking in tongues. He has every intention of paying them a visit (16:5), but not for the purpose of speaking in tongues. Paul writes the expression tongues in the plural instead of the singular. Somewhat later he testifies that he has the ability to speak in tongues more than any of the Corinthians (v. 18), and again he uses the plural. The phrase speaking in tongues is an abbreviated form of the original clause, to speak in other tongues (Acts 2:4).^[17] Paul refuses to address the Corinthians in tongues, for he wants to communicate his message intelligibly (see v. 19). A lack of communication means a lack of love, yet love should be the hallmark of all personal relationships in the church. Moreover, Paul never refers to tongue-speaking without pointing out its inferior value, and comparing it unfavorably with speech that is intelligible. ^[18] c. What shall I profit you unless I speak to you by revelation or by knowledge or by prophecy or by teaching? The answer Paul expects from the Corinthians is negative, unless, of course, he edifies them with his spiritual gifts. The gifts that the Holy Spirit distributes are meant to serve the church so that all the members may benefit from them. Consequently, when Paul eventually arrives in Corinth, he comes to edify the people with intelligible messages from God. Paul delivers his messages in the form of either revelation, knowledge, prophecy, or teaching. We do well to take these four categories as two pairs that reinforce each other: revelation and knowledge prophecy and teaching In the first pair, revelation can be taken to mean, first, the additions to the developing New Testament at that time. Next, it can refer to insights into God's Word revealed to the apostles and prophets (Eph. 3:5; Phil. 3:15). And last, it may signify a divine message to Paul (e.g., going to Jerusalem to see if the gospel he preached was in harmony with that of the apostles [Gal. 2:2; compare also II Cor. 12:1, 7] ). Paul now states that he divulges revelation for the benefit of God's people. Likewise, he shares with the Corinthians knowledge that presumably pertains to God and his Word. The second pair enhances the preceding one. Prophecy runs parallel with revelation, and teaching finds its counterpart in knowledge.^[19] A prophet is unable to prophesy without a revelation and a teacher cannot impart instruction without knowledge. A person who receives revelation and then prophesies is a mouthpiece of the Holy Spirit; and someone who has knowledge and teaches the members of the church experiences the help of the Spirit (12:8). Last of all, revelation and knowledge relate to a person's internal possessions, while prophecy and teaching allude to a person's external activities.^[20] 7. In the same way, lifeless things, whether flute or harp, make a sound; if they do not produce distinct notes, how will anyone know what is being played on the flute or the harp? Paul resorts to analogies to prove that in the church a lack of communication is pointless. He bypasses the animal world and takes an example from the world of music. Paul could have chosen the horn, the trumpet, the cymbals, or the gong. Instead, from the woodwind instruments he selects the flute and from the string instruments the harp. Flute playing was common at both funerals and weddings (Matt. 9:23; 11:17). The psalmists mention the harp a number of times (Pss. 33:2; 137:2; 149:3; 150:3) and leave the impression that this instrument was used in worship services at the temple and elsewhere.^[21] Music must be agreeable to the ear to be acceptable to the audience. The musician must skillfully produce pleasing sounds that disclose the distinct characteristics of the instrument that is played, whether the flute or the harp. Thus a relationship is formed between the player and the listener. But if the player produces a cacophony of sounds, everyone will depart from his presence. 8. For if the trumpet produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle? To ask the question is to answer it. Paul takes an example from warfare in which the bugler on the city wall alerts the citizens to an impending onslaught by an approaching army. The sound of the trumpet is a warning call to every able person to prepare himself for battle. But if the trumpeter plays in such a way that the notes cannot be heard, the citizens continue either their daily labors or their nightly sleep. In either case, inaction spells disaster. With these examples taken from daily life, Paul seeks to show the Corinthians the utter futility of speaking in tongues that do not communicate a spiritual message. Because comprehension is lacking, people turn away from the tongue-speaker and leave the church. 9. So also you, unless you utter a distinct message with your tongue, how will anyone know what is being said? For you will be speaking into the air. a. So also you. This phrase introduces the direct application of the analogy. Paul uses this saying twice (see v. 12) to emphasize his point. The Corinthians emit sounds that listeners are unable to appreciate and understand, much as musical instruments that are incorrectly handled convey nothing significant. b. Unless you utter a distinct message with your tongue. The responsibility to speak clearly and understandably is now laid before the Corinthians. Paul waits for them to conform to his direct reproof. He wants them to speak intelligibly. Note that he uses the adjective distinct as the converse of the adjective indistinct that describes the trumpet (v. 8). Further, the phrase with your tongue can mean either the physical speech organ, a known language, or ecstatic speech. Of these three, the first explanation appears to be the best. First, the noun tongue is rather personal, as it is modified by the pronoun your. Next, the noun serves as the counterpart of the musical instruments mentioned earlier (vv. 7 8). And last, the preposition with signifies instrumentality that applies more to the organ of speech than to a language as a whole. c. How will anyone know what is being said? The wording of this question repeats the wording in verse 7. There the question was asked how anyone would know what is being played, and here of what is being said. The parallels are striking and aptly underline the comparison. The answer to the question that Paul raises is the unequivocal no one. d. For you will be speaking into the air. Here is the reason that no one is able to understand a word of what is said. The speaker faces the wind, so to speak, and loses all the qualities of effective communication. His voice cannot be heard, his words are lost, and his efforts are wasted (compare 9:26). 10. There are undoubtedly ever so many languages in the world and none without meaning. Now Paul is ready to present another analogy; this time he takes it from the area of voices. This covers a broad range that includes the calls and the cries in the animal world. Paul's first analogy relates to inanimate objects in the area of music; his second example pertains to voices of living beings. John Calvin notes that voices include even the barking of a dog, the neighing of a horse, the roar of a lion, and the braying of a donkey. In addition, there are the songs, calls, and chirps of countless birds.^[22] But in this verse Paul distinctly suggests human languages. If he should even try to survey the multitude of languages and dialects in the world of his day, Paul certainly would have to say undoubtedly. To express this thought, he uses a well-known Greek formula ei tychoi (if it should turn out that way). Languages that cannot be understood create formidable barriers in society. A case in point is those countries that cope with multiple languages and ethnic divisions within their borders. These divisions usually stem from the fact that when people do not understand a language spoken to them, they are frustrated. Speech without meaning is a contradiction in terms. ^[23] Thus, in the Corinthian church uninterpreted tongue-speaking created barriers that could result in divisions. 11. If then I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to the one who is speaking and the one who is speaking in my presence is a foreigner. Paul writes a conditional sentence that expresses probability. Although he was able to converse in a number of languages, Paul himself did not understand the Lycaonian dialect of the people in Lystra (Acts 14:11 14). He personally experienced that his presence among people who could not understand his speech made him a foreigner to them and, similarly, his inability to understand the language made the speakers foreigners to him. The Greek word barbaros, from which we derived the term barbarian, denotes any person whose native tongue differs from Greek. Originally the expression conveyed nothing negative and was used to distinguish Greek-speaking people from those who spoke another language. A spoken language must convey meaning; otherwise it is ineffective and impotent. If it fails to communicate, language alienates speakers and hearers. A literal translation of the phrase the meaning of the language is the power of the language. The Greek term dynamis (power) can also be translated force, which makes good sense in this text.^[24] From the setting of this word we may deduce that the force of unintelligible speech creates a sense of fear and insecurity in the heart of the hearer. But in the church fear and insecurity ought to have no place. Where God's love is, there is no fear, because God's perfect love takes away fearI John 4:18, NCV . 12. So even you, since you are eager for spiritual gifts, seek to excel in those that edify the church. a. So even you. At the conclusion of his second analogy, Paul repeats the phrase he used at the end of the first analogy (v. 9). The Christian community, aware of the many nationalities and languages represented in the city of Corinth, should understand the frustration someone experiences by not being able to understand a certain spoken language. This means that Paul's illustration is apt, because it can be applied to the matter of tongue-speaking in the local church. b. Since you are eager for spiritual gifts. After his discussion on prophecy and tongues, Paul has come full circle. At the beginning of this chapter, he urged the readers to strive eagerly for spiritual gifts (v. 1; compare 12:31). Paul actually writes, since you are zealots for spirits (compare 12:10). He uses two nouns in this clause, zealots and spirits, that call for closer scrutiny. First, Paul tells the Corinthians to become zealots, which is a word that has either a negative or a positive connotation. He himself had been a zealot by keeping the traditions of Judaism and, as a consequence, tried to destroy the church (Acts 22:3; Gal. 1:14). But in this verse, the word signifies a positive striving after the gifts of the Spirit (Titus 2:14; I Peter 3:13).^[25] Next, Paul's intent is not to ask the Corinthians to pursue the spirits. Rather, he exhorts them to become recipients of spiritual gifts. Some commentators understand the term spirits to mean various breathings of inspirations in the assemblies of the Church. ^[26] This undoubtedly is true, but we come closer to Paul's intention if we say that the Holy Spirit reveals himself in distributing a multitude of spiritual gifts to his people. As Paul stated earlier: The one and the same Spirit works in all these things, apportioning them to each one individually as he desires (12:11). In brief, the plural noun spirits refers to the Holy Spirit distributing many of his spiritual gifts to his people.^[27] c. Seek to excel in those that edify the church. The emphasis in this clause is on the concept edification, which is one of Paul's important themes in this chapter (see the commentary on v. 4). The Holy Spirit endows his people with spiritual gifts for the purpose of edifying the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul does not specify which gifts the members are to use for their mutual edification. Instead, he exhorts them to excel. The words in those following the imperative seek to excel are not in the Greek text, yet the flow of the sentence suggests that they be included. The message Paul leaves with the Corinthians is that they excel in edifying the church with the spiritual gifts they have received. Doctrinal Considerations in 14:6–12 Any pastor or teacher will attest to the fact that sermons or lessons are soon forgotten but apt illustrations last a lifetime. A wise speaker, however, uses verbal pictures sparingly. He knows that although a presentation saturated with stories may be entertaining, it often lacks substance or coherence. And an incoherent sermon or lecture is unintelligible. Jesus taught numerous parables, but all of them have a ringing message that is instantly understandable to every listener. The analogies Paul presents are taken from daily life and support the main point of the argument. A flute and a harp are meant to convey pleasing melodies, and a bugle ought to emit clear tones to warn the citizenry. These two illustrations enhance, clarify, and strengthen the point Paul tries to make. Paul lays down four principles that the Corinthians had to observe: first, tongues should be interpreted; next, they must edify the members of the church; third, they ought to be intelligible in the context of love (see v. 1a); and last, orderliness must be characteristic of believers at worship (see especially v. 33a). Within the Christian community of Corinth, tongue-speakers were voicing meaningless utterances. Paul shows that when he is with the believers he will bring them some revelation, knowledge, prophecy, and teaching. He informs them that his task is to preach the crucified Christ and his gospel (1:23; 15:1). This gospel is intelligible and edifying only when the Holy Spirit is associated with it. Comments J. Stanley Glen, The Spirit of God signifies an ultimate intelligibility. ^[28] Word and Spirit go together when a preacher or a teacher clearly communicates God's revelation, for the Holy Spirit is inseparably connected with the Word of God. In short, the Spirit explains the word intelligibly. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 14:6–12 Verse 6 [Greek] this preposition followed by the dative case in four nouns is descriptive and actually means consisting of. ^[29] [Greek] the noun can signify either the act of teaching or the body of doctrine (KJV). Scholars favor the first interpretation. Verses 7 8 [Greek] the usual translation is nevertheless, yet. However, the setting of the adverb demands that it introduces a comparison and, therefore, should be translated likewise or just as (Gal. 3:15).^[30] [Greek] literally, the Greek reads how will it be known? In an acceptable English translation, we use the active voice and add the word anyone: how will anyone know? [Greek] a verb in the middle voice and future tense has a direct bearing on the person involved: who will prepare himself? Verse 10 [Greek] the particle introduces a conditional clause with the present optative of the verb [Greek] (I obtain). The clause appears as a formula signifying perhaps or if it should turn out that way (see also 15:37). The formula as a protasis is not followed by a corresponding apodosis. In the current text, it probably tries to limit the impact of the adjective [Greek] (so many) in the sentence: there are probably ever so many different languages. ^[31] Verses 11 12 [Greek] the conditional clause, expressing probability with the verb [Greek] (I understand; see v. 16), is followed by the future tense of the verb to be and [Greek] (the one speaking) as a dative of respect: I shall be, in the eyes of the speaker, a barbarian. ^[32] [Greek] the present imperative is located in the middle of the second part of verse 12. The word order is striking, because the emphasis falls on the church's edification of its members. Paul wants the Corinthians to pursue wholehearted edification. c. Praying and Praising 14:13–17 Throughout this chapter Paul questions the usefulness of religious activity that is devoid of edification. In this section he writes that intelligibility requires the use of the believer's mind in praying, singing, praising, and giving thanks to God. A believer who does not employ the mind and practices tongue-speaking without interpretation utters a series of meaningless syllables. The gift of speaking in tongues can be validated only when there is interpretation (v. 5). 13. Therefore, let the one who speaks in a tongue pray so that he may interpret. The adverb therefore links the present verse to the preceding passage (vv. 6 12) and especially to verse 12. There Paul stresses both edification and intelligibility. On the basis of these principles he exhorts the Corinthians that the person who engages in tongue-speaking should pray for interpretation. The wording of the text is clear, yet its interpretation presents a few questions. Does Paul mean that the same person may possess the gift of speaking in a tongue and afterward, in answer to prayer, receive the gift of interpretation? Can a person possess these two gifts at the same time or is the first one coming to an end when the second one is received? Is Paul telling the tongue-speaker to pray that someone may be found who is able to translate the spoken words? Finding satisfactory answers to these questions is difficult because the wording of the text is compact and measured. However, we should realize the setting that Paul describes is not the privacy of one's house but a public worship service. In this setting, the spoken word must always be lucid and instructive; otherwise the speaker ought to remain silent (vv. 5, 28). The tongue-speaker usually has full control of his senses and thus is able to either begin or stop at any time.^[33] Neither the speaker nor the listener is edified by unintelligible speech. Moreover, tongue-speaking and the interpretation of tongues should be linked, for they are gifts of the Holy Spirit that are meant to edify the church. Further, if a person speaks a foreign language, someone should be found to translate his words.^[34] Paul wants everyone in the audience to receive the benefit of the message. In a subsequent context, he says that someone else should be found to interpret the spoken words (vv. 27 28). If an interpreter is not present, the speaker must remain silent. 14. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful. 15. What then is the result? I shall pray with my spirit, and I shall pray also with my mind. I shall sing with my spirit and I shall sing also with my mind. The first clause is conditional, and in it Paul is not saying that he himself prays in a tongue (compare vv. 18 19). He only states what would happen if he should do so: his spirit would be praying without the use of his mind. Paul himself sets the example by praying in distinct words that everyone is able to understand.^[35] a. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit^[36] prays, but my mind is unfruitful. This text explains the preceding verse (v. 13), being connected by the introductory word for.^[37] That is, Paul uses his personal life as an example for the Corinthians. In an earlier passage, he stated that speaking to God in a tongue is a private matter without benefit to the church (vv. 2 4). In private prayer, only the human spirit communicates with God. But Paul rejects such praying in public worship. He says that the mind is unproductive, because it does not edify others. Although the exact words in Jesus command to love God with heart, soul, and mind (Matt. 22:37) differ from those found in this text (vv. 14 15), the exercise of prayer should employ the same faculties. How do the spirit and the mind function? The human mind, which has the capacity to think and understand, is intimately linked to the human spirit. When the Holy Spirit controls both the spirit and the mind, a person usually flourishes and prospers. But when the human spirit is not governed by the Holy Spirit, the mind remains spiritually idle and the result is sterility.^[38] It is possible for the spirit and the mind to function separately, but Paul intimates that a person's spirit and mind must be equally engaged to be productive.^[39] Accordingly, Calvin makes this pointed observation concerning the Corinthian situation: But if someone endowed with the gift of tongues spoke sensibly and intelligently, it would have been pointless for Paul to say that the spirit prays but the understanding is unfruitful, for the understanding must have been acting together with the spirit. ^[40] b. What then is the result? I shall pray with my spirit, and I shall pray also with my mind. The spirit and the mind must work together in the exercise of prayer to utter intelligible words. They must edify the church members who listen to these words. Thus, Paul urges the Corinthians to pray in a language that is known to everyone present in the worship service. He tells the Corinthians that both the spirit and the mind must pray effectively for the benefit of the church. Indeed, praying calls for an intense concentration of the mind: we praise God, confess our sins, thank him for blessings received, and humbly petition him to fill our needs. To pray without engaging one's mind is useless, says Paul. Hence, speaking in tongues without the use of the mind results in a failure to communicate with those who listen. In verse 14, Paul clearly states that if the mind is unfruitful, there is no intelligibility, no understanding, and no edification.^[41] By writing the future tense in verse 15, Paul expresses his own will and determination, that is, I shall certainly pray with my mind, and I shall indeed sing with my mind. Among the aspects of worship (see v. 26) are both prayer and praise. The first one usually consists of petitions and the second one is the joyful response to blessings received. Seventeenth-century English bishop Thomas Ken gave poetic expression to the thought of praising the Triune God for such blessings in the familiar doxology: Praise God, from whom all blessings flow; Praise Him, all creatures here below; Praise Him above, ye heavenly host; Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. c. I shall sing with my spirit and I shall sing also with my mind. Paul deliberately places praise next to prayer. He reasons that for his spirit to pray effectively, he must use his mind. And when his spirit wants to sing joyful praises to God, Paul must do so with full understanding of the words and music. The Gentiles, says Jesus, engage in meaningless babbling when they pray (Matt. 6:7). He warns his listeners not to be like them but to pray intelligently the words of the Lord's Prayer (Matt. 6:9–13). Similarly, singing ought to be expressed in meaningful words with appropriate melodies. Both the one who prays and the one who sings gain a spiritual blessing when their hearers obtain a celestial benefit. The setting obviously is a worship service during which the members of the congregation participate in prayer and in singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). When one sings praises to God, he or she should pay close attention to the words and the tune, or one's singing may result in nonsense and dissonance. As the spirit and the mind work together in praying, so they ought to be in tandem when singing. 16. Otherwise, if you bless [only] with the spirit, how shall the one who fills up the place of the uninformed say amen to your thanksgiving? Because what you utter he does not understand. a. Result. Otherwise, if you bless [only] with the spirit. Paul is saying that if the Corinthians do not speak and sing intelligibly, they will offend those who are unable to understand the words of the one who is praying. To be precise, in the Greek Paul uses the second person singular you as if he addresses a person who is challenging his discourse. Hence, once more he stresses the consequence of praying and giving thanks with the spirit but not with the mind. The verb to bless should be taken together with the noun thanksgiving, for both terms explain the worshipful acts of praying and singing. In this context, to bless means to offer praise to God in worship. Because of Old Testament teaching, the verb was used in everyday life especially before and after a meal.^[42] Blessing is the act of praising, whereas thanksgiving is the content of that praise. Blessing may be the most worthy part of prayer, but unless it is uttered in understandable language, it is useless to everyone who participates in the worship service. b. Response. How shall the one who fills up the place of the uninformed say amen to your thanksgiving? Paul asks a question that is contextual and can be understood only when we are familiar with worship services in the ancient synagogue and church. At the conclusion of a prayer in a synagogue, it was customary for the audience to utter a responsive amen a Hebrew term that means So let it be! as a sign of wholehearted approval of what was said.^[43] This custom continued in the worship service of the early church, as is evident from Paul's writings and those of church fathers.^[44] The members of the church voiced their consent to a prayer that one of them had uttered. If they had not understood a prayer expressed in a language unknown to them, they would be unable to say amen. The clause one who fills up the place of the uninformed is difficult to interpret. The Greek word idiMts (uninformed) occurs again in verse 23 (there, with the term unbelievers; see the commentary); in the current text we perhaps do well to understand the uninformed to be one who fills the role of disciple, an inquirer whose status is between an unbeliever and a full-fledged Christian (compare also the commentary on vv. 23 24).^[45] Just as the synagogues had God-fearers whose status was between those of unbelievers and proselytes, so in its evangelistic outreach the early church had disciples or inquirers. Moreover, the use of the singular in this verse and the next should not be overlooked. With the singular, Paul uses a Hebrew idiom that actually means to play a part, or fill a role.^[46] In this passage, however, the inability to understand a spoken language, not an inability to understand the Christian faith, is at issue. For that reason, most commentators apply the Greek term idiMts to a person who lacks the gift of either tongues or interpretation yet is a full member of the church. Such a person is untrained and unskilled in understanding the language that is spoken and thus is deprived of spiritual blessings. Paul focuses attention on a particular individual who evidently is a tongue-speaker and another person who is not. c. Reason. Because what you utter he does not understand. The sense of the current passage is that someone who fails to understand the prayer is not edified at all and thus is unable to say amen in confirmation to the spoken words. Paul reproves anyone who speaks in a tongue without the benefit of an interpreter, and thus he implicitly reiterates that tongue-speaking is not a high-ranking gift. 17. For you are giving thanks well enough; however, the other man is not edified. Paul emphatically addresses the individual who speaks in a tongue during a worship service. He says to him, You, in fact, you are giving thanks. He praises this person for thanking God and commends him: well done! Paul does not find fault with this person's expressions of gratitude but rather with the manner in which he expresses them. He reproves him for the total disregard for the other man, because the uninformed person receives no benefit from the prayer that was uttered in a language that was not understood. Paul's last clause in this verse is a ringing rebuke for the tongue-speaker who failed to edify the uninformed person. In short, anyone who gives leadership in a worship service must speak intelligibly to enlighten and instruct his fellow man. Practical Considerations in 14:15–17 The New Testament church emerged from local Jewish synagogues in both Israel and the Dispersion. When Christians founded churches in distinction from Jewish synagogues, the liturgical structure of worship in these two assemblies remained quite similar. Both the Jew and the Christian sang the psalms and hymns recorded in the Old Testament, yet in time the Christians added songs from the New Testament for instance, the songs of Mary, Zechariah, and the angelsLuke 1:46 55; 68 79; 2:14 .^[47] Leaders in both gatherings read portions from the Scriptures (selections from the Law and the Prophets), but in the church they also read the Gospels, Acts, and epistolary literature. The sacred writings were kept safe in the custody of local officials, who encouraged the people to memorize the Scriptures. Worshipers learned by heart the psalms, hymns, songs, and numerous parts of Holy Writ. And at every worship, these parts were repeated and augmented. When the writer of Hebrews wrote his epistle, he quoted primarily from psalms, hymns, and messianic prophecies sung and recited by the people at worship. Thus he was able to communicate clearly and effectively, because everyone in the audience was familiar with the Old Testament quotations and Christ's gospel. In addition, the people confessed their faith in accord with their respective creeds. The Jew recited the Shema (Deut. 6:4) and the Christian declared his faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior (I Cor. 12:3; Phil. 2:6–11; I Tim. 3:16). Preaching in the local churches was in the form of teaching, exhortation, and edification. Apart from administering baptism and celebrating the Lord's Supper, church leaders and members offered congregational prayers to which the people expressed their concurrence with the customary amen. The church as a body not only heard the sermons and prayers but also tested them.^[48] Sermons and prayers were to be understood and had to edify everyone present in the worship service. From the information provided in Acts and the epistles, we are not aware of any church other than the one in Corinth that practiced tongue-speaking in the first century. No other New Testament writer, with the exception of Luke in Acts 2, 10, and 19, mentions tongue-speaking. Furthermore, aside from I Corinthians 12 14, the other New Testament passages that list spiritual gifts refrain from recording the gift of tongues. And in his First Epistle to the Corinthians, Paul discourages the practice of uninterpreted tongue-speaking. Although he urges the Corinthians to strive for the gift of prophecy (vv. 1, 5), he does not exhort them to seek the gift of speaking in tongues. Paul shows that of all the spiritual gifts the one of tongues is the least. He encourages the readers of his epistle to desire the greater gifts (12:31). On the other hand, he does instruct the Corinthians not to forbid anyone from speaking in a tongue (v. 39). Tongue-speaking is a gift of the Holy Spirit. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 14:13–17 Verse 13 [Greek] and so. This combination of the preposition [Greek] (because of) and the neuter singular relative pronoun E (which) summarizes the message of the preceding verse (v. 12). Verse 15 [Greek] the context indicates that the future tense expresses purpose: I shall sing &and I shall sing with my mind. Verses 16 17 [Greek], [Greek] the words translated for otherwise allude to an ellipsis that means if it were different. ^[49] [Greek] &[Greek] these two words signal a sharp contrast between the tongue-speaker and the uninformed worshiper. d. Thanksgiving 14:18–19 18. I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19. However in the church I would rather speak five words with my mind so that I may even teach others than ten thousand words in a tongue. a. Admission At least one translation reads speaking in different kinds of languages (NCV), and indeed Paul was able to converse in Semitic and in Indo-European languages and thus serve Jesus Christ as a cosmopolitan missionary. The Greek text, however, has the plural form tongues, not the singular, and does not say different kinds of tongues (12:10, 28) but tongues. It appears that Paul focuses attention more on speaking in tongues than on his ability to speak different known languages. Paul gives thanks to God^[50] for granting him the ability to speak in tongues more than people in the Corinthian community. His comparison relates not so much to frequency of occurrences as to the quality of his speaking in tongues.^[51] We presume that Paul's admission of possessing this gift most likely came as a surprise to the believers, especially to the tongue-speakers. Although we know that both Peter and Paul at times fell into a trance (Acts 10:10; 22:17; compare II Cor. 12:1–6), we have no record in the New Testament that they ever spoke in tongues. Why does Paul reveal this personal information? I venture to say that he urges the Corinthians to follow his example of using his gifts only for edifying the Christian community. Paul's objective in relating a personal experience is to show that he would not use the gift in public unless others would benefit from it. b. Use. Paul immediately qualifies his statement that he has the ability to speak in tongues. He clearly indicates what his conduct would be in the setting of a worship service: In the church I would rather speak five words with my mind. The words in the church state the location and make clear that Paul is not referring to the privacy of one's home (see the commentary on v. 4). The church is the place where God's people worship, where they praise God communally, and where they hear the gospel. In church, they are edified through the teaching and preaching of God's Word and are subsequently strengthened in their faith. Speaking in uninterpreted tongues does not contribute to the edification of the people and so Paul discourages the practice. The numeral five in the expression five words is idiomatic, much as we use the numeral six in the saying six of the one and half a dozen of the other. In the New Testament, five occurs as a round number with such nouns as sparrows (Luke 12:6), family (Luke 12:52), yoke of oxen (Luke 14:19), brothers (Luke 16:28), talents (Matt. 25:15), and the foolish and wise virgins (Matt. 25:2).^[52] With my mind denotes speaking intelligibly and reminds readers of Paul's earlier insistence on praying and singing with the mind (vv. 14 15). The phrase with my mind also evokes a contrast between speaking words that are intelligible or unintelligible: that is, the difference between prophecy or tongue-speaking.^[53] So that I may even teach others. The Greek verb katcheM (I teach) actually means that a teacher utters words that are directed to listeners who are seated at his feet. In the early church, the verb connoted a question-and-answer method that we associate with the term catechism.^[54] Paul would rather speak five words teaching others the gospel of Christ than ten thousand words that are unintelligible to the Corinthians. In effect, Paul rules out the possibility that he will ever publicly speak in a tongue, especially in a worship service.^[55] He implicitly encourages the Corinthians to adopt his model. If they want to exercise the gift of tongue-speaking, let them do so in private. And if they wish to do so in public, let them use an interpreter (v. 27). Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 14:18–19 [Greek] there are two variants, [Greek] (speaking) and [Greek] (to speak), which appear to be improvements of the verb [Greek] (I speak) but lack the introductory conjunction [Greek] (that). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 15. The Resurrection (15:1–58) Outline (continued) 15:1–58 F. The Resurrection 15:1–8 1. Resurrection of Christ 15:9–11 2. The Apostolicity of Paul 15:12–34 3. Resurrection of the Dead 15:12–19 a. Logical Argument 15:20–28 b. Reality of the Resurrection 15:20–22 1 In Adam and in Christ 15:23–28 2 The Coming of the Lord 15:29–34 c. Arguments Regarding the Resurrection 15:35 44a 4. Parallels to the Resurrection Body 15:35–38 a. Life Out of Death 15:39–41 b. Species, Stars, and Planets 15:42 44a c. Sown and Raised 15:44b 49 5. Physical and Spiritual Bodies 15:50–57 6. Immortality and Victory 15:50–53 a. Transformation 15:54–57 b. Celebration 15:58–7. An Exhortation F. The Resurrection 15:1–58 15 1 Now, brothers, I make known to you the gospel which I preached to you, which you also received, in which you also stand. 2 By this gospel you are also saved if you hold fast to the word that I preached to you; otherwise you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you that which I also received as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom remain until now but some have fallen asleep. 7 After that he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 And last of all he appeared to me also as to one untimely born. 9 For I am the least of the apostles; indeed, I am not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. However, I labored more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. 11 Therefore, whether I or they, thus we proclaim and thus you believed. 12 But if Christ is preached, that he has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain and also your faith is vain. 15 In addition, we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified in contradiction to God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then neither has Christ been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless and you are still in your sins. 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If for this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied. 20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, also by man came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, thus also in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then those who belong to Christ at his coming. 24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father, after he has abolished all rule, and all authority and power. 25 For he must rule until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that will be abolished is death. 27 For he has put all things under his feet. And when [Scripture] says, All things are put under him, it is clear that the one who subjected all things to him is excepted. 28 And when all things are subjected to him, then even the Son himself shall be subjected to the one who subjected all things to him, so that God may be all in all. 29 Otherwise what shall they do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized in their behalf? 30 And what about us? Why are we in danger every hour? 31 I die every day yes, indeed, by my boasting about you, brothers, which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord. 32 If according to man I fought with wild animals in Ephesus, what advantage is it to me? If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. 33 Do not be deceived, Bad company corrupts good habits. 34 Come to your senses as you ought and do not sin, for some have no knowledge of God. I say this to put you to shame. 35 But someone will say, How are the dead raised? And with what kind of body do they come? 36 You fool! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 And when you sow, you sow not the body that shall be but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38 But God gives it a body just as he wished and to each of the seeds its own body. 39 All flesh is not the same, but there is one flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another flesh of birds, and another flesh of fish. 40 And there are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. But the glory of the heavenly bodies is one and the glory of the earthly bodies is another. 41 The glory of the sun is one, the glory of the moon another, and the glory of the stars another. For star differs from star in glory. 42 Thus is also the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. 43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. 44 It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 Thus also it is written, The first man Adam became a living being, the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46 However, the spiritual is not first but the physical then the spiritual. 47 The first man was from the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 48 As was the one made of dust, so also are those that are dust; and as is the one heavenly, so also are those that are heavenly. 49 And as we bear the image of the one made of dust, so we shall bear the image of the one who is heavenly. 50 But this I say, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, neither shall corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Look, I tell you a mystery: we shall not all fall asleep, but all of us shall be changed 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 But when this corruptible has put on incorruption and this mortal has put on immortality, then the saying that is written will be realized: Death is swallowed up in victory. 55 Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting? 56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. 58 So then, my dear brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord. The content of this chapter differs considerably from that of preceding chapters. There Paul wrote about moral, ethical, cultural, and ecclesiastical problems the Corinthians faced. Here he discusses the doctrinal question of the resurrection. This doctrine was a topic of debate in the church of Corinth. The resurrection of Jesus Christ did not become an articulated doctrine at the time (about a.d. 55) Paul wrote his first epistle to the Corinthians. Far from it. When Peter addressed a multitude of devout Jews on the day of Pentecost, presumably a.d. 30, he already proclaimed Jesus resurrection (Acts 2:24 36). Throughout the Book of Acts, we read that the apostles preached the doctrine of the resurrection to both Jews and Gentiles in Jerusalem, Pisidian Antioch, Athens, and Rome. That doctrine was fundamental in apostolic preaching and proved to be basic to the Christian faith (Acts 17:18). And this doctrine has been and still is the centerpiece of Christianity. Paul writes that he received and passed on the teaching of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection (v. 3). He implies that at his conversion near Damascus he knew the reality of the resurrection and thus immediately proclaimed the sonship of Jesus Christ in local synagogues (Acts 9:20). Afterward Paul went to Jerusalem and met both Peter and James. Jesus had appeared to both Peter and John between Easter and ascension (see v. 7). These apostles reinforced Paul's knowledge of Jesus resurrection. In short, the Book of Acts indicates that Paul himself received and passed on the resurrection doctrine after his conversion (see 9:20, 22, 28; 13:30–37; 17:31). He did not wait until he wrote his Corinthian correspondence. If Paul proclaimed the gospel to the Corinthians when he was with them as their pastor, why did they object to accepting the teaching on the resurrection? Christians of Jewish background accepted the Hebrew doctrine that a person is a unit of body and soul; human existence in the form of a disembodied soul is unthinkable, for body and soul belong together. For Jewish people, the teaching of their physical resurrection meant the reintegration of the whole person. ^[1] In the first century, the Sadducees denied the doctrine of a physical resurrection (Mark 12:18 23; Acts 23:8), yet we cannot prove that they influenced the Jews living in the dispersion. Luke reveals that in Jerusalem a large number of priests converted to the Christian faith (Acts 6:7) and had no relations with the minority party of the Sadducees. We assume, therefore, that in Corinth not the Jewish Christians but some of the Gentile Christians denied the resurrection from the dead (v. 12). Some Corinthian believers, influenced by Greek philosophy, failed to see the importance of a bodily resurrection and were denying its reality (v. 12). Paul knew that he had to counter their denial. We suspect that Paul did not receive a request by letter (see 7:1, 25; 8:1; 12:1), but that he probably heard a report about Corinthian views on the resurrection of Christ. We infer from the longest chapter in this epistle that for Paul and for the universal church the doctrine of the resurrection is and remains basic. Paul teaches the doctrine of Christ's resurrection from the Scriptures and numerous eyewitness reports (vv. 1 11). Among the eyewitnesses he mentions the twelve apostles, together with James and himself. He also notes that a group of five hundred believers saw the resurrected Jesus. The testimony of all these witnesses strengthens the readers faith in Christ. 1. Resurrection of Christ 15:1–8 1. Now, brothers, I make known to you the gospel which I preached to you, which you also received, in which you also stand. a. Now, brothers. The word now refers more to time than to logic. After a lengthy discourse on propriety in worship, Paul is ready to consider an entirely different topic, namely, the resurrection of the body. He knows that this topic is controversial in the societal setting of ancient Corinth. For this reason, he addresses the readers as brothers, which term in the parlance of that day includes the sisters of the congregation. Paul wants them to know that he is their brother in the Lord. b. I make known to you the gospel which I preached to you. ^[2] The translation of the main verb to have you know in this sentence does not imply that Paul is proclaiming a gospel that differs from that of the other apostles.^[3] With this verb he conveys that he teaches them once more the gospel which he proclaimed to them in earlier days. Nonetheless, Paul introduces a new element: detailed doctrinal teaching on the physical resurrection of Christ and believers.^[4] In his earlier teachings and writings, Paul had already acquainted the believers with the resurrection doctrine (Acts 13:30; Gal. 1:1). But here in chapter 15, he gives them a comprehensive exposition of this Scriptural doctrine. For this reason he is able to say: I make known to you the gospel. On his conversion near Damascus, Paul received the gospel from the Lord Jesus Christ. But later he spent time with Peter and James in Jerusalem; these disciples undoubtedly told him numerous details of Jesus gospel (Gal. 1:18–19) and equipped him for the ministry. After fourteen years had passed, Paul returned to Jerusalem to confer with the apostles whether his preaching was in harmony with the gospel they proclaimed (Gal. 2:1). The gospel that Paul preached consisted of the revelation of Jesus Christ, who fulfilled the Old Testament Scriptures. Paul acknowledged that he had not followed Jesus from the time of the Lord's baptism to his ascension (Acts 1:21 22). Yet Paul could say that he was a witness of Jesus resurrection and thus he had received authority from Christ to proclaim his gospel. c. Which you also received, in which you also stand. With these words Paul affirms the Corinthians in their faith. But he subtly reminds them of the responsibility to receive and transmit basic doctrines (I Thess. 2:13). He expects them not only to accept his gospel but also to proclaim it in Corinth and elsewhere. As Paul received the gospel from Jesus and passed it on to the Corinthians, so they in turn ought to receive and transmit it to others (see v. 3). He commends them for standing firm in the gospel and accepting it as foundational for their lives. 2. By this gospel you are also saved if you hold fast to the word that I preached to you, otherwise you believed in vain. Closely connected to verse 1, the first part of verse 2 reveals a climax by which, with his threefold use of the word also, Paul emphasizes the gospel: which you also received, in which you also stand, by which you are also saved. The gospel by itself does not save, but God through the gospel saves a person in Christ.^[5] God is the implied agent, as the passive construction reveals. He effects the sinner's salvation. With the present tense of the verb to save, Paul indicates that God's saving act is both effective and progressive (Rom. 5:9). Most translators reverse the order of the Greek sentence by placing the clause if you hold fast before the clause to the word that I preached to you. This is the preferred reading of the text, which then repeats the phrase the gospel which I preached to you in verse 1.^[6] But what does Paul mean with the term word? Perhaps it refers to the content of the gospel he proclaimed. Paul notes that even though the Corinthians are holding fast to Christ's gospel, he wants them to live in accordance with its teachings. If they are merely hearers but not doers of the proclaimed gospel, they have believed in vain. The flow of the verse is that the Corinthians are saved because they have received the gospel; but they must hold on to that gospel and so demonstrate this in their conduct. Otherwise their faith will be hollow and worthless. Faith must exhibit perseverance in the teachings and application of the gospel to be genuinely active. If this is not the case, says Paul, you have believed in vain. Doctrinal Considerations in 15:1–2 Can a Christian receive God's good news, take a stand for Jesus Christ, know that he or she is saved, firmly hold to the teachings of the gospel, and yet believe in vain? Will true believers lose their salvation? Certainly not. Then why does Paul write: Otherwise you believed in vain? Because the Greek is clearer than our translations reveal, a careful look at verb tenses is helpful. Note that Paul employs the present tense for the verbs to be saved and to hold fast. He commends the Corinthians because they received the gospel and took their stand in it. This is foundational, for what has happened in the past is still valid in the present. Next, Paul says that the Corinthians are saved. Elsewhere he teaches that salvation is a process which, on the one hand, the believers must work out fully, and on the other, God accomplishes by working within them (Phil. 2:12–13). This means that the believers are being saved provided they hold on to the gospel and apply it to their lives. God is at work in the process of salvation and holds on to the believers. He wants them to hold on to him by obeying his Word. Paul writes a conditional clause, if you hold fast, but he knows that the activity of holding fast is a fact. Conversely, the people who at one time believed but subsequently refused to hold fast to God's Word provide evidence that they have broken faith with God. Consequently, they consider the gospel to be of no value to them (Heb. 4:2). They are the people who have believed in vain and whose temporal faith is to no avail (Matt. 7:22–23; 25:11–12). Paul's concluding remark, otherwise you believed in vain, affirms that believers who continue to hold on to Christ and obey God's Word are safe and secure. God will never forsake them, for they belong to him. 3. For I delivered to you that which I also received as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4. and that he was buried and that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5. and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. a. Tradition. For I delivered to you that which I also received as of first importance. Paul states that the gospel is not a teaching he himself has formulated. He indicates that he received it from the Lord (Gal. 1:12) and that he considered the apostles teaching an authoritative tradition that originated in Jesus Christ. Upon receiving this teaching, he was obliged to pass it on to both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 20:21) and at the same time to serve as its guardian (compare 11:23). The terms to receive and to deliver are technical terms that appear in both Jewish and Greek contexts. The gospel that Paul received from Jesus and the apostles appears to be formulated here as a primitive creed used in the confessions of faith by the early Christians and in the preaching and teaching of their churches.^[7] This summary is founded on the Scriptures. Paul in three verses twice uses the phrase according to the Scriptures to demonstrate that the gospel is rooted in and emerges from the Old Testament. For him, the elementary teachings of this gospel are these four redemptive facts: 1. that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures; 2. that he was buried; 3. that he was raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures; and 4. that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. These facts are the most important ones in Paul's gospel presentation. In verse 3 the translation at first instead of of first importance is possible. The passage, however, stresses not that Paul was the first person to proclaim the gospel in Corinth. Rather, these four facts epitomize the intrinsic significance of the gospel. b. Death. That Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures. Note that Paul uses the name Christ and not Jesus to point to the official role of the Messiah. With his reference to the Old Testament, Paul points to the prophecy of Isaiah. The prophet relates that the Messiah, God's anointed one, the suffering servant, was pierced for our transgressions and crushed for our iniquities. Isaiah further writes that all our sins were put on the servant, and that he died for the sins of his people (Isa. 53:5–6, 8 9; see also Ps. 22:16; I Peter 3:18). Jesus fulfilled the messianic prophecies of (Psalms 22and Isaiah 53. When he instituted the Lord's Supper, Jesus gave verbal expression to the doctrine that the Messiah died for the sins of his people. He said, This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sinsMatt. 26:28). The concept for our sins occurs elsewhere in Paul's epistles (Rom. 5:8; 8:32; Gal. 1:4; ^[8] Eph. 5:2; Titus 2:14). In these passages, the Greek preposition hyper (for) expresses the idea of Jesus being both our representative and our substitute.^[9] In short, Christ not only represents us before God but also takes our place by dying for our sins on the cross. The clause Christ died for our sins is the doctrinal summary of the atonement. As our substitute, Christ died to appease God and meet the demands of the law (Rom. 3:25–26; 5:9–19).^[10] As our advocate, he effected reconciliation and made us righteous before God (II Cor. 5:21; I John 2:1 2). As our mediator, he established a new covenant and accepted us as partners (Luke 22:20; I Cor. 11:25). And as our Savior, he grants us eternal life through faith in him (John 3:16). When Jesus met the disciples in the upper room on Easter Sunday, he told them that everything had to be fulfilled that was written in the Scriptures about him (Luke 24:45 46). The Old Testament declares that Christ will suffer (Ps. 22; Isa. 53), and that he will rise from the dead on the third day (Ps. 16:9–11; Isa. 53:10–11). c. Burial. And that he was buried. Apart from the Gospel writers, only Paul mentions Jesus burial. He notes that Jesus was taken down from the tree and laid in a tomb (Acts 13:29). He identifies the believer's baptism with Christ's burial (Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12). And in the current text he mentions interment as the consequence of death and as the harbinger of the resurrection. Jesus burial points backward to the reality of the death and forward to the character of the resurrection. ^[11] d. Resurrection. And that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures. Translations fail to do justice to the difference in verb tenses of the Greek text in verses 3 and 4. The Greek uses the past tense to describe a single action in the past for Jesus death and burial. But for the verb to be raised the Greek has the perfect tense to indicate an action that occurred in the past but has lasting relevance for the present (II Tim. 2:8). That is, Jesus was raised from the dead and continues his life in the resurrected state. The passive voice denotes the implied agent, namely, God. In their speeches and sermons, both Peter and Paul present the active voice with respect to Jesus resurrection and say that God raised Jesus from the dead (Acts 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30, 37). To both the Jews and the Gentiles, the apostles proclaimed Jesus death and resurrection as the heart of the good news. Therefore, with respect to the most important facts of the gospel, Michael Green observes, It is the death and resurrection of Jesus, the empty cross, which lies at the heart of the apostolic Christianity and is God's good news for the world. ^[12] The evidence of the empty tomb emphasizes that Jesus resurrection was physical. The four writers of the Gospels explicitly describe the emptiness of the tomb by relating the appearance of the angels and the presence of the graveclothes (Matt. 28:5–6; Mark 16:5 6; Luke 24:3 4; John 20:6 8). After his resurrection, Jesus physical body could be touched (John 20:27), could be recognized with difficulty by the disciples (John 20:14 15; 21:4, 7), could come and go through locked doors (John 20:19, 26), and could consume a piece of broiled fish (Luke 24:42 43). On occasion, Jesus ate and drank with his disciples (Acts 1:4; 10:41). Yet his body was also transformed to transcend time and space. We simply do not have answers for questions about Jesus resurrected body.^[13] The Scriptures do not reveal this information. Jesus was raised from the dead on the third day, writes Paul, according to the Scriptures. Indeed, Jesus himself taught that he would be killed and on the third day be raised (Matt. 16:21). But do the Old Testament Scriptures teach his resurrection on the third day? The answer is twofold. There is no specific reference in any one text; yet, a combination of passages provides sufficient evidence of the concept of the resurrection. For example, we read that God will restore Israel on the third day (Hos. 6:2); Jonah was inside the fish for three days and three nights (Jonah 1:17; Matt. 12:40). And Isaiah prophesies the resurrection of the Messiah (Isa. 53:10–12). Gordon D. Fee concludes, The O[ld] T[estament] as a whole bears witness to the resurrection on the third day.& An early tradition saw the combined evidence of Ps[alms] 16:8–11 and 110:1 as bearing witness to the Messiah's resurrection (Acts 2:25 36). ^[14] The early Christians considered Easter Sunday as the third day following the death of Jesus on Good Friday. On that Sunday, the first day of the week, Jesus appeared to the women, Mary Magdalene, the two men of Emmaus, Peter, and the ten disciples in the upper room.^[15] e. Appearances. And that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve. In this verse and the next three, Paul enumerates Jesus postresurrection appearances. He has in mind the physical presence of the resurrected Lord, not visions of the kind Paul experienced when Jesus spoke to him in Corinth and Jerusalem (Acts 18:9 10; 23:11). Yet Paul lists himself as one to whom Jesus appeared on the way to Damascus. This appearance differed definitively from those of the pre-ascension period. What does Paul mean with the Greek word ophth (he appeared, he was seen)? During the forty-day period between Easter and ascension, the witnesses saw the Lord but did not always recognize him. There was a certain ambiguity in the appearances ^[16] that, however, did not diminish the joy of those who testified to the fact that Jesus was raised from the dead. The first person Paul mentions is Peter, whom he usually calls Cephas (1:12). This is the Aramaic name for Peter (John 1:42).^[17] Did Peter see Jesus? Yes, because on Easter Sunday, the disciples in the upper room told the men of Emmaus, The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon (Luke 24:34). That morning, the angel instructed the women to tell the disciples and Peter to go to Galilee, where Jesus would meet them (Mark 16:7). There Jesus forgave Peter and reinstated him (John 21:15 19). The Book of Acts reveals that immediately after Jesus ascension Peter became the undisputed leader in the Jerusalem church. For this reason, he is mentioned first in the list of Jesus appearances, even though the women preceded him as witnesses of the resurrection. Next, Paul mentions that Jesus appeared to the Twelve, which in the four Gospels and Acts is the common term for the disciples. True, Judas had committed suicide and Thomas refused to meet with his colleagues that first Sunday evening, but these details are not relevant here because Paul uses the term collectively. These men served as Jesus official representatives and witnesses of his resurrection. Perhaps this is the reason that references to the appearances to the women and the two men of Emmaus are omitted. 6. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom remain until now but some have fallen asleep. Because of a change in the structure of the passage, we conclude that the creedal formula ends in verse 5, perhaps after the verb he appeared.^[18] We are confident that verse 6 was not part of the primitive creed. Nothing in the Gospels or Acts corroborates the figure of 500 brothers. The nearest number Isaiah 120 persons who met to appoint a successor to Judas Iscariot (Acts 1:15). Whether a large group of people witnesses chosen by God (Acts 10:41) was present in Galilee cannot be verified.^[19] The point of this passage is not the location of the appearance but the number of witnesses who could testify to the resurrection. In a Jewish court of law, the presence of two or three witnesses was mandatory to prove the veracity of an event. By appearing to five hundred believers at one time, Jesus provided overwhelming proof of being alive. Paul adds that most of the five hundred were still living at the time he writes the epistle. He implies that should some people doubt the fact of Jesus triumph over the grave, they can consult any of the believers who saw the resurrected Lord. Where these witnesses lived cannot be ascertained but we understand that both Paul and the Corinthians were acquainted with many of them. Paul seems to indicate that skeptics could go to the witnesses and ask them to give their testimony. The phrase some have fallen asleep is a euphemism that the early Christians had adopted as a reference to death. They viewed the natural death of a believer as a sleep from which a person awakes. Thus they used the phrase as an analogy to the resurrection. 7. After that he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8. And last of all he appeared to me also as to one untimely born. a. After that he appeared to James. We know that half a year before Jesus death his brothers, including James, still did not believe in him (John 7:5). But immediately after Jesus ascension, his brothers believed and were with the apostles in the upper room (Acts 1:13 14; compare also I Cor. 9:5). Paul's allusion to James in the context of appearances is possibly due to the prominent position James filled in the early Christian community.^[20] James listened to Paul when the former persecutor returned to Jerusalem as a believer (Gal. 1:19). James filled Peter's place when the apostle fled Jerusalem after his release from prison (Acts 12:17). Paul considered James, Peter, and John the three pillars of the church (Gal. 2:9); and at the conclusion of his third missionary tour, Paul reported to James and the elders in Jerusalem (Acts 21:18 19). As Paul mentions Peter so he names James, probably because of all the believers these two were known for their leadership abilities. b. Then to all the apostles. This clause seems merely to repeat verse 5, which mentions the Twelve, or to conflict with it. Understanding the clause depends on understanding the term apostle. In the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the word apostles signifies the Twelve (Matt. 10:2; Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13). It had that connotation after Judas Iscariot committed suicide and before Matthias was appointed. By contrast, in Acts Luke uses the term to refer to the Twelve, the initial proclaimers and the guardians of the gospel, and to describe Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:14). The church of Antioch commissioned Paul and Barnabas to take the gospel to the Gentiles; hence, these two men are called apostles, in the sense of preachers of the gospel. Andronicus and Junias, according to Paul, were outstanding among the apostles (Rom. 16:7). In the earliest, most specific usage, an apostle was both a witness of Jesus resurrection and appointed by Jesus himself (Acts 1:21 26). We have no information that the persons whom Luke and Paul mention met these qualifications. Accordingly, we would be incorrect in applying Luke's and Paul's usage in this text. We conclude, then, that the expression all the apostles is synonymous with the Twelve (v. 5). The mention of the Twelve refers to Jesus Easter appearance and that of a week later (John 20:19, 26). The reference to the apostles is to Jesus ascension appearance (Acts 1:6 11).^[21] The references together highlight the first and the last days of Jesus physical appearances. c. And last of all he appeared to me also. What is the meaning of the expression last of all? It means that Paul is last in line of all the appearances. He takes last place because of his sudden conversion experience that occurred years after Jesus ascension. Paul alludes to his conversion experience on the way to Damascus and calls the encounter with Jesus a vision from heaven (Acts 26:19). This encounter was not a hallucination but a genuine revelation of the resurrected Lord. Notice that Paul uses the verb he appeared once more, but now specifically for himself. He wants to indicate that he also belongs to that special group of people who saw Jesus. Paul never followed the Lord from the day of Jesus baptism to that of his ascension. Nonetheless he saw Jesus in a vision as clearly as the apostles did during the forty-day period between Easter and ascension. He definitely is the last apostle whom Jesus called.^[22] For that reason Paul could write, to me also. d. As to one untimely born. The choice of words is unusual, for the Greek term to ektrMma occurs only once in the New Testament.^[23] Negatively, it can mean an untimely stillbirth or an aborted fetus. But note that Paul applies the term to himself as an illustration; he writes the word as, which is similar to for example. I do not think that the example has anything to do, with physical looks or spiritual immaturity. Positively, therefore, the immediate context speaks of apostleship. God had appointed Paul from his mother's womb to be an apostle (Gal. 1:15), but the appointment was frustrated when Paul persecuted the church^[24] and was delayed until the time of his conversion. Paul had neither followed the Lord nor seen the empty tomb on Easter Sunday. Yet Paul could claim that he had personally seen the risen Christ (9:1), who appointed him to be an apostle to the Gentiles.^[25] Jesus discounted a period of discipleship for Paul, overlooked Paul's record as persecutor of the church, and made his conversion the starting point of his apostleship. His appointment is abnormal, but so is Christ's appearance to Paul near Damascus. We do not have to assume that Paul purposely took a contemptuous term that his opponents may have used to describe him. Rather, the context applies the words one untimely born to Paul to effect a contrast between himself and the others to whom Jesus appeared.^[26] The term that Paul uses to describe himself is unrefined, but in the succeeding context he explains the intent. Doctrinal Considerations in 15:3–8 A few lines full of theological significance summarize the truth of Christ's gospel. They relate to Jesus death, burial, and resurrection and as such present the good news of salvation. Agnostics and atheists have no problem accepting Jesus death and burial; they see the inevitability of death. Because Jesus was condemned in a Roman court, his death on a wooden cross was the unavoidable penalty a misguided revolutionary had to pay. To say that Jesus rose from the grave and thus conquered death is preposterous to the modern mind. No one has ever returned from the grave, so to unbelievers the story of Jesus resurrection must be a fabrication of his distraught followers who thought that he was still with them. Yet the doctrinal truth of the resurrection is the teaching of the four Gospels, the Book of Acts, the Epistles, and the Revelation. Paul states unequivocally that Jesus was raised on the third day according to the Old Testament Scriptures. For him, the resurrection is an undeniable truth, which entails that everyone who believes in Christ will also be raised from the dead. Christ conquered death not for himself alone but for his people. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 15:2–8 Verse 2 [Greek] here is an abbreviated sentence structure that should read as [Greek], [Greek]. The pronoun [Greek] takes the place of [Greek] (whatever).^[27] The sentence reads: If you hold to this word, which I proclaim to you. [Greek] this particle is part of the protasis of a conditional sentence and indicates that the clause expresses a fact. [Greek] the combination of these three words reveals redundancy; it serves as an idiomatic expression that signifies unless, except. [Greek] here is a combination of adverb and verb in the aorist tense. The adverb is used as a dative of manner and conveys the sense without due consideration, in a haphazard manner. ^[28] The aorist tense denotes action in the past. Verses 3 4 [Greek] the adjective in the plural can be either masculine or neuter. Of the two, the neuter is preferred: among the first things, that is, the things of primary importance. [Greek] where this preposition appears in the New Testament context of suffering and dying, it usually refers to Christ's death. Christ died for, that is, in behalf of, his people. Compare John 11:50 52. [Greek] the perfect passive tense of the verb [Greek] (I raise) expresses an action that occurred in the past but has abiding value for the present. This perfect tense is unique because it follows the single occurrence of the past tense in the two verbs he died and he was buried. Verse 5 [Greek] the Twelve is a word that applies to the immediate circle of Jesus disciples. The term eleven applies appropriately to the group of disciples between Easter and ascension (Matt. 28:16; Mark 16:14; Luke 24:9, 33; Acts 1:26). Verses 6 7 [Greek] the aorist passive of the verb [Greek] (I fall asleep) connotes the falling asleep of some believers at various times. The verb is used euphemistically to describe death. [Greek] because this adjective follows the noun apostles, not the adjective but the noun receives the emphasis. Paul is saying, to the apostles, indeed to all the apostles. In a sense, James cannot be included because he never left Jerusalem and thus he was not a missionary sent out to proclaim the gospel.^[29] Verse 8 [Greek] the first word actually means so to speak. It is a combination of [Greek] (as) and [Greek] (if): as it were. The noun [Greek] (untimely birth) derives from the verb [Greek] (I cause an abortion). It refers to an abnormality in life that Paul describes with the definite article that is, he refers to himself. Of all the apostles (Rev. 1:12–20), he had the privilege of seeing the Lord after the ascension.^[30] 2. The Apostolicity of Paul 15:9–11 The word choice in the preceding verse (v. 8) forces Paul to present a fuller explanation of his apostolate. The churches questioned whether Paul was a legitimate apostle. They knew that he had never followed Jesus, but instead had tried to destroy the church through severe persecutions. Yet Jesus called him to proclaim the gospel to both the Jews and the Gentiles. 9. For I am the least of the apostles; indeed, I am not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. The word for prefaces an explanation of the imagery Paul presented: the untimely birth of his apostleship. He is purposely humble and knows that he did not belong to the circle of the Twelve, who met the requirements for apostolicity (Acts 1:21 22). Barnabas introduced him to the apostles and told them that Jesus had called him on the way to Damascus and that Paul had fearlessly preached in the name of Jesus (Acts 9:27). The apostles had accepted Paul, but he remained subordinate to them. After fourteen years, he returned to Jerusalem to see if the gospel he preached was in harmony with the one the apostles proclaimed (Gal. 2:1–2). The apostles recognized his special ministry to the Gentiles and later placed Paul on a footing equal with them (Gal. 2:8–9). Although Paul knew the Scriptures and theology (Acts 5:34 39; 22:3), he lacked the teaching that the apostles had received from Jesus (Acts 4:13). Appropriately, he presents himself as the least among the apostles (Eph. 3:8; I Tim. 1:15). In addition, Paul asserts that he is not worthy of the name apostle and states the reason: he persecuted the church of God. Near Damascus, Jesus asked him, Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? (Acts 9:4; 22:7; 26:14). From that moment, Paul knew that he had persecuted Jesus himself. For him, the realization of this crime could not be erased from his memory. He refers repeatedly to his life as a persecutor (Acts 26:9; Gal. 1:13; I Tim. 1:12–14). The expression church of God (10:32) should not be limited to the Jerusalem church where Paul vented his rage against the Christians. He sought to destroy the churches in Judea and asked for letters from the high priest to do the same in Damascus (Acts 9:2; 22:5) and other foreign cities (Acts 26:11). The expression, then, denotes the universal church of that day. 10. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. However, I labored more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. a. But by the grace of God I am what I am. When Paul reviews the course of his life, from his student days in Jerusalem to his actions as persecutor of the church and as apostle to the Gentiles, he exclaims that by God's grace he is what he is. The grace of God is power that flows from God to the apostles.^[31] For instance, Paul and Barnabas experience divine grace when they travel to Cyprus and Asia Minor on their first missionary journey. They are supported in prayer by their commissioning church in Antioch that commends them to the grace of God (Acts 14:26). God's grace keeps them safe during their travels so that they are able to return to Antioch and report what God has done through them. Paul sees the grace of God operative throughout his life from birth (Gal. 1:15) to his career as an apostle of Jesus Christ (Eph. 3:7–8). Freely he acknowledges that his accomplishments are due to God's grace. Note that he writes I am what I am, not I am who I am. Paul is interested in looking at himself not as a person but as an instrument in God's hand to further the cause of the gospel (Acts 21:19). b. And his grace toward me has not been in vain. Paul utters this statement of thanksgiving to God because God has extended grace to him. Three times in this verse Paul writes the term grace; he lives, travels, and works by God's grace. We are not aware of the work the other apostles performed, because the New Testament fails to reveal this information. But if we consider the distances Paul traveled to proclaim the gospel, the churches he was able to establish, and the care he expended on them, we stand amazed at the yeoman's work he performed in the relatively short span of two decades. The Greek expression ken, which I have translated in vain signifies without effect, that is, without reaching its goal. ^[32] By relating that God's grace to him was not in vain, Paul is stating positively that it bore extraordinary results. He is specific in this particular verse when he twice declares that God's grace was directed to him his grace toward me and the grace of God was with me. Paul knew that God blessed his labors. c. However, I labored more than all of them. The adversative however goes back to Paul's remark about being the least of the apostles. His record of suffering for the sake of Christ is impressive by anyone's standards.^[33] While in Ephesus, he toiled as a tentmaker to support himself financially (Acts 20:34). In the rented hall of Tyrannus he daily instructed his students (Acts 19:9). And the remaining time was spent in preaching and teaching publicly from house to house (Acts 20:20). Moreover, he wrote letters to the members of the church in Corinth and visited them, too (II Cor. 2:1–4). We have a collection of thirteen epistles of Paul, so that in respect to literary activities Paul excels the other letter writers of the New Testament. Paul had received the training to write letters and he fearlessly preached the gospel to Jew and Gentile. Indeed he was God's chosen instrument to do this work. Yet the clause I labored more than all of [the apostles] should not be understood to mean the combined labors of the Twelve, but the work of any one of these apostles. d. Yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. Let no one think that Paul ever credits himself for the work he has performed. He shuns self-glorification but expresses gratitude to God; he glories in his Lord and Savior. Being far from idle in his calling, Paul presents the results of his labors to God. He humbly acknowledges that he has been able to accomplish all his achievements only by God's grace. 11. Therefore, whether I or they, thus we proclaim and thus you believed. The adverb therefore not only summarizes the preceding discourse but also forms a link with verse 8. The intervening verses (vv. 9 10) are a short digression in which Paul explains his status with respect to the apostles. Paul stresses the power of God's grace in his life and ministry, not for the purpose of elevating himself above the other apostles but to thank God for his mercy and love. With this last sentence, Paul indicates that he is not interested in persons but in the cause and effect of the gospel message. Paul desires nothing less than that he, the apostles, or anyone else proclaims the good news of Jesus death, burial, and resurrection. The basis of Christianity is the doctrine of the resurrection; without it the Christian religion ceases to exist. Paul and his associates preached the gospel in Corinth with the result that the people there believed in Jesus Christ. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 15:9–10 [Greek] this is a true superlative of the adjective [Greek] (small, little) and means the least. [Greek] the relative pronoun in the masculine nominative case obstructs smooth English in a literal translation. Modern versions render it indeed. [Greek] and [Greek] notice the differing prepositions that Paul uses: [Greek] denotes toward, into, and in me; [Greek] means together with me. The first refers to Paul's conversion experience, the second to God's grace that surrounds him in his ministry. E the deliberate choice of the neuter relative pronoun instead of the masculine [Greek] stresses the thing, not the person: what I am instead of who I am. 3. Resurrection of the Dead 15:12–34 From his summary of the gospel (vv. 3 5), Paul selects the doctrine of the resurrection for further discussion.^[34] Positively, he affirms that Christ has been raised from the dead and follows this up with a query why some people deny this historical and redemptive fact. Negatively, he examines the results of repudiating this doctrine: that the apostles preaching and the believers faith are empty and powerless. Without proclaiming the doctrine of the resurrection, preachers utter falsehoods, people remain in sin, believers who have died in Christ are lost, and Christians are to be pitied. Hence, when opponents to the Christian faith attack and undermine the tenet of the resurrection, they seek to destroy Christianity's foundation. Should they succeed in their assault, the church founded on Jesus Christ would disintegrate and eventually cease to exist. In short, the resurrection doctrine is basic to the Christian faith. a. Logical Argument 15:12–19 12. But if Christ is preached, that he has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? a. But if Christ is preached, that he has been raised from the dead. The first part of this conditional sentence states a fact. That is, Christ's gospel is being proclaimed in Corinth and elsewhere. The word Christ obviously represents the gospel that originated with him and that his followers continue to proclaim. To prove the veracity of Jesus resurrection (vv. 5 8), Paul has listed Jesus numerous appearances after he rose from the dead and before he ascended to heaven. The perfect tense in Greek of the verb to raise indicates that Christ's resurrection, which happened in the past, has lasting significance for the present. By conquering death Jesus Christ never has to face death again. The phrase from the dead means that Jesus has been raised by God the Father from death. To be precise, the Greek text has the plural word dead, which must be understood in a general sense. If then God raised Jesus from the dead, he will also raise believers from death at the end of time (6:14). Paul intimates that everyone who believes in Jesus shares in his resurrection (15:20–23). b. How do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? Paul has stated that Christ has been raised from the dead. Now he asks why some Corinthians deny the doctrine of the resurrection. They did not reject this doctrine but reinterpreted it by saying that Christ's resurrection was spiritual. They taught that with Christ they were also raised from the dead at the time of their baptism. Thus for them the resurrection had already taken place and had only passing significance. They did not accept it as a tenet of the Christian faith and, therefore, were in danger of separating themselves from the church. Elsewhere, Paul writes that because Hymenaeus had shipwrecked his faith, Paul handed him over to Satan (I Tim. 1:19–20). With Philetus, Hymenaeus denied the doctrine of a bodily resurrection and destroyed the faith of some believers (II Tim. 2:17–18).^[35] We are not sure how many people in Corinth questioned this doctrine, what influence they exerted in the church, or who they were. In view of the lengthy discourse on this particular doctrine, we assume that these Corinthians were influential.^[36] Influenced by Greek philosophy, these church members argued that the soul (which is immortal) returns to God who gave it (Eccl. 12:7) but that the body is mortal and at death descends into the grave. The soul, they believed, is raised to be with God and enjoys eternal life but the body is annihilated. This is a truncated view of the resurrection, for God created Adam with body and soul as a complete human being. The soul and the body are God's creation and share in Christ's resurrection. Christ rose physically from the dead, as Paul proves with his list of Jesus appearances (vv. 5 8). Over against the Greek philosophical view of some Corinthians, in chapter 15 Paul develops a scriptural perspective. In the next verse, he presents an argument that shows both contrast and logic. 13. But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised. Placing verses 12 and 13 in parallel columns, we observe that Paul contrasts his thoughts: Verse 12 Verse 13 But if Christ is preached, But if there is that he has been raised no resurrection from the dead, of the dead, how do some among you say that there is not even Christ no resurrection has been raised. of the dead? With irrefutable logic, Paul counters the Corinthians erroneous view that God raises the soul but not the body. If some people hold to a spiritual resurrection of the soul and deny a bodily resurrection, then the inevitable conclusion must be that Christ's body is still in the tomb and his redemptive work fruitless. Indeed, Jesus did not come to earth, die on the cross, and rise from the dead for himself but for those whom he redeems.^[37] A gospel without the tenet of the resurrection has no message of redemption. With the double negative in the two parts of this verse, Paul writes a conditional sentence that is contrary to reality. The clause if there is no resurrection of the dead contrasts the fact that there is a resurrection. But if the critics deny this fact, then Paul draws for them the inescapable conclusion that Christ's physical body did not rise from the grave either. 14. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain and also your faith is vain. a. And if Christ has not been raised. Paul continues writing a conditional sentence that contrasts incorrect teaching with reality. Paul states that to deny Christ's resurrection is to go against all the pertinent evidence that was available in the early church. Hundreds of people in Paul's day could testify to the resurrection because they had personally seen their glorified Lord. The apostles aside, about five hundred people saw the living Lord between Easter and ascension (vv. 5 8). Paul could tell the Corinthians to consult these eyewitnesses. Even he himself had seen Jesus near Damascus, and for that reason proclaimed the message of his risen Lord. b. Then our preaching is vain and also your faith is vain. The logic of Paul's discourse is compelling. If Christ is still in the tomb outside Jerusalem, he argues, then the content of my preaching is nothing but empty words and I with all the other apostles and preachers am a charlatan. More, the faith of all those who listen to Paul and his companions is vain. Both he and his listeners would be ill served if they would have to believe a lie and perpetuate it. Doctrinal Considerations in 15:14 The Roman soldier who pierced Jesus side and saw blood and water gush forth knew that Jesus had died. Jesus broken body was beyond restoration and had to be buried. Thus, from a medical point of view the resurrection of Jesus body is unthinkable, for nobody has ever returned from the grave. Some theologians have tried to meet this medical objection by giving a modern interpretation to the word resurrection. They explain the term spiritually and say that the resurrection is not an objective event of Jesus coming forth from the tomb outside Jerusalem. They say that no one was present to witness Jesus leaving the burial place, for the guards became like dead men (Matt. 28:2–4). And they conclude that the story of his resurrection, which cannot be verified by observation, is not part of history. These theologians interpret the resurrection as a subjective experience that occurs in the hearts of believers. They allege that when believers listen to and obey the Word of God, the resurrection takes place in their hearts.^[38] We admit that this spiritual interpretation is ingenious, for it dispels all the objections raised by medical scientists and empirical historians. Whenever preachers proclaim this spiritual resurrection message, no critic voices objections. The truth of the matter, however, is that this message has identified the doctrine of the resurrection with a description of a believer's conversion experience. This spiritual interpretation has no bearing at all on the physical resurrection of Jesus and on that of all his followers. In reality, it has nothing in common with the doctrine expressed in the Apostles Creed: I believe in the resurrection of the body. Critics of the resurrection doctrine demand evidential proof from eyewitnesses that Jesus rose physically from the dead and left the tomb. They assert that because the New Testament Scriptures fail to provide such observable proof, the Christian faith is dubious. One of them even suggests the possibility that archaeologists in Jerusalem would unearth a letter written by Caiaphas addressed to Pontius Pilate. This letter, then, would reveal a detailed plan to move Jesus body from the tomb and place it in an undisclosed location.^[39] Would the Christian faith be seriously damaged by such a letter and lose its credibility? The answer is absolutely not. Consider the difference in the respective points of departure of believers and unbelievers. Christians accept the teachings of Scripture in faith, but the unbeliever rejects them. Christians believe the doctrine of Christ's resurrection, but the unbeliever denies it. Sufficient for Christians, but insufficient for unbelievers, is the testimony of the apostles who were eyewitnesses of their Master's resurrection (Acts 1:22; 3:15). Scripture hints that at the time of Jesus ascension many people met the requirement for apostleship because they were eyewitnesses of the resurrection. And Scripture teaches that by the testimony of two or three witnesses truth is established (Deut. 19:15). If Pilate had moved Jesus body to a secret place, the resurrection doctrine would in fact rest on the fraudulent testimony of apostles and numerous believers. Then Christ would be an imposter, his apostles deceivers, and the church a sham. Instead Christ himself is the truth and so is God's Word (John 14:6; 17:17). 15. In addition, we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified in contradiction to God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if the dead are not raised. a. In addition, we are even found to be false witnesses of God. Paul is by no means finished with his logical analysis. He has much more to say, for he emphatically points out that should Christ's resurrection be falsehood, Paul and his associates would be exposed as impostors of the worst kind. ^[40] They would be branded as false witnesses who were spreading lies to gullible people and deceiving them. Not only that, they would testify falsely of God and thus stand guilty before God himself. The phrase false witnesses of God can be taken either objectively or subjectively. It can mean objectively that Paul and his co-workers were giving a false report of what God had done in Christ. And subjectively it can signify that they were sent forth by God himself to preach and practice deceit. Of the two interpretations, only the first one is acceptable: God does not commission people to represent him deceitfully. The above-mentioned phrase, then, has an objective connotation and implies that if Christ's resurrection is a falsehood, those who proclaim it as a tenet of faith are liars. These people must stand before God's tribunal as impostors. They are in the same category as the false prophets of the Old Testament era (Deut. 18:20–22) and the false apostles of the New Testament era (I John 5:10; II John 10). b. Because we testified in contradiction to God that he raised Christ. The concept speaking against someone is legal terminology. It is used when a witness swears an oath to affirm the truth of his testimony.^[41] Truth is at stake, because either God raised Jesus from the dead or, if the resurrection did not take place, Paul and all his associates preach a lie and speak against God. But why would they promulgate deception, be willing to suffer and die for it, and acknowledge that they must face the God of truth? c. Whom he did not raise if the dead are not raised. In translation, the last segment of verse 15 repeats the wording of verse 13. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is inseparably linked to the resurrection of the dead. This truth comforts the believer whose hope is built on Christ. How does this truth comfort the Christian? A sixteenth-century catechism replies: Not only my soul will be taken immediately after this life to Christ its head, but even my very flesh, raised by the power of Christ, will be reunited with my soul and made like Christ's glorious body.^[42] 16. For if the dead are not raised, then neither has Christ been raised. This verse also repeats verse 13 (see v. 14). The reiteration serves to alert the readers to the consequences of denying the doctrine of Jesus resurrection. Those who deny this doctrine implicitly label God a liar and the apostles false witnesses. But these people ought to realize that they will have to appear before God's judgment throne to give an account of what they have said. 17. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless and you are still in your sins. Verse 17 is a continuation of the preceding verse. Paul extends his compelling logic to have the readers view the effect of a denial of the resurrection. Step by step he reveals to them the spiritual implications of this denial. Paul addresses the Corinthians with the use of the second person plural you. He says, if you deny Christ's resurrection, then you should realize that your faith is worthless (compare v. 2). In verse 14 Paul uses the adjective useless, but here worthless. The difference is that the Greek adjective ken, translated useless, expresses emptiness and the Greek adjective mataia, translated worthless, connotes aimlessness.^[43] What are the ramifications of a worthless faith? For one thing, if Christ is not raised from the grave, he is dead; a dead Christ is unable to justify believers; and unjustified believers remain in their sins. We draw the inevitable conclusion that the justification of believers rests squarely on the resurrection of Jesus Christ.^[44] Without the risen Christ there is no justification, without justification there is no living faith, and without living faith there is no forgiveness of sin. Paul confronts the Corinthians who reject Christ's resurrection and in effect tells them: If you remain in your sins, your faith is worthless, you show no sign that you belong to God's sanctified people, and you are not saved. Yet, Paul had written that the Corinthians were sanctified in Christ Jesus, would be kept strong to the end, and were called into God's fellowship (1:2, 8, 9). More than that, Paul had told them that they were washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of Jesus through the Spirit of God (6:11). Their sins were forgiven; they were made holy and righteous in Christ Jesus. Paul does not contradict himself in this letter; rather, he wants the Corinthians to understand his logic and see the error of their way. They must grasp the effect that denying Jesus resurrection has on their spiritual lives and therefore they must come to repentance. Paul wants them to possess the assurance that they have been redeemed by Jesus Christ, who died and rose from the grave on their behalf. He wants them to know that on the basis of Jesus resurrection they have been justified and sanctified. 18. Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. Paul arrives at the conclusion of his logical argument and introduces it with the Greek expression ara, which in this verse means as a result. He asks his readers to reflect on a point that relates to a past generation of believers. He refers to those who have fallen asleep, which is a New Testament euphemism commonly used for those who have died.^[45] (In English, we circumscribe the word death with the euphemism he passed away.) The New Testament euphemism relates not to sleep of the soul but to a physical body waiting in a grave for the day of resurrection. In the current text, however, the expression fallen asleep in Christ applies to Christians who at the time of death believed that they would enter heaven to be eternally with Christ. The Corinthians believed that the separation of body and soul would come to an end when Jesus returns (I Thess. 4:16). If a person denies the resurrection, Paul informs his readers, the logical implication is that those who have died in Christ are lost. If Christ has not risen from the dead, then God condemns people to everlasting punishment because of their sins; they never enter heaven to be in God's presence; and, last, their bodies remain forever in the grave. Cut off from the living God, they have perished. If the Corinthians who deny the resurrection doctrine say that those who have died are with Jesus, then they contradict themselves. A denial of the resurrection would mean that all have perished, including Jesus. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/hendriksen/ 16. Collection for God's People (16:1–4) and Conclusion (16:5–24) Outline (continued) 1 1. Paul's Travel Plans B. Exhortations and Greetings 2. Final Greetings G. Collection for God's People 16:1–4 16 1 Now concerning the collection for the saints, just as I directed the churches of Galatia, so you do also. 2 On the first day of the week, let each one of you put aside something and store it up as he may prosper, so that when I come collections will not have to be made. 3 And when I come, I will send those men whom you approve with letters [of recommendation] to take your gift to Jerusalem. 4 And if it is fitting that I go, they will go with me. The epistle as such has come to an end except for some final directions, exhortations, and greetings. Paul reveals that he plans to travel to Jerusalem to alleviate the poverty of the saints in that cityActs 19:21; 24:17; II Cor. 8 9 . He wants to collect monetary gifts from the believers in Corinth, just as he is doing in all the Gentile churches. Paul's underlying purpose for these collections is to promote unity in the churches of Jewish and Gentile backgrounds. His objective is to break down any animosity that continues to separate Jewish Christians from Gentile Christians. 1. Now concerning the collection for the saints, just as I directed the churches of Galatia, so you do also. The first two words, now concerning, are Paul's reply to a question included in the Corinthian letter addressed to him (7:1). With these two words as an introduction, Paul also answers questions regarding marriage, meat offered to idols, spiritual gifts, the collection for the poor in Jerusalem, and Apollos (7:1, 25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12). The Jerusalem church oversaw the churches that Paul founded (Acts 15:4; 18:22; 21:17–19). Yet we have no scriptural evidence that this church levied taxes on Gentile Christians, just as the Jerusalem priests compelled the Jews in Israel and in dispersion to pay the annual temple tax. Rather, Paul taught Gentile believers that they should joyfully share material blessings with the Jerusalem Christians, because the Jerusalem saints had shared with them spiritual blessings (Rom. 15:26–27). They should know that they were indebted to the church in [Greek] -2 _ftnref1 ([Greek] Paul wanted them to be cheerful givers who without reluctance or compulsion generously gave their gifts to support the poorII Cor. 9:7). The church is obliged to take care of its own people and of others who are needy (James 2:15 16; I John 3:17). After the early years of Christianity, during which there were no poor among the Christians (Acts 4:34), the Jerusalem church had experienced hard times. The great persecution following the death of Stephen had driven most of the church members away from that cityActs 8:1b . Without possessions and businesses, these refugees had joined the ranks of the poor (James 2:6; 5:1–6); the believers who stayed in Jerusalem, along with those who returned, faced difficult economic times. Less than a decade later they endured a protracted period of severe famine (Acts 11:28). And in later years they experienced economic adversities, for Paul writes that there were poor people among the saints in JerusalemRom. 15:26; nevertheless, some Christians there seemed to be prospering . Paul was eager to lend aid to the poor as he had promised to do when James, Peter, and John extended to him the right hand of fellowship (Gal. 2:9–10). Indeed, he and Barnabas had delivered famine relief from the church in Antioch to the Christians in Judea (Acts 11:29 30). Thus, we suggest that Paul had mentioned to the Corinthians by either Timothy, Titus, or letter the matter of taking care of the economically poor believers in Jerusalem. The definite article in the expression the collectionactually means the well-known collection. In their letter to him they had asked details on how to proceed in gathering the [Greek] -2 _ftnref2 [Greek] Just as he urged the Galatian believers to do good to all people but especially to fellow believers (Gal. 6:10), so he told the Corinthians to collect money for the poor in Jerusalem. The churches of Galatia are those that Paul and Barnabas founded during the first missionary journey: Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe (Acts 13 14). Also, Luke mentions that Gaius of Derbe and Timothy of Lystra accompanied him to Jerusalem with the monetary gift (Acts 16:1; 20:4; [Greek] -2 _ftnref3 [Greek] As representatives of their churches, they safeguarded the money that was sent to the poor in Jerusalem. Paul tells the Corinthians to follow the instructions he had given the churches in Galatia. With apostolic authority he orders the believers to care for the poverty-stricken saints in Jerusalem. 2. On the first day of the week, let each one of you put aside something and store it up as he may prosper, so that when I come collections will not have to be made. a. On the first day of the week. This is the customary Jewish wording for what we today call Sunday (Matt. 28:1and parallels; Acts 20:7; see also Rev. 1:10). In the evening of the first day of the week, Christians gathered for the breaking of bread, that is, the Lord's Supper (Acts 20:7). Early Christians commemorated the first day of the week as the day of Jesus [Greek] -2 _ftnref4 [Greek] they chose that day for worship and fellowship. b. Let each one of you put aside something and store it up as he may prosper. Paul teaches the Corinthians the commendable habit of continued giving to the Lord. He uses the present tense of the verb to put asideto indicate that every believer must do so regularly. Paul fails to say where the something should be stored, but he implies that the individual believer should store these gifts by himself until Paul arrived to collect them. True, the Corinthian church had administrators (12:28), and deacons were charged with administering funds and caring for the poor (Acts 6:1 6; compare Phil. 1:1; I Tim. 3:8–13). Undoubtedly, they gathered donations from the Christians to carry out their ministry to the needy. But the wording of the text seems to suggest that gifts for the Jerusalem Christians were kept by the individual at home. Paul tells the Corinthian believers to give on the first day of the week but he does not stipulate that their gifts he collected by church [Greek] -2 _ftnref5 [Greek] The money was not for local needs, to be distributed by the deacons. It was a special gift set aside by the individual for the Jerusalem saints. How much ought the Corinthian believer to give? The word tithedoes not occur. Instead Paul lays down the clear principle that a believer should give in relation to the prosperity he or she receives from the Lord. In the Greek, the verb to prospermeans to be led along a good road. [Greek] -2 _ftnref6 [Greek] The agent for this prosperity is the Lord, to whom believers gratefully ought to donate their gifts. c. So that when I come collections will not have to be made. This is the second time that Paul notifies the Corinthians of his forthcoming visit (4:18–21). The first indication was to rebuke them; now he says that he will come to ascertain that the Corinthians have indeed made collections. By giving them adequate instructions, he avoids pressuring the Christians to give money hastily. He desires to do all things properly. 3. And when I come, I will send those men, whom you approve, with letters [of recommendation] to take your gift to Jerusalem. In harmony with a discussion on his personal income (9:7–18), Paul avoids involving himself in collecting the money and taking it to Jerusalem. He wants the Corinthian church to select and approve men for this task. Men from Macedonia and Asia Minor also were appointed to carry the gift to the saints in Jerusalem. Thus Paul could never be accused of enhancing his own assets. No representatives from Corinth are listed as accompanying Paul to Jerusalem (Acts 20:4). Who was the brother chosen by the churches to travel with Paul and his company to deliver the gift (II Cor. 8:18–19)? This person had earned the trust of the Corinthians, but whether he was either Barnabas, Luke, or another apostolic helper we shall never [Greek] -2 _ftnref7 [Greek] Translators are divided regarding the identity of the letters author. Did Paul write the letters of recommendation for the men approved by the [Greek] -2 _ftnref8 [Greek] Or did the church in Corinth compose these [Greek] -2 _ftnref9 ([Greek] In view of Paul's apostolic authority, knowledge of the leaders in Jerusalem, and desire for ecclesiastical unity, I suggest that Paul wrote the letters recommending these Gentile Christians from Greece to the Jewish Christians in Judea. In Paul's day, people who were sent on missions often carried credentials. These credentials were written by the sending agent or agency that recommended the carrierActs 9:2; 15:23; 22:5; Rom. 16:1; II Cor. 3:1–3). The term Paul uses for gift is the Greek word charis, which in this verse denotes a charitable donation as an expression of goodwill. It is the gracious gift of Christians in Corinth to those in Jerusalem. 4. And if it is fitting that I go, they will go with me. This verse reveals a measure of hesitation on Paul's part. He wanted to be in charge of sending the bearers of the collection and thus wrote letters to introduce the men to the leaders in Jerusalem. On the other hand, Paul refused to be responsible for collecting, safeguarding, and delivering the amount. His objective was to be above reproach and suspicion and to be approved by both God and man (II Cor. 8:20–21). Paul is asking the church members whether they deem it proper that he should travel with their representatives. He himself had decided to go to Jerusalem after he had visited the churches in Macedonia and Greece (Acts 19:21), but he wished to obtain the church's confirmation. Practical Considerations in 16:1–2 One of the elements of worship is giving gifts to God in thankful response to his numerous blessings. We worship God regularly on Sunday and even on set and special days during the week. We come to church for worship because God wants to meet us and speak to us from his Word. We sing his praises, confess our sins, express thanks for answered prayer, and present our petitions. We demonstrate our love to him not only by doing his will but also by offering our gifts. Paul teaches the Corinthians to set aside their gifts on the first day of the week and to do so regularly, a teaching that reflects God's provisions for his people. God provides daily the needs of the believers, and he instructs them to pray for their daily bread (Matt. 6:11; Luke 11:3). As God taught the people of Israel to honor him with their wealth and the firstfruits of all their crops (Prov. 3:9), so he teaches the New Testament people to honor him by giving liberally (Luke 6:38; 21:1–4). God gives faithfully in answer to the prayers of his people (I John 5:14 15). Similarly, his people should regularly offer their gifts to him as their act of worship. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 16:1–4 Verses 1 2 [Greek] a collection for the poor. Note that Paul uses the article twice to specify the particular gift for the Jerusalem saints. [Greek] the preposition is used distributively, in the sense of every first day of the week. [Greek] alongside of himself. This literal translation indicates that the giver kept the gift in his home. Verses 3 4 [Greek] the preposition [Greek] followed by the genitive case denotes the manner by which Paul sends the emissaries. The noun lettersmay be an idiomatic plural for a letter. [Greek] -2 _ftnref10 [Greek] [Greek] the articular infinitive serves as subject of the verb to [Greek] -2 _ftnref11 [Greek] The genitive appears to be influenced by the adjective [Greek] (fitting) and the personal pronoun [Greek] in contracted form is the subject of the infinitive. IV. Conclusion 16:5–24 5 I shall come to you after I go through Macedonia. I am going through Macedonia, 6 and perhaps shall stay with you for some time or even spend the winter, so that you may send me on my way, wherever I may go. 7 For I do not wish to see you now in passing, for I hope to remain with you for some time if the Lord permits. 8 But I shall remain in Ephesus until Pentecost. 9 For a wide door for effective service has been opened to me, and there are many adversaries. 10 Now if Timothy comes, see that he does not have to be afraid when he is among you, for he is doing the work of the Lord, just as I also do. 11 Let no one therefore despise him. Send him on his way in peace, so that he may come to me. For I am expecting him with the brothers. 12 Now concerning our brother Apollos, I encouraged him greatly to come to you with the brothers. And indeed he was unwilling to come now. But he will come when he has an opportunity. 13 Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, be men of courage, be strong. 14 Let everything you do be done with love. 15 And I appeal to you, brothers. You know the household of Stephanas, that they were the firstfruits of Achaia and they have given themselves to the ministry of the saints. 16 Now I urge you, brothers, to submit to such men and to everyone who works and toils with us. 17 And I rejoice over the coming of Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, because they supplied what was lacking from you. 18 For they refreshed my spirit and yours. Therefore acknowledge such men. 19 The churches in the province of Asia greet you. Aquila and Priscilla heartily greet you in the Lord with the church that meets in their house. 20 All the brothers greet you. Greet one another with a holy kiss. 21 I, Paul, write this greeting in my own hand. 22 If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be accursed. Maranatha! 23 The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you. 24 My love be with you all in Christ Jesus. Amen. A. Paul's Requests 16:5–12 In the next two paragraphs Paul relates his travel plans, the forthcoming visit of Timothy to Corinth, and the reception of Apollos. The allusion to two time references spending the winter in Corinth and staying in Ephesus until Pentecost leaves the impression that he wrote this epistle possibly a month or two [Greek] -2 _ftnref12 [Greek] Effective evangelistic work kept Paul in Ephesus for some time. Timothy needed a word of commendation to the Corinthians. Due to his youth and timid personality, Timothy had been adversely received at an earlier visit (Acts 18:5). Apollos also had his own reasons for being unwilling to return to Corinth. Paul's remarks are cryptic and open to conjecture. 1. Paul's Travel Plans 16:5–9 5. I shall come to you after I go through Macedonia. I am going through Macedonia, 6. and perhaps shall stay with you for some time or even spend the winter, so that you may send me on my way, wherever I may go. a. I shall come to you after I go through Macedonia. According to Luke, Paul planned to travel via Macedonia to Corinth and from there to Jerusalem (Acts 19:21). Indeed, he visited the churches in Macedonia and eventually arrived in Corinth, where he stayed for three monthsActs 20:1 3a . The time spent there was undoubtedly during the winter months, when sea travel was impossible. After he had composed this epistle and sent it to the church in Corinth, Paul decided to cross the Aegean Sea for a double visit. First he would spend some time with the Corinthians, although he would not yet make arrangements for the collection. Then he would travel on foot to Macedonia to visit the churches. Afterward he would return to Corinth and depart for Judea (II Cor. 1:15–16). But because his brief visit to Corinth proved to be painful, he changed his mind. He returned to Ephesus without visiting the churches in Macedonia (II Cor. [Greek] -2 _ftnref13 [Greek] b. I am going through Macedonia, and perhaps shall stay with you for some time or even spend the winter. Ever since his departure from Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea on his second missionary journey, Paul had been unable to return to the Macedonian churches for many years. He told the church in Thessalonica that his plan to visit was blocked by Satan (I Thess. 2:18). Even though Timothy, Silas, and Erastus had visited and served the churches in Macedonia (Acts 18:5; 19:22), Paul had only sent them letters (I and II Thess.). He had not been able to see them personally. His plan to travel through Macedonia meant that he wanted to spend time with the believers in the various churches. After ministering to the Macedonians and receiving their gifts for the poor who were in Jerusalem (II Cor. 8:1–7), Paul planned to travel to Corinth to stay with the believers there for a considerable period. He foresaw that he would be in Corinth until spring, as inclement weather made sea travel impossible during the winter. In short, Luke relates that he stayed in Greece three months (Acts 20:3). c. So that you may send me on my way, wherever I may go. Paul's travel plans were indefinite, for he left open the possibility of preaching the gospel in other regions (e.g., Illyricum [present-day Albania and the former Yugoslavia] and Spain [ (Rom. 15:19, 24, 28]). He considered his visit to Jerusalem obligatory, for he wanted to report on the progress of the Gentile churchesActs 21:18 19) before he would set out for new fields of [Greek] -2 _ftnref14 [Greek] Thus he waited for God to lead him in making his plans. Traveling missionaries received food, beverages, lodging, and financial aid from the Christian churches (Rom. 15:24; II Cor. 1:16; Titus 3:13; III John 6). Not the pagans but the Christians are obliged to supply the missionaries physical needs and to send them on their way. Paul himself, however, had told the Corinthians that he would offer the gospel free of charge and not request financial remuneration (9:17–18). 7. For I do not wish to see you now in passing, for I hope to remain with you for some time if the Lord permits. Paul informs the readers that he has no intention of paying them a brief visit. He desires to spend some time with them to renew the ties he had formed when he founded the church. He wanted to express his love for them and knew that they, in turn, would reciprocate. We have no reason to believe that at an earlier occasion Paul had briefly visited the Corinthians. The term nowpoints not to the past but to the present and the future. Paul reveals his plan to remain with the church in Corinth after a lengthy absence. The numerous moral and spiritual problems of its members compel him to think of spending considerable time with them. Paul needs a season during which he can remove the inconsistencies currently present in the Corinthian congregation. God's people ought to know that their time is in God's hands. They should place their lives in submission to God's will. New Testament saints set the example of living in harmony with the Lord's [Greek] -2 _ftnref15 [Greek] 8. But I shall remain in Ephesus until Pentecost. 9. For a wide door for effective service has been opened to me, and there are many adversaries. Here is a definite reference to time, Pentecost, without any indication regarding the year. For the Jews, Pentecost was the feast of the harvest celebrated seven weeks after Passover (Lev. 23:9–16). This would be in the second part of May or the first half of June. The Christians commemorated the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in Jerusalem (Acts 2:1 4). Exactly a year later, Paul traveled to Jerusalem and arrived in time for Pentecost (Acts 20:16). Paul writes that he has work to do in Ephesus; he has numerous evangelistic opportunities in that city. He uses a figurative expression, a wide door for effective service. Elsewhere he employs similar language: The lord had opened a door for [him in Troas] (II Cor. 2:12; see also Col. 4:3). We are unable to say when this took place, for the uproar in Ephesus that Demetrius and his guild instigated may have occurred after Paul composed his letter (Acts 19:23 41). Paul lectured in the hall of Tyrannus, taught both publicly and from house to house, and called to repentance both Jews and Greeks in Ephesus and in the province of Asia (Acts 19:9 10; 20:20–21). The adjective (effectiveis balanced by the noun adversaries. Here are the two sides of the proverbial coin. Paul's service in the church and the community is effective and gains many converts, but the presence of numerous enemies keeps him on guard and prevents him from being overly confident. Among his opponents are the silversmiths whose livelihood is in jeopardy as people turn from the worship of dead idols to the service of the living Christ. In addition, some Jews maliciously opposed Paul and aligned themselves with the Gentiles and their attackActs 19:9, 33 34). Paul refrains from providing details, but the sketch itself is sufficiently clear. Satan threw his might and power against Paul's work and associates, and the church in Ephesus (Phil. 1:28). Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 16:5–9 Verses 5 6 [Greek] although the tense of this verb is present, it has a future connotation. [Greek] this preposition followed by the accusative denotes position and means with. [Greek] perhaps. The aorist participle in the neuter accusative functions as an adverb expressing manner. [Greek] the future tense of the compound is identical in meaning to [Greek]. Of the two verbs, the first one is preferred. Verses 8 9 [Greek] Pentecost. This is an abbreviation of the full form, the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1; 20:16). [Greek] the second perfect intransitive of the verb [Greek] (I open). The perfect shows lasting effect (II Cor. 6:11; John 1:51). 2. Timothy's Arrival 16:10–11 10. Now if Timothy comes, see that he does not have to be afraid when he is among you, for he is doing the work of the Lord, just as I also do. a. Now if Timothy comes. This is the second time in this epistle that Paul mentions Timothy (4:17). He sent Timothy to the Corinthians, probably through Macedonia (Acts 19:22), and is uncertain of the time of Timothy's arrival. Hence, Paul writes a conditional clause in which the particle ifrelates to Timothy's eventual arrival. Paul does not indicate who delivered this letter to the Corinthian church. Certainly Timothy was not the carrier, for then we would have expected his name to be in the greetings of this epistle (1:1). Also, because Paul's first epistle does not say that Timothy returned with a report of his visit to the Corinthians, we infer that this letter arrived in Corinth before Timothy's visit. By the time Paul wrote his second letter, Timothy had returned (II Cor. 1:1). We conclude that Paul sent him only once to Corinth (4:17; 16:10) and that he is now unsure about the exact time of Timothy's arrival. Timothy's journey to the Macedonian churches necessitated land travel while Paul's epistle was sent by ship to [Greek] -2 _ftnref16 [Greek] b. See that he does not have to be afraid when he is among you. Paul writes an imperative to the Corinthians: he instructs them to receive Timothy courteously and respectfully. We assume that Timothy's age had something to do with his relation to the church in Corinth (I Tim. 4:12). Venturing a guess, we judge Timothy to be in his twenties at the time Paul writes this letter. His youth may have hindered him from exercising authority in the Corinthian community. Moreover, the church in Corinth may have considered him to be not the chief spokesman but Paul's deputy, that is, a person who is second in command. And last, some members had expressed their differences with Paul; they would now not have to face the apostle but could express their arrogance without impunity in the presence of his representative (compare 4:18). In his pastoral epistles, Paul reveals that Timothy was not enjoying robust health (I Tim. 5:23), was timid (II Tim. 1:7), and had to be taught how to instruct groups of people and how to control his own inclinations (I Tim. [Greek] -2 _ftnref17 [Greek] By all appearances, Timothy was not an imposing figure but someone who might be abused verbally in the Corinthian church. For this reason, Paul instructs the readers to accept Timothy so that he does not have to be afraid in their midst. c. For he is doing the work of the Lord, just as I also do. The reason for making Timothy feel at ease is the labor he performs. He is doing the work of the Lord that Paul himself performs (see 15:58). In other words, Paul ascribes equal authority to Timothy because of his work on behalf of Christ. Paul does not place himself above his co-workers, even though he is an apostle and they are apostolic helpers. He intimates that the readers should respect Timothy because of his calling and should accept him as they would Paul. Elsewhere Paul teaches that especially those persons whose work is preaching and teaching the gospel are worthy of double honor (I Tim. [Greek] -2 _ftnref18 [Greek] The Corinthians, then, must receive Timothy for the sake of his work in the Lord. 11. Let no one therefore despise him. Send him on his way in peace, so that he may come to me. For I am expecting him with the brothers. a. Let no one therefore despise him. On account of Timothy's spiritual work, no one in the Corinthian community ought to reject him and treat him with contempt. He is a servant of the Lord, so that rejection of the servant is the same as rejection of his Sender. Paul is not saying that the Corinthians have been doing this in the past, but he cautions them about the possibility of despising Timothy. b. Send him on his way in peace, so that he may come to me. The New Testament provides no information about Timothy's arrival and reception in Corinth. Paul writes clearly about Titus, whose report concerning the Corinthian visit he anxiously [Greek] -2 _ftnref19 [Greek] But he reveals nothing about Timothy's work in Corinth. This does not mean that Timothy fulfilled a minor role in the ministry of the Word. On the contrary, many churches regarded Timothy as a faithful co-worker with Paul. His name occurs with that of Paul in the greetings to the churches in Corinth, Philippi, Colosse, and [Greek] -2 _ftnref20 [Greek] Paul instructs the Corinthians to aid Timothy in his travels by providing him with the basic necessities of life (food, drink, lodging, and money). Above all, he wants them to bid Timothy farewell in peace. He desires spiritual tranquility within the Corinthian church reflected by the manner in which they send Timothy on his return trip. And Paul would receive a first-hand report from his colleague in the ministry. c. For I am expecting him with the brothers. The repetition of the first person singular personal pronoun confirms that Paul is vitally interested in Timothy's mission. The Corinthians should understand that meeting with Timothy is the same as meeting Paul himself. If they repudiate him, they will have to meet Paul eventually. The noun brotherscan be construed with either the pronoun Ior him. It can mean that Paul with the brothers in Ephesus expects Timothy to [Greek] -2 _ftnref21 [Greek] Or it can mean that Paul expects Timothy to come to him with travel [Greek] -2 _ftnref22 [Greek] Which of the two interpretations is preferred? Timothy did not travel alone to Macedonia but was accompanied by Erastus, a resident of CorinthActs 19:22; Rom. 16:23b . It is possible that Erastus together with other travel companions escorted Timothy on his return. On the other hand, the three Corinthian delegates (Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus [v. 17]) may have awaited Timothy's return. Yet why would these three men have to wait for Timothy to return to Ephesus after they had communicated their messages to Paul? We conclude that certainty is lacking for either interpretation. Like other dilemmas in Paul's epistles, this problem remains unresolved. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 16:10–11 [Greek] this particle followed by the verb [Greek] (he comes) in the subjunctive expresses uncertainty regarding Timothy's arrival time. [Greek] see the comment at verse 6. [Greek] let no one despise him. Here is a rare occurrence of the hortatory subjunctive in the third person [Greek] -2 _ftnref23 [Greek] 3. Apollos's Reluctance 16:12 12. Now concerning our brother Apollos, I encouraged him greatly to come to you with the brothers. And indeed he was unwilling to come now. But he will come when he has an opportunity. The last request in this series of three is asking Paul's co-worker Apollos to go to Corinth to serve the church. Apollos was the learned orator from Alexandria who had been commissioned by the Ephesians to minister to the spiritual needs of the Corinthians (Acts 18:24 28; 19:1). Because he was a skilled orator, Apollos was appreciated and had numerous friends in Corinth. In fact, the Corinthians had formed an Apollos party which Apollos, like Paul, repudiated (1:12; 3:4–6, 22). One wonders who was pastor of the church in Corinth or whether the pastorate was vacant. Is the church asking Apollos to come for a brief visit or to be the pastor for an extended period? The invitation is the last item in their letter addressed to Paul, as is evident from the first two words in this verse ( now concerning; see 7:1, 25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1). The Corinthians relay the invitation via Paul and ask him to intervene on their behalf. Paul had never considered Apollos to be a competitor but always a faithful fellow worker. Therefore, Paul does not hesitate to persuade Apollos to go and visit the Corinthians. He calls him our brother and notes that he has greatly encouraged Apollos to accompany the brothers, that is, the three delegates from Corinth, on their homeward journey (v. 17). We do not know the reason for Apollos's reluctance to go to Corinth. We surmise that he was fully aware of the many problems and divisions in the life of the church. He knew that Paul both planned to visit Corinth and was instructing the congregation by correspondence. And last, he did not wish to interfere with the work Paul was doing. Apollos is the person who has to answer the call to visit the Corinthian church. He makes it known that he is unwilling to go at the moment, but at the right time in the future he will travel to Corinth. The past tense of the verb in the sentence shows that Apollos is no longer in Paul's presence at the time this verse was written. Apollos had decided not to go now but was willing to visit Corinth at another time. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 16:12 [Greek] the adjective is pressedinto service as an adverb meaning greatly or strongly. [Greek] an emphatic combination signifying not at all or wholly not. [Greek] this noun stands by itself without qualifiers and therefore appears to refer not to the will of God but to the will of [Greek] -2 _ftnref24 [Greek] B. Exhortations and Greetings 16:13–24 A number of exhortations and references to certain Corinthians are part of the conclusion to this chapter. The last few verses (vv. 19 21) consist, first, of final greetings from churches and individuals; Paul writes his greeting in his own hand. Next, Paul censures those who do not love the Lord. Praying for the return of Jesus Christ, he commends the readers to the grace of the Lord Jesus. 1. Final Admonitions 16:13–18 13. Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, be men of courage, be strong. 14. Let everything you do be done with love. Like a general in the army of the Lord, Paul gives short orders in rapid succession and expects his people to put his commands into practice. He is confident that they are already obeying these directives, but he exhorts the readers to persevere. a. Be on the alert. The first command is to be vigilant, especially with a view toward Christ's return (see v. 22). These words occur frequently in the eschatological passages of the New [Greek] -2 _ftnref25 [Greek] They imply that God's people should remain watchful and fully alert to thwart the spiritual forces of darkness. b. Stand firm in the faith. Paul issues a second order, which is similar in meaning to his concluding exhortation of the preceding chapter, Be steadfast (15:58). He adds the prepositional phrase in the faithto indicate the immovability of the believer with respect to trusting God subjective faith. As a soldier firmly defends the interests of his nation, so the Christian stands firm in relation to the teachings of God's Word objective faith. Paul's directive to stand firm, with or without modifiers, appears repeatedly in his [Greek] -2 _ftnref26 [Greek] c. Be men of courage. The Greek verb andrizesthein the imperative plural means acquit yourselves like men. This is the only place in the New Testament where the verb appears, yet the sense is sufficiently clear. No soldier in the army of Jesus Christ may be fainthearted; in his presence, there is no place for cowards and weaklings. d. Be strong. In a series of four commands, this last imperative is synonymous with the preceding one. In the passive voice, the verb means to be made strong through experiences that God prepares for the believer (Ps. 31:24; Eph. 6:10). e. Let everything you do be done with love. This is an echo of Paul's remark in an earlier chapter on the use of spiritual gifts: But let all things be done decently and in order (14:40). Paul is not interested in aggressive force without the virtue of love. He shows the church of Jesus Christ an even more excellent way, namely, to follow the path of Christian love (12:31; 13; 14:1). A militant church battles sin but loves the sinner. Like a mighty army, Moves the Church of God & One in hope and doctrine, One in charity. Sabine Baring-Gould 15. And I appeal to you, brothers. You know the household of Stephanas, that they were the firstfruits of Achaia and they have given themselves to the ministry of the saints. a. And I appeal to you, brothers. After a series of commands, Paul now issues an appeal addressed to the brothers and sisters in the Corinthian church. Apparently they failed to respect the office bearers who worked diligently in their local congregation to advance the cause of Christ. A weakness in that church seems to have been a disregard for the authority invested in their spiritual leaders. b. You know the household of Stephanas, that they were the firstfruits of Achaia. Paul states the fact that the Corinthians are fully acquainted with the household of Stephanas. At the beginning of this epistle, he already mentioned Stephanas and his household, Paul baptized him and all those who belonged to his family (1:16). Indeed he included Stephanas, as an afterthought, with those whom Paul himself had baptized. Granted that at Athens, Dionysius, Damaris, and others became believers (Acts 17:34), here is the first indication of a person and his entire family being baptized. Paul calls Stephanas and his household the firstfruits, which in Old Testament times was a harvest term used when the first ears of grain were reaped (Lev. 23:9–11, 15 17; Deut. 26:1–11). In Paul's vocabulary, the expression (firstfruitshas a spiritual meaning: Christ is the reaper who presents a new harvest of his people to God the Father. For Paul, the household of Stephanas in Corinth and Epenetus in the province of AsiaRom. 16:5) are the firstfruits of Gentile [Greek] -2 _ftnref27 [Greek] After the firstfruits are gathered, the real harvest is imminent. c. They have given themselves to the ministry of the saints. From the outset, Stephanas and his family took upon themselves the task of ministering to the spiritual needs of those Corinthians who became Christians. Their work was to serve God's people (see 12:5). They volunteered their services and, blessed with organizational talent, did the arduous work that developing a church requires. As is often the case, some people in the congregation did not always appreciate these labors and repudiated the members of Stephanas's household. One of the complaints could have been that these members had never been officially appointed to serve the church but had appointed themselves. Jealousy and rivalry were undermining the spiritual welfare of the membership. Paul, however, has a high view of church membership and calls the believers saints. He implies that even those who are critical of the church's servants are called saints (compare 1:2). The sentence structure in the Greek is awkward, as translations that follow the word order of the original text [Greek] -2 _ftnref28 [Greek] Paul begins verse 15 with an exhortation, I appeal to you, brothers, which he interrupts with an explanatory note about the household of Stephanas. After writing this note, he applies the entreaty to the content of verse 16. For the sake of a smooth translation, I have repeated the exhortation in slightly altered form. 16. Now I urge you, brothers, to submit to such men and to everyone who works and toils with us. Paul implores the members of the Corinthian church to submit to their leaders and to do so out of love for one another and without compulsion. Notice that he addresses the readers as brothers (and sisters) to show his tender love for them. He realizes that in a developing community, tensions are unavoidable. But these tensions should be alleviated and eliminated in the context of Christian love. A literal translation shows emphasis: that you also be in subjection to such men -2 _ftnref29 (NASB). Paul wants the readers to realize that they themselves must be in submission to their leaders. As the younger men must submit themselves to the authority of their elders (I Peter 5:5), so Christians willingly must submit to one another (Eph. [Greek] -2 _ftnref30 ([Greek] They should renounce their own preferences and in humility and love regard others better than themselvesPhil. 2:3). Thus, Paul urges the Corinthians to be in subjection to their leaders who diligently serve the members of the Christian community. The writer of the epistle to the Hebrews also urges his readers to obey their leaders and to submit to their authority ([Greek] -2 _ftnref31 [Greek] The people who should be respected are the leaders from the family of Stephanas. But Paul broadens the circle by including everyone who works and toils with us. This means that the apostles, their helpers, and all other church workers should be accorded proper respect (I Tim. 5:17). Paul is not merely writing synonyms when he mentions the verbs to workand to toil. There is a distinct difference between working and toiling. The former signifies being productive; the latter connotes working hard and long in the interest of attaining a goal. When church members honor the hardworking servants in the church, they themselves will follow their example. A church with willing workers proves to be a powerhouse that illumines and benefits the entire community in which it is located. Let every Christian adopt the old adage that still speaks volumes: Only one life, `t will soon be past; Only what is done for Christ will last. 17. And I rejoice over the coming of Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, because they supplied what was lacking from you. 18. For they refreshed my spirit and yours. Therefore acknowledge such men. a. And I rejoice over the coming of Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus. The arrival and the presence of three Corinthian church leaders proved to be a tremendous source of joy for Paul. These three had given him the letter from the Corinthians and had acquainted Paul with the spiritual condition and the problems of their church. This is now the third time that Paul mentions the name Stephanas(1:16; 16:15, 17), which in Greek means the one who bears a crown. Stephanas was the most influential of the three men, for he had a household. Whether his two companions belonged to this household is a conjecture. Both men could have been slaves. We know next to nothing about them because their names occur only once in the New Testament. The name Fortunatusis a Latin term that signifies the blessed one. And Achaicussimply means the one from the province of Achaia. These three men were not the members of Chloe's household (1:11) who came to Paul with an oral report on the divisions in the church. Stephanas and his two friends were well-known leaders who acquainted Paul with the spiritual life of the congregation. The oral report of Chloe's people was unofficial; that of the three-man delegation was official. The church commissioned Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus to carry their letter and to answer any questions Paul might raise. Further, Paul was unhappy with the report of Chloe's people but rejoiced in the arrival and presence of the Corinthian delegation. He mentions the brothers in verse 12 and identifies them by name in verse 17. He shows that a special bond existed between himself and the Corinthian trio. b. Because they supplied what was lacking front you. The personal pronoun youis open to two interpretations. Objectively, it can signify that the three church workers filled the void created by Paul's absence from Corinth; and subjectively it can signify that Paul had a longing to see the Corinthian believers, a longing that the three delegates by their presence tried to [Greek] -2 _ftnref32 [Greek] In addition, we presume that Paul inquired about the members of the Corinthian church and, after reading their letter, asked further questions. The better of the two choices, then, is the subjective interpretation. c. For they refreshed my spirit and yours. Why does Paul rejoice? Because Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus were able to renew Paul's spirit with good reports about the church (II Cor. 7:13). They encouraged him with positive accounts that counterbalanced the negative report he had received from the members of Chloe's household, they experienced Paul's love for them; and they, in turn, demonstrated their affection for him. They not only refreshed Paul's soul; upon their return to Corinth, they would be able to inform the church about Paul's love for them. Their visit with Paul would be a blessing to them. Besides, they would be able to deliver Paul's letter and answer questions Corinthians might raise. d. Therefore acknowledge such men. This is the last command Paul has for the Corinthians. When the trio returns to Corinth from their visit with Paul, they need to be warmly received in the community and duly recognized as leaders. The words such mengo beyond the Corinthian trio and include all the people who unfailingly give of their time and talent to the well-being of Christ's church. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 16:15–18 Verses 15 16 [Greek] firstfruits. Although the word is in the singular, it has a plural connotation that is evident in the verb and reflexive pronoun [Greek] (they appointed themselves) Also note a possible play on words in this verb and the compound [Greek] (you submit yourselves). Verses 17 18 [Greek] this possessive pronoun in the neuter singular is replaced by the second person plural [Greek], as in the reading of the Majority [Greek] -2 _ftnref33 [Greek] The possessive pronoun is the more original, yet in translation the matter is inconsequential. [Greek] this correlative adjective in the plural denotes quality, of such a kind. 2. Final Greetings 16:19–24 In this last segment of the epistle, the concept greetoccurs five times. First, there are the greetings of churches in the province of Asia; they are followed by those of the missionary couple Aquila and Priscilla with their house church. Then there are the compliments from all the brothers, succeeded by the manner of greeting one another, and last, Paul's best wishes in his own handwriting. The last three verses (vv. 22 24) constitute the benediction. It includes a curse on all those who do not love the Lord, a petition for the Lord's return, and the customary wish for the Lord's grace. As a last remark, Paul assures the readers of his love for them in Christ Jesus. 19. The churches in the province of Asia greet you. Aquila and Priscilla heartily greet you in the Lord with the church that meets in their house. a. The churches in the province of Asia greet you. Almost the entire western part of Asia Minor was known as the Roman province of Asia during the first few centuries of the Christian era. Jewish people living in the major cities of that province were among the first to hear the gospel, especially in Ephesus. Paul came to Ephesus on his way to Syria and taught in the local synagogue, where he was well received. At the request of the Jews, he promised to return to them (Acts 18:18 21). When Paul arrived in Ephesus for the second time, he at first spoke in the local synagogue for three months and then taught in the lecture hall of Tyrannus for two years. The effect was that all the Jews and the Greeks who lived in the province of Asia heard the word of thee Lord (Acts 19:10). Students of Paul became pastors who founded churches in the western part of Asia Minor. Among these pastors were Epaphras, who labored faithfully in Colosse, Laodicea, and Hierapolis (Col. 4:12–13); Tychicus, who was a faithful minister and fellow servant of Paul in Colosse and Ephesus (Acts 20:4; Col. 4:7; Eph. 6:21); Philemon and Archippus, who were fellow workers in Colosse (Philem. 1 2); and Trophimus, who was an Ephesian (Acts 20:4; 21:29). The church at Ephesus occupied first place among the seven churches in the province of Asia (Rev. 1:11; 2:1–7). From Ephesus, Christianity spread throughout the province, so that at the time Paul composed his first epistle to the Corinthians many churches had been formed. Paul conveys the greetings of the churches in the province of Asia and thus stresses both the unity and the universality of Christ's church. These ecumenical greetings conveyed the thought of peace and love. Also, a greeting expressed by Christians strengthens the bond of fellowship with those who are engaged in the same task and who serve the same Lord. [Greek] -2 _ftnref34 [Greek] b. Aquila and Priscilla heartily greet you in the Lord. Aquila was born and raised in Pontus, a province in the northern part of Asia Minor. He was of Jewish descent and had settled in Rome with his wife, Priscilla. Both were expelled from the imperial city by edict of Emperor Claudius about a.d. 49 and moved to Corinth, where they practiced their tentmaking trade (Acts 18:2 3). When Paul arrived in Corinth, they provided lodging for him and became active participants in his missionary endeavors. With him they traveled to Ephesus, where they explained to Apollos the way of God more clearly (Acts 18:26). They opened their home to fellow believers and founded a church. Priscilla, abbreviated as Prisca, was a talented teacher whom Paul at times mentions before her husband. Aquila and Priscilla left Ephesus, took up residence in Rome for a while, and then returned to Ephesus. Paul mentions their names in his greetings (Rom. 16:3; II Tim. 4:19). c. With the church that meets in their house. House churches were common in apostolic times. Aquila and Priscilla founded house churches in Ephesus and in Rome (Rom. 16:5); Nympha had a church in her home (Col. 4:15); and Philemon opened his home to church gatherings (Philem. 2). House churches did not exist as individual groups separate from the local church; the local church in the first century met in the homes of private [Greek] -2 _ftnref35 [Greek] 20. All the brothers greet you. Greet one another with a holy kiss. The first part of this verse appears to be redundant. Paul had already sent the greetings of the churches and of Aquila and Priscilla and their house church; now he conveys the greetings of all the brothers and sisters. The greeting of the Ephesian church members included a warm embracing of the Corinthian believers. Furthermore, their gesture of affection must be expressed with a holy kiss, which in Paul's times and culture was customary and [Greek] -2 _ftnref36 [Greek] With the descriptive adjective holy, Paul prevents any misunderstanding. In addition to a mutual embrace, the act of kissing included a touching of the cheeks probably on the left and on the right and possibly a touching of the lips to the other person's [Greek] -2 _ftnref37 [Greek] 21. I, Paul, write this greeting in my own hand. Writing letters was frequently done by scribes at the request of individuals who dictated the message. At times, scribes identified themselves (Rom. 16:22) or were mentioned by name (I Peter 5:12). We are not sure whether Paul employed a scribe to write the current epistle, but we do know that the phrase (greeting in my own handmeans that this is a genuine letter from the author. Paul tells the Thessalonians that the greeting in his own hand is the characteristic mark in all his lettersII Thess. 3:17; see Gal. 6:11; Col. 4:18; Philem.19). The recipients in Corinth knew Paul's style of writing and recognized his [Greek] -2 _ftnref38 [Greek] 22. If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be accursed. Maranatha! a. Curse.Not all the recipients of this epistle love the Lord Jesus, as is evident from a number of passages where Paul reproaches those who deliberately undermined the [Greek] -2 _ftnref39 [Greek] With the use of a conditional clause, he notes that there are indeed people in the church who have no affection for Christ. Paul does not write the Greek word agapo, which denotes a genuine spiritual love and which he uses everywhere in his epistles. Except for Titus 3:15, this is the only place where Paul chooses the verb phileM; it signifies affection. Paul utters a formula that curses anyone who opposes the Lord Jesus, much as he invokes a curse on preachers who proclaim not Christ's gospel: As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursedGal. 1:9, NASB . b. Call.Maranatha. This is an Aramaic expression that can be translated either as an imperative. Our Lord, come! or as a perfect indicative, Our Lord has come. In view of the similar petition in Revelation 22:20, Come, Lord Jesus, the imperative is [Greek] -2 _ftnref40 [Greek] The use of an Aramaic word in the Greek community of Corinth is intriguing but not unusual. The writers of the New Testament were not a verse to Aramaic terms. The Christians adopted a Jewish vocabulary that included the words (AbbaRom. 8:15: Gal. 4:6), (AmenII Cor. 1:20), (HalleluiahRev. 19:1, 3, 4, 6), (HosannaMatt. 21:9, 15; Mark 11:9 10; John 12:13), and Maranatha. What is Paul's purpose for calling on the Lord Jesus to return? Some scholars regard the verse as a formula that was part of the liturgy for celebrating the Lord's [Greek] -2 _ftnref41 [Greek] There are similarities but not to the extent that in this passage Paul refers to a communion celebration. True, the early church recognized the very presence of Jesus at communion and earnestly prayed for the physical return of the Lord in their midst: Come, Lord Jesus!Didache10:6 . But in the current text, Paul adds the word Maranathato a curse formula. This means that he implores the Lord to come as Judge to mete out punishment. He prays that the Lord will come quickly and remove those people who do not love [Greek] -2 _ftnref42 [Greek] 23. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you. 24. My love be with you all in Christ Jesus, Amen. The conclusion to this epistle is the usual benediction recorded in many epistles. Paul prays that the Lord Jesus may extend his forgiving grace and his spiritual presence to all the recipients of this letter. His is a prayer for the physical and spiritual well-being of God's people. The last sentence in this epistle expresses Paul's personal love for all the Corinthians who are in Christ Jesus. He wants them to know that his love for them is truly spiritual in the Lord. He calls judgment on those who refuse to love the Lord, but for Jesus followers he has genuine love. Doctrinal Considerations in 16:22 Churches sometimes look for a unique name to identify themselves. They choose the word (Maranathaand want to be known as a church that prays for and anticipates the imminent return of Jesus Christ. But in the universal church, every sincere Christian longs for the day of the Lord and prays fervently for his return. Peter instructs his readers that they must look forward to the day of God and speed its comingII Peter 3:12). He means that all believers must hasten that day by proclaiming and teaching Christ's gospel to all the inhabitants and the nations of the world. Peter himself addressed a multitude and told the people to repent so that God may send the Christ (Acts 3:19 21). When men, women, and children throughout the world repent and turn to Christ, they will hasten his return. The prayer Amen. Come, Lord Jesus (Rev. 22:20) is a response to Jesus promise, Yes, I am coming soon. Both the Holy Spirit and the bride, that is the church, are earnestly praying for the coming of Jesus Christ. The bride longs for the coming of the bridegroom to be together eternally in joyful celebration. Greek Words, Phrases, and Constructions in 16:19–22 Verse 19 [Greek] the subject of the verb to greetis a compound plural followed by the singular verb form. Although the Majority Text features the verb in the plural, the more difficult reading is preferred. [Greek] the variant reading [Greek] is adopted by the Textus Receptus on the basis of numerous manuscripts. Luke writes the full form (Acts 18:2, 18, 26), but Paul prefers the diminutive [Greek] in three of his epistles (Rom. 16:3; I Cor. 16:19; II Tim. [Greek] -2 _ftnref43 [Greek] Verses 21 22 [Greek] the proper noun stands in apposition to the possessive pronoun and noun [Greek] (my own hand). [Greek] the present imperative from the verb [Greek] (I am) is used as an optative of wish. With the noun, it pronounces a prayer for damnation on those who separate from Christ. [Greek] it is a transliterated word from the Aramaic and is preferably interpreted as an imperative. Summary of Chapter 16 At an earlier occasion, Paul had instructed the Galatian churches to gather a monetary collection for the support of the poverty-stricken saints in Jerusalem. Now he tells the Corinthian believers to do likewise. He charges them to set aside money regularly on the first day of the week, so that when Paul arrives in Corinth no collections will have to be made. He will write letters of introduction for the men who will carry the gift to Jerusalem, and he himself may accompany them if it is advisable. Paul reveals his travel plans: he warns to travel through Macedonia and upon arriving in Corinth spend the winter there. At present, he will stay in Ephesus until Pentecost; he writes that a door of evangelistic opportunity has opened. Timothy is expected to arrive in Corinth, and Paul asks the Corinthians to receive him warmly because of his work. He advises the readers to send Timothy on his way. Apollos, who was invited to visit Corinth, expressed unwillingness to go, yet Paul encourages him to accept the invitation. Apollos says that he will do so when the opportunity arises. The name of Stephanas is mentioned with respect to his household, conversion, and service to the saints. Paul exhorts the readers to submit to such leaders. The visit of Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus makes him happy, for they have refreshed Paul's spirit. The chapter ends with greetings from the churches in the province of Asia, Aquila and Priscilla with their house church, and all the believers. Paul sends his greetings by signing the epistle. All those who do not love the Lord are placed under a curse. Paul commends the readers to the grace of the Lord Jesus and extends to them his love in Christ Jesus. -2 _ftn1 1 Murray J. Harris, NIDNTT, vol. 3, p. 752; Gerhard Kittel, TDNT, vol. 4, pp. 282–83; Keith F. Nickle, The Collection: A Study in Paul's Strategy, SBT 48 (London: SCM; Naperville, Ill.: Allenson, 1966); Dieter Georgi, Die Geschichte der Kollecte des Paulus für Jerusalem(Hamburg: Reich, 1965). -2 _ftn2 2 Gerd Luedemann, Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles: Studies in Chronology, trans. F. Stanley Jones (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), p. 81; John C. Hurd, Jr., The Origin of I Corinthians(Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1983), p. 233. -2 _ftn3 3 C. K. Barrett suggests churches in northern Galatia. See A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, Harper's New Testament Commentaries series (New York and Evanston: Harper and Row, 1968), p. 386. -2 _ftn4 4 Max Turner, The Sabbath, Sunday, and the Law in Luke/Acts, in From Sabbath to Lord's Day: A Biblical, Historical, and Theological Investigation, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982), p. 137. -2 _ftn5 5 Among others, see Samuele Bacchiocchi, From Sabbath to Sunday: A Historical Investigation of the Rise of Sunday Observance in Early Christianity(Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University Press, 1977), pp. 93–95; Willy Rordorf, Sunday: The History of the Day of Rest and Worship in the Earliest Centuries of the Christian Church, trans. A. A. K. Graham (London: SCM; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968), pp. 193–94. -2 _ftn6 6 Bauer, p. 323. -2 _ftn7 7 Refer to Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians, WBC 40 (Waco: Word, 1986), pp. 274–75. -2 _ftn8 8 (GNB, NAB, NASB, NEB, NIV, NJB, REB, SEB, Phillips. ) -2 _ftn9 9 JB, KJV, MLB, NKJV, RSV, NRSV. -2 _ftn10 10 C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom-Book of New Testament Greek, 2d ed, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960), p. 57. -2 _ftn11 11 Compare A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research(Nashville: Broadman, 1934), p. 1061. -2 _ftn12 12 On the basis of 5:7 and 15:20, some commentators suggest that Paul wrote this epistle at Easter. Whether he composed the letter before or after Easter is inconsequential. For a discussion on the chronology of Paul's stay in Ephesus and Corinth consult the Introduction. -2 _ftn13 13 Consult Gordon D. Fee, [Greek] in II Corinthians 1.15: Apostolic Parousia and Paul-Corinth Chronology, NTS24 (1977 78): 533–38. -2 _ftn14 14 (Grosheide is of the opinion that Paul wrote I Cor. before he had decided to travel to JerusalemActs 19:21 22) or that he had not yet fully determined his plans. Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes, New International Commentary on the New Testament series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), p. 399 n. 4. -2 _ftn15 15 Paul in Acts 18:21, Rom. 1:10, 15:32, and I Cor. 4:19; the writer of Hebrews in 6:3; and James in 4:13–15. -2 _ftn16 16 Luedemann, Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles, p. 93. -2 _ftn17 17 Consult Gerald F. Hawthorne, ISBE, vol. 4, pp. 857–58. -2 _ftn18 18 Refer to William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Pastoral Epistles, New Testament Commentary series (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1965), pp. 179–81. -2 _ftn19 19 (II Cor. 2:13; 7:6, 13 15; 8:6, 16 17, 23; 12:18. ) -2 _ftn20 20 (Respectively, II Cor. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1; I Thess. 1:1; II Thess. 1:1. ) -2 _ftn21 21 (KJV, NKJV, JB, NJB, Cassirer. ) -2 _ftn22 22 (GNB, NAB, NCV, NIV, SEB, Phillips. ) -2 _ftn23 23 Moule, Idiom-Book, p. 22. -2 _ftn24 24 Meinrad Limbeck, EDNT, vol. 2, p. 137. However, Gottlob SchrenkTDNT, vol. 3, p. 59 understands it as the will of God. -2 _ftn25 25 E.g., see Matt. 24:42; 25:13; Mark 13:35, 37; I Thess. 5:6; Rev. 3:3; 16:15. See also Albrecht Oepke, TDNT, vol. 2, p. 338. -2 _ftn26 26 Gal. 5:1; Phil. 1:27; 4:1; I Thess. 3:8; II Thess. 2:15. Consult Walter Grundmann, TDNT, vol. 7, p. 639; Michael Wolter, EDNT, vol. 2, p. 207. -2 _ftn27 27 Refer to Robert Murray, New Wine in Old Wineskins XII. Firstfruits, ExpT86 (1974 75): 164–68. -2 _ftn28 28 E.g., see KJV, NKJV, NASB. -2 _ftn29 NASB New American Standard Bible -2 _ftn30 29 29. Gerhard Delling, TDNT, vol. 8. pp. 44–45. -2 _ftn31 30 The author of Hebrews writes the Greek verb hypeikM(I give way, submit), a synonym of hypotassM(I submit). -2 _ftn32 31 Compare Bauer, p. 836. -2 _ftn33 32 Compare Friedrich Blass and Albert Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans. and rev. Robert Funk (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), #285.1. -2 _ftn34 33 Hans Windisch, TDNT, vol. 1, p. 501. -2 _ftn35 34 Marlis Gielen, Zur Interpretation der paulinischen Formel h kat oikon ekklsia, ZNW77 (1986): 109–25. -2 _ftn36 35 (See also Rom. 16:16; II Cor. 13:12; I Thess. 5:26; compare I Peter 5:14. ) -2 _ftn37 36 John Ellington, Kissing in the Bible: Form and Meaning, BibTr41 (1990): 409–16. -2 _ftn38 37 John Nijenhuis, The Greeting in My Own Hand Paul, BibToday19 (1981): 255–58. -2 _ftn39 38 Compare, e.g., 4:18–19, 5:13; 6:9–10; 12:3; 14:36–38; 15:12. -2 _ftn40 39 J. A. Emerton, MARANATHAand EPHPHATHA, JTS18 (1967): 427–31. -2 _ftn41 40 Fee, First Corinthians, p. 834 n. 6. -2 _ftn42 41 C. F. D. Moule, A Reconsideration of the Context of Maranatha, NTS6 (1960): 307–10; Oscar Cullman, Early Christian Worship, SBT, 1st series 10 (London: SCM, 1953), pp. 13–14; J. J. Hughes, Maranatha, ISBE, vol. 3, p. 243. Compare W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, Two Texts in I Corinthians, NTS16 (1970): 271–76. -2 _ftn43 42 Consult Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 3d corrected ed. (London, and New York: United Bible Societies, 1975), p. 570.