David Lipscomb Commentary On 1st Corinthians 1 1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God,—Paul had first preached the gospel at Corinth (Acts 18:1) ; had planted the church there, yet his authority as an apostle had been denied, and in this letter he vindicates his claim to be an apostle. He therefore begins the letter with the assertion that he was an apostle and called of Jesus Christ to the apostleship. “ Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God,” is a simple and literal translation, giving the idea clearly. Jesus called Paul to be an apostle to the Gen­tiles when he appeared to him on the way to Damascus. Hence, it is said: “ Paul, an apostle (not from men, neither through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead).” (Galatians 1:1.) and Sosthenes our brother,—Sosthenes is doubtless the same person mentioned in Acts 18:17, who as ruler of the synagogue was set upon by the Jews. He became a follower of Christ, was persecuted at Corinth, and likely went with Paul when he left the city under persecution, and when Paul wrote this letter to the church at Corinth, Sosthenes joined him in it, probably acting as amanuensis. To this position it is objected that it was he, who, as ruler of the synagogue, had dragged Paul himself before Gallio, the Roman proconsul, and who, when Gallio refused to meddle with the case, as out of his jurisdiction, was set upon and roughly handled by the Jews, even before the judgment seat. (Acts 18:12-17.) But since the name of Sosthenes occurs nowhere else but in this epistle addressed to the Corinthians as one with whom they were familiar, and since it is often that the most violent op- posers of the truth, when once won by it, become, like Paul himself, its most enthusiastic promoters, I can but conclude that the position here taken is correct. 2 unto the church of God—The church is a divine name for the disciples of Christ in a city or community. The term church is used in a general and universal sense, also in a specific and local sense. Jn its universal sense it embraces all the spirits in the universe that obey God as the ruler and the lawgiver. (Hebrews 12:22-29.) In its local sense it embraces all persons in a community who have been called out, separated from the world by the gospel, and who are bound together by a common faith in Jesus Christ. While in the world we can know and approach this church only in its local manifesta¬tions. So far as this church is composed of spirits that are invisible, the church is invisible; so far as it is composed of visible men and women, it is a visible body. No visible being can be a part or a member of an invisible church, any more than visible arms and legs can compose an invisible body. If a visible material person is a member of the church, he is a member of the visible local church where he lives. All Christians in the days of the apostles were members of the local churches. They became so by obedience to God. These local churches were bodies distinct and separate, without any organic connection with one another. Each was a distinct body within itself. The members of these local assemblies, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, chose their own overseers and workers. The local congregation was the highest and only manifestation of the church. Each congregation stood on a perfect equality with all others. The elders of the local con¬gregation were the highest “ dignitaries” of the church, and they were chief servants and ruled by example rather than by authority. which is at Corinth,—The members of the church at Corinth had fallen into many sinful habits, yet Paul recognized them as a church of God. even them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus,—The sanctified are set apart or separated to a sacred service of purpose. It does not mean that they were sinless, or free from temptation from sin; but consecrated to the service of God. All who have entered into Christ, and have obligated themselves to serve him, are said to be sanctified in Christ Jesus regardless of their degree of consecration or perfection of character. There are degrees of sanctification just as there are degrees of Christian knowledge and fidelity to Christ. The growth in sanctification and holiness is to be attained by a constant and persistent study of God’ s will, and a daily effort to bring oneself into obedience to the same. The claim that religion in any of its parts is to be obtained otherwise than through learning the word of God and striving faithfully to do the things commanded is a sad mistake that results in the perversion of religion from a faithful, self-denying service to a spasmodic feeling or impulse of excitement. True religion is to be felt and appreciated, not as fleshly excitement or emotion, but as the result of right thinking and doing. It is the abiding consciousness of duty performed to the best of one’ s ability. This feeling of joy and happiness that thus comes is permanent and enduring. All excitement of the fleshly emotions are short lived and deceptive. called to be saints,—All who accept the invitation offered in the gospel are the called of Jesus Christ. Saints are sanctified ones, set apart to the service of God. with all that call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ— [To call upon is to invoke his aid. To call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord is to invoke his aid as the Christ, the Messiah predicted by the prophets, and as our almighty and sovereign possessor and ruler. It is in that sense that Jesus is Lord. All authority in heaven and on earth was committed unto him (Matthew 28:18) after he died and rose again that he might be the Lord of the dead and of the living; that is, that he might acquire that peculiar right of possession in his peo¬ple which arises from his having purchased them with his own blood. (Acts 20:28.) To call upon the name of Jesus as Lord is therefore to worship him. It looks to him for that help which God only can give. All Christians, therefore, are the worshipers of Christ. And every sincere worshiper is a true Christian. The phrase expresses not so much an individual act of invocation, as an habitual state of mind and its appropriate expression.] in every place,—This shows that while the epistle was written directly to, and for the instruction of the church at Corinth, it was also intended for the instruction and use of all who call upon the name of Jesus Christ at all times and in all places. In other words, it was an epistle for universal use. their Lord and ours:— This means that Jesus is at once the Lord and Savior of all God’ s children wherever they be. 3 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.—This is a prayer that favor be unto them and peace that God and Christ have and alone can give should be given unto them. This peace nothing can destroy. ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR 1 Corinthians 1:4-9 4 I thank my God always concerning you, for the grace of God which was given you in Christ Jesus;—He thanked God for the great favor that had been shown them as servants of Christ Jesus. [He congratulates them on the abundant gifts and graces bestowed on them from God, and to express his hope as to their spiritual progress; in order, by a praise calcu-lated to conciliate their good will, to introduce, with less of¬fense, the reproofs which their state rendered is necessary for him to administer, and which he skillfully introduces. There was much to be thankful for, and hopeful about, in the Corin¬thian church. And on this he first dwells, in order to appeal to their better feelings, and thus place the contrast in stronger relief, and so fix a deep conviction of sin.] 5 that in everything ye were enriched in him,—In the fourteenth chapter Paul mentions the many gifts bestowed on the church at Corinth, showing that in everything they, as a church of Jesus Christ, had received blessings and favors that spiritually enriched them, or placed the rich gifts of the favors unto which these gifts brought. in all utterance— The ability to speak the gospel in different tongues. and all knowledge;— The spiritual gifts that would bestow all knowledge needful for salvation and the power of im¬parting it to others by the gift of tongues had been freely bestowed on the members of the church at Corinth. These gifts had been so distributed to the members of the church that they would supply the knowledge of God’ s will to them. 6 even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you:— The testimony concerning Jesus was confirmed by the miracles wrought and the gifts bestowed, making sure that the things spoken were from God. 7 so that ye come behind in no gift;—The gifts were so freely bestowed that they fell behind other churches in no gift. “ For what is there wherein ye were made inferior to the rest of the churches, except it be that I myself was not a burden to you?” (2 Corinthians 12:13.) waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ;—These gifts were to impart all instruction and knowledge while they waited the coming, or restitution, of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is difficult to determine whether this coming refers to the destruction of Jerusalem, which would be a full confirmation of all that had been said of Christ and the apostles; or whether to “ when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be marvelled at in all them that believed ... in that day.” (2 Thessalonians 1:10.) [That it has reference to the latter there can be but little doubt, since the Lord promised his anx¬ious disciples when he was about to leave them that he would return, and this promise was renewed by the angel on the very day that he ascended into heaven. (Acts 1:11.) It be¬came the settled hope of Christians that he would return. (Tit. 2; 12, 13; 2 Peter 3:12; Heb. 8: 28.) And the apostle John, who was present when Jesus ascended, closed the vol¬ume of inspiration with the earnest prayer that he would come quickly. (Revelation 22:20.) The expectancy of the coming of the Lord steadied and strengthened the Christian life, and probably here it is introduced as the motive by which they were kept from anything that would impoverish their spiritu¬ality. This earnest desire and expectation is the greatest proof of maturity and richness of the Christian life.] 8 who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye be unre¬provable in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.— God would so confirm them in the truth of what had been taught them that they would remain steadfast and be blameless when Christ should come to judge the world. [This would cause them to hold themselves in readiness for that great day, not knowing when it might come.] 9 God is faithful,—He assures them that God is faithful to do what he has promised. If they continued steadfast in their obedience to him, he would preserve them without blame, through the power he exerts in Christ Jesus. through whom ye were called into the fellowship—Fellowship with Christ means a partnership with him, a merging our individuality in the body of Christ. Earthly partnerships are limited. Business partnerships are limited to the business proposed in the combination. The relation of husband and wife is the most extended partnership of this life, yet it is limited. The partnership in Christ is unlimited as to time or ob¬jects of accomplishments. The completeness of the partner¬ship is indicated by the comparison to the union of the fleshly in one body. They are indissolubly joined together; the inter¬est of the one is the interest of all. One cannot possibly pros¬per at the cost or detriment of another. If “ one member suf fereth, all the members [the whole body] suffer with it.” (12: 26.) If one member prospers, all rejoice with it, the union is complete. of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.—Of that partnership Christ is Head. He is Head in the sense that from him all the strength and power come, all the wisdom descends. He is the center to which all the members are bound, from him all the impulses and guidance flow. [Paul’ s whole desire was to rivet the mind of the Corinthian church to the name of Jesus Christ. He makes no mention of any apostle or teacher, but evermore of Jesus. Nowhere in any other epistle is the name of Jesus Christ so often repeated. In these introductory verses, he repeats the name nine times, making it the connect¬ing link of the whole introductory part of the epistle. The frequent mention of his name doubtless grew out of the desire of the apostle to draw them away from their party admiration of particular teachers to Christ alone.] TO UNITY AND REPROOF OF PARTY SPIRIT1 Corinthians 1:10-17 10 Now I beseech you, brethren, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,—Paul, as a brother in Christ, tenderly entreats them from God, speaking for Jesus Christ and by his authority (2 Corinthians 5:20), [not to let any other name eclipse the name of Jesus Christ, by making it a rallying point around which to gather.] that ye all speak the same thing,—To speak the same thing is to speak only as they were taught by the Holy Spirit, with which he had told them they had been richly endowed. and that there be no divisions among you;—They were di¬vided- over their favorite teachers or ministers. [The divisions which existed in Corinth were not of the nature of hostile sects refusing communion with each other, but such as may exist in the bosom of the same congregation, consisting in alienation of feeling and party strife.] but that ye be perfected together in the same mind and in the same judgment.— To be of the same mind and the same judgment must be practical among Christians, else Paul would not have urged it. But it is practical only when all follow the things taught by the Lord. By deferring our judgment to his teaching and following the same we can be one. When we change things which God directs or add things not taught by God, we will differ and divide. In any matter not taught by God involving no fidelity to his laws or to institutions, each must defer to the other. 11 For it hath been signified unto me concerning you, my brethren, by them that are of the household of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.-—Chloe and her house are mentioned only here. They had probably come from Corinth to Ephesus where Paul was when he wrote this letter and had told him that contentions had arisen among them at Corinth, that divided them into factions and parties. 12 Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul;—Some Judaizers had come among them and denied that Paul was an apostle. Others became so zealous in his de¬fense that they claimed to be his followers. He had planted the church, was plain, direct, and uncompromising in his teaching, withal was not commanding in appearance or elegant in speech. His enemies said: “ His bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account.” (2 Corinthians 10:10.) and I of Apollos;—Apollos, an eloquent speaker and learned in the Scriptures, had gone among them, become popular and a party had sprung up claiming him as their teacher. At this writing he was with or near Paul (16: 12)., in communication with him and likely cognizant of the condition at Corinth, and of the writing of this letter. and I of Cephas;—Others had come from Jerusalem and were now at Corinth. They claimed Peter as their leader and teacher, as he had been the leader at Jerusalem and in Judea. and I of Christ.—Others still claimed to ignore all teachers and to be of Christ. This could be done in a partisan spirit. To ignore the teachers sent of Christ, and while doing this to claim to be of Christ, was to be a party. Jesus said: “ He that heareth you heareth me; and he that rejecteth you rejecteth me; and he that rejecteth me rejecteth him that sent me.” (Luke 10:16.) 13 Is Christ divided?—This was said in condemnation of their divided state. To divide and rend the church of Christ into parties is to divide Christ. The church is his spiritual body, to establish which he sacrificed his fleshly body. Then it is a greater sin to divide the church of Christ than it was to pierce and mutilate his fleshly body. He who introduces things not required by God, that cause division and strife, is guilty of the strife. All the divisions in the churches arise over the introduction of teachings, orders, and institutions not ordained of God. Hence the followers of Christ cannot divide— cannot introduce things not required by God. was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul?—That is, they should be followers of none, save him who died to redeem them, and into whose name they had been baptized. He does not mention Apollos, but shows the folly of human leaders by showing the sin of following himself instead of Christ. [To be “ baptized into the name of” signifies to be baptized while engaging henceforth to belong to him in whose name the rite is performed. In the name is summed up all that is revealed regarding him who bears it, consequently all the titles of his legitimate authority. Baptism is therefore a taking possession of the baptized on the part of the one whose name is invoked on him. Never did Paul think for a moment of arrogating to himself such a posi¬tion in relation to those who were baptized by him.] 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you,— He said this on account of their divisions and strife, save Crispus and Gaius;—Crispus was one of the first con¬verts (Acts 18:8), and was baptized before Timothy and Silas reached Corinth. Of Gaius we know but little. In the epistle to the Romans (16: 23), he calls him “ my host, and of the whole church.” He was doubtless one of the first converts. 15 lest any man should say that ye were baptized into my name.—Had he baptized in his own name he would have taken unto himself the honor that belonged to Christ alone. 16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas:—The household of Stephanas were the first fruits of Achaia. (16:15.) Because it is said that Paul baptized the households of Stephanas, Lydia, and the jailer (Acts 16:15 Acts 16:34), some en¬deavor to prove that infant baptism was practiced in the apos¬tolic age, on the ground that these families contained infants and that when Paul baptized the household he must have bap¬tized the infants. But that these three persons, one a woman in business of whose husband nothing is said, had infant children is far from certain. Nor does the phrase “ baptized the household” make it certain that the infants, if there were any, were baptized. [For we are told that the nobleman “ believed, and his whole house” (John 4:53) ; that Crispus “ believed in the Lord with all his house” (Acts 18:8) ; that the jailer “ rejoiced greatly, with all his house, having believed in God” (Acts 16:34) ; that Cornelius “ feared God with all his house” (Acts 10:2); and that “ the house of Stephanas ... is the first fruits of Achaia, and that they have set themselves to minister unto the saints” (1 Corinthians 16:15). But this by no means implies that in these five houses there were no infants, or that infants believed the gospel, feared god, or rejoiced but that those capable of understanding the gospel believed it and rejoiced. Just so in reference to baptism. Consequently these passages render no aid whatever to those contending for infant baptism.] besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.—[Paul guards against the statement being taken absolutely, so that any slight error in it could be used against him. The Spirit was given to the apostles to lead them into all the truth (John 16:13); but it was truth relative to man’ s salvation which was thus made known to them, and not truth like the fact here mentioned, the certain knowledge of which was of no use to the world. ] 17 For Christ sent me not to baptize,—By this he did not mean to deprecate baptism, or to say it was not important. An inspired man could not preach Christ without preaching baptism. Usually Paul was accompanied by his companions in labor who baptized those who believed under his preach¬ing; but he went into Corinth unaccompanied by any of them (Acts 17:14 Acts 15; comp. 18: 5), and “ reasoned in the syna-gogue every sabbath, and persuaded Jews and Greeks” (Acts 18:4), and those persons most likely believed before the ar¬rival of Silas and Timothy. So he baptized with his own hands those who believed, and after their arrival he baptized no more of them. They ministered to him by doing such service. Paul, no matter who were his companions, was the chief leader and teacher. His pre-eminence was marked and always recognized. but to preach the gospel:—To preach the gospel is to preach Christ as God’ s representative, and no one can preach Christ as he is represented in the Scriptures without teaching all he taught. Paul could only claim to be free from the blood of all men by declaring the whole counsel of God. (Acts 20:26-27.) not in wisdom of words,— Christ sent him to preach the gospel, not with the wisdom of learning, nor by the philoso¬phy of human wisdom, nor with eloquent and persuasive speech, but with the simple facts of the gospel. lest the cross of Christ should be made void.—The simple facts of the gospel, with the requirements growing out of them, told in an earnest and loving spirit, and not eloquence and learning, should be relied on to win men from their sins to serve the living God. [To a people thoroughly vitiated in their taste, the preacher of the gospel is open to the tempta¬tion of shading off those features of the gospel which are re¬pulsive to the pride of the heart, and of urging the reception of it rather on the ground of its own “ sweet reasonableness” than on its being an authoritative message from heaven.] THE OF THE CROSS AND ITS MODE OF AS OPPOSED TO 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 18 For the word of the cross is to them that perish foolish¬ness;—To those who reject the story of the cross, the death of Jesus for the deliverance of man from sin is all foolishness. They regard it so, treat it so, and it, standing to them as foolishness, has no influence or power to save. but unto us who are saved it is the power of God.— The cross, which stands for the facts and truths of the gospel, is the power to save from sin. The idea that to humble himself as a servant, to suffer and die as a criminal, is the way to exert influence and power to overcome man and to lead him away from selfishness and sin is contrary to all feelings and propensities of human nature. While Christ reveals in his hu¬manity a new power to men, and through thus humbling him¬self he can lead others away from sin, he also reveals to men a new and living way to happiness. The only sure way to happiness is to help others in the name of him who became a sin offering for the whole human family. 19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, —The wisdom of the world is folly in the sight of God. The great living principle of salvation is that man must hear God and be guided by his wisdom. God is the Creator and Ruler of the universe and all things must be brought into harmony with his will and be subject to his laws. All God’ s dealings with man are intended to bring about this end. The trouble with man is that he prefers to walk by his own wisdom rather than surrender to the wisdom of God. All God’ s dealings with man from the beginning have been to show that man’ s own wisdom has brought him to ruin. Therefore he must eschew it and seek the wisdom of God. (Isaiah 29:14; Jeremiah 8:9; Romans 1:16.) And the discernment of the discerning will I bring to nought.—So God has foretold that he would bring all the devices and inventions of human wisdom to nought by the things that seemed to men weak and foolish. 20 Where is the wise?—The wise doubtless were the Greek philosophers who sought after wisdom and claimed to be its chief upholders. where is the scribe?—The scribes were a learned body of men, otherwise denominated lawyers, whose influence over the Jewish people was very great. where is the disputer of this world?—The disputers were the Epicureans, Stoics, and other schools of philosophy devoted especially to disputation. None of these classes, the learned and wise of their nations, accepted the truth. Jesus said: “ I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto babes: yea, Father; for so it was well-pleasing in thy sight.” (Luke 10:21.) hath not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?— When properly used, learning, instead of being a hindrance, is a great help in coming to a knowledge of the truth; but if a man is puffed up by it, so as to think he is wise and not de¬pendent upon God, it hinders. God has shown by his teachings and dealings with the world that all such wisdom is fool-ishness. 21 For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom knew not God,—To know God is to know his character, will, judgments, and his manner of dealings with man, when he will bless and when he will curse. It was a part of the wisdom of God, in ordering all things, that man by his own wisdom should not thus know God. it was God’ s good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save them that believe.— Nothing in man can teach him these things. He is dependent upon God made known through the preaching of the gospel which seems foolishness to man. The gospel is a revelation of God and of his will made known through Christ. Those who believe in Christ and accept him and his teachings as the true wisdom of God will be saved by it. The things suggested by human wis¬dom cannot save. 22 Seeing that Jews ask for signs,—The Jews had been trained to accept the revelation of God attested by signs and miracles. It was the test of one claiming to be a teacher of the truth. The Jews repeatedly asked signs of Jesus. (Matthew 12:38 Matthew 16:1; Mark 8: 11, 12; 4:.48.) and Greeks seek after wisdom:—The Greeks asked philosophy— wisdom of the world. The religion of the Jews was based on signs and miracles; [but the more they got of them; the less they were satisfied; contrariwise, the Greeks looked with philosophic indifference on the whole field of the supernatural, regarding even the resurrection of Christ as adding but one more of the already plentiful childish fables, fit only for the simple-minded. “ Give us wisdom” was their cry— anything that will carry its own evidence on its face. Nor was this state of things a peculiarity of that time. Every age has its blind devotees of supernatural interposition and its self-sufficient worshipers of human reason.] 23 But we preach Christ crucified,—This they did as the only means offered to man to escape sin and its penalties. unto Jews a stumblingblock,—Jesus was a living miracle and sign in his life, his teaching, and his works. The life and teaching of Jesus are as much a miracle, above human power, as were the works he performed. They are not so striking to the unthinking mind, but the life and teaching of Jesus are just as far above the capacities of man as it is beyond the power of man to raise the dead. The Jews could not account for his wonderful life. [It is well known that to the Jews no doctrine was more offensive than that the Messiah was to be put to death, and that there was to be salvation, in no other way. It was so in the time of Paul, and it has been so ever since.] and unto Gentiles foolishness:— His whole teaching and manner of helping man was without reason or sense to the philosophic Greeks. They could see neither reason nor sense in it. [Nothing in the apprehension of the modernist can be more absurd than that the blood of the cross can remove sin, promote virtue, and secure salvation; or that the preaching of that doctrine is to convert the world.] 24 but unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks,— The called were those who believed in Jesus and accepted the invitation to come unto him. And those who accepted him were not those filled with the conceit of their own wisdom and self-sufficiency; but those conscious of their own weakness, willing to hear, and be guided by his wisdom. Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.—The provisions made in Christ for the salvation of men embodied what God in his wisdom saw was best to save man, and in these provisions the full power of God to save is found. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men;—The things provided by God that seem foolish to man have much more true wisdom than the things that seem to man the greatest wisdom. and the weakness of God is stronger than men.—The things of God that seem to man weak have more strength in them than the mightiest of man’ s devices. The seemingly weakest of God’ s appointments, used in God’ s name for God’ s honor and glory as he directs, have all the power and strength of God in them. 26 For behold your calling, brethren, that not many wise after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:-—This will bear two constructions. One is, not many worldly or great ones accept the divine call and become servants of God. The other is, that not many wise, noble, or great ones of earth are chosen of God to preach the gospel. Both propositions are true. The latter one seems more in harmony with the context. 27 but God chose the foolish things of the world, that he might put to shame them that are wise;—God to show his power and presence, and to manifest the folly of man’ s wisdom, and the weakness of his greatest inventions, chose the things that to human wisdom appear foolish to confound or confuse the wisdom of the great ones. and God chose the weak things of the world, that he might put to shame the things that are strong;—Jesus himself came as a helpless babe among the poorer classes of the people and without human power or greatness, and undertook the rescue of the world from the dominion of the evil one. All the appointments of God correspond to the character of Jesus and his condition, lack worldly wisdom. When man uses means fitted to the end sought, he is prone to attribute the result to the means used, to his wisdom in choosing the means. But when the conditions are inadequate to produce the end, then he who ordains the means is looked upon as the source of the power. Of such character was the separating the waters of the Red Sea, the throwing down the walls of Jericho, and the healing of Naaman of leprosy, and this is characteristic of God’ s work generally. The things that seem foolish and weak to the wisdom of man are chosen by God to overturn the works of man, and to effect what his wisdom chooses to accomplish. 28 and the base things of the world, and the things that are despised, did God choose, yea and the things that are not,—God chose the things that seem base, that man despised as un¬worthy, and even things that are not— are dead— as Rachel weeping for her children; and she would not be comforted, because they are not— dead. that he might bring to nought the things that are:—God depended upon a dead Christ to call them to repentance, to establish the reign and authority of God, overturn the mighty works of man that had been built up in the world in rebellion against God. 29 that no flesh should glory before God.—God requires man to work through means unfitted to the end to be accomplished, to show him that the power is of God, that God does the work, that man might not glory as though he did it himself ; but his glorying was in God the giver of all good. The great end of God’ s dealings with man is to cause him to trust God, and lead him to walk in accordance with his will. God imposes on man conditions which in themselves are inadequate to the accomplishment of the end sought, that man may show his faith in God and his willingness to obey him, and in this obedience show his fitness to receive the blessings of God, and that no man should glory in himself in the presence of God. Man had so sinned, so fallen from God’ s favor, that God would receive him only as he distrusted self and trusted God who redeemed him. 30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus,—By the provisions of God we are brought into Christ Jesus through faith. Faith affects the heart, the emotions, and directs the confidence and trust toward Christ. Faith carries into Christ only as it leads us to perform the acts that place us in Christ. Faith perfected by obedience is the bringing the whole man—“ spirit and soul and body”— into harmony with the faith of the heart. Faith perfected by obedience embodied and expressed by repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38), puts us in Christ. “ For ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ." (Galatians 3:26-27.) who was made unto us wisdom from God,—Jesus Christ with his works, teachings, and requirements is the perfection of divine wisdom to save man. When man acts according to his teaching and follows his ways, he appropriates and uses God’ s wisdom to guide his steps. This lifts the humble man of earth above the weakness of his own wisdom and ignorance, and enables him to walk by the wisdom of God. When Solomon gave divine sanction to the wise proverbs of nations and peoples, he enabled every one who has faith in God to appro¬priate this wisdom as his own and to walk by it. So Jesus Christ is to us the wisdom of God. “ Behold, a greater than Solomon is here.” (Matthew 12:42.) mon gave divine sanction to the wise proverbs of nations and peoples, he enabled every one who has faith in God to appro¬priate this wisdom as his own and to walk by it. So Jesus Christ is to us the wisdom of God. “ Behold, a greater than Solomon is here.” (Matthew 12:42.) and righteousness—Jesus suffered and died as though he was a sinful man that sinful men might stand clothed with the righteousness of God, and live as though he had never sinned. God is righteous, and for man to become righteous, he must live according to the will of God, that in character he may be like him. Man by faith enters into Christ, drinks into his spirit, walks as he walked, and so clothes himself with the righteousness of Christ, thus has God made him righteousness to us. and sanctification,—Jesus sanctified himself that in him man might be sanctified or set apart to the service of God. Only in Christ, and walking in his wisdom, can man be set apart or sanctified to the services of God. Out of Christ man cannot serve God. and redemption:—Jesus Christ came to rescue man from the thralldom of sin, and gave his life to rescue him from death. In Jesus Christ as his servant God will accept him. Thus is Christ made unto us redemption. 31 that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.—All these blessings came to man, not in his own name, or by walking in his ways, but as a servant of Jesus Christ, redeemed, sanctified, saved by him in fulfillment of the Scripture: “ Thus saith Jehovah, Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him that glorieth glory in this, that he hath understanding, and knoweth me, that I am Jehovah who exerciseth lovingkindness, justice, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith Jehovah.” (Jeremiah 9:23-24.) There is no room for man glorying in himself. His own wisdom, his own ways, his own strength brought death, and still bring only ruin. So he cannot glory in himself. He that glorieth in honors won, or in blessings enjoyed, must do it in the Lord, as he alone can guide with wisdom, clothe with righteousness, sanctify man to his service, and redeem him from his iniquities and from death. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ 1 Corinthians 1:2. The terms church of God and church of Christ are both used for the same institution because of their common relation to the Deity. For the meaning of church see the notes on Romans 16:16, in volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary. The various qualifying terms following the phrase of the church do not indicate separate groups, but are qualities belonging to the one institution. Sanctified is from HAGIAZO, which Thayer defines, "1. to render or acknowledge to be venerable, to hallow. 2. to separate from things profane and dedicate to God, to consecrate." Saints is from HAGIOS, which Thayer defines, "set apart for God, to be, as it were, exclusively his." With all, etc., means to apply the epistle to Christians everywhere. For the meaning of calling on the name of the Lord, see the notes at Acts 22:16 in volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary. Lord . . . theirs . . . ours, signifies there is only one God. 1 Corinthians 1:3. Grace is from CHARIS, and one part of Thayer's definition is, "kindness which bestows upon one what he has not deserved." This phase of the word explains why the apostle specifies that it is the grace from God he is wishing for his brethren, since all of God's favors upon man are undeserved. Such favors are bestowed upon man only through the Lord Jesus Christ. That is because the sacrifice of Christ provided the way for God to maintain his Justice and at the same time extend this unmerited favor to humanity. (See the notes at Romans 3:26, volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary.) 1 Corinthians 1:4. In his unselfishness Paul was thankful for the favors bestowed upon the brethren at Corinth. In this he was carrying out his own words in Romans 12:15. 1 Corinthians 1:5. Riches do not always consist of material wealth; the Corinthians had been given the wealth of spiritual blessings in the form of utterance and knowledge. The first is from LOGOS which is the Greek term for "word," and is applied in a variety of senses. It denotes any expression of thought, whether in single words or in sentences, or even in entire discourses. It is also applicable either to inspired or uninspired speech, so that it would include the gift of tongues. The second word is from GNOSIS and the outstanding definition in Thayer's lexicon is, "intelligence." 1 Corinthians 1:6. This verse shows 'the preceding one has special reference to the spiritual gifts that were bestowed on the church at Corinth, since that was the primary purpose of those gifts (Mark 16:20; Ephesians 4:8-15). 1 Corinthians 1:7. Come behind in no gift. Not every member of a congregation was given a spiritual gift, but a sufficient per cent of the membership would be thus endowed to accomplish the Lord's work. The Corinthian church was large in numbers (Acts 18:8), which would call for a proportionate number of gifted men. Waiting for the coming. All persons must of necessity wait literally for the coming of Christ. Strong defines the original word, "to expect fully." 1 Corinthians 1:8. The promise to confirm them unto the end does not mean that spiritual gifts will continue that long. The idea is that the Lord will do whatever is necessary for the purpose. After the New Testament will have been completed, spiritual gifts will not be needed and they will cease (chapter 13:8-10). The grand purpose of all divine means for the confirming of God's people, is that they may be prepared to stand approved by Christ when he comes again. 1 Corinthians 1:9. A part of Thayer's definition of faithful is, "worthy of trust; that can be relied on," and this definition is especially applicable to the Lord. It carries the idea that He may be expected fully to fulfill all his promises. God had promised to bless all mankind through Christ, who is the seed promised to Abraham (Genesis 22:18). In being faithful to redeem that promise, God called the Corinthians into the fellowship of his Son. 01 Corinthians 1:10. The apostle now approaches one of the serious defects referred to in the "general remarks," that of divisions. This is not a formal or bodily division, but one of sentiment that causes contention and strife. That is why he specifies the mind and judgment in his exhortation, to the end that all would speak the same thing. The mind means the faculty of reason, and judgment denotes the conclusions arrived at with the mind. The apostle beseeches them all to be united in sentiments. 1 Corinthians 1:11. The name Chloe does not appear in any other place, and all we can learn of her is that she was a disciple who was concerned about the conditions existing in the church at Corinth. She passed the information on to the apostle which he repeated in his epistle to the church in that city. 1 Corinthians 1:12. The reader should not be confused over the apparent similarity between contentions and "contend," both of which are used in the New Testament. The first means quarrels and wranglings over petty matters of personal opinion. The second is from the vocabulary of contests in the physical exercises, in which a man engages with a contestant under recognized rules of combat. Every one of you. That is, each man among them had his preference and was wrangling with the others about it. The four persons named were not literally the subject of their quarrels; chapter 4:6, 7 shows this, which will be commented upon in detail when we reach that place in this study. But until that time, the apostle reasons as if their contentions were actually over these men (even including Christ), and I also shall make my comments from that standpoint. The idea of Paul seems to have been that, having received the force of the argument before their actual prejudices were aroused, they should be prepared to see the folly of their variances. 1 Corinthians 1:13. The three questions in this verse require negative answers. In is from EIS which means "into" the name of another, that was supposed to have been accomplished by the ordinance of baptism. 1 Corinthians 1:14. There was more than one man named Gaius, one of whom belonged to the congregation in Corinth, and was among the few persons whom Paul baptized. 51 Corinthians 1:15. The apostle gives his reason for the feeling expressed in the preceding verse. In is from the same word as in verse 15. 1 Corinthians 1:16. Paul did not place much stress on the question of who personally does the baptizing, consequently he seems to have overlooked this case in verse 14. Household is from OIKOS, and in the King James Version it has been rendered by house 102 times, home 4, household 3, temple 1. The first definition in Thayer's lexicon is, "an inhabited house." We know the inhabitants of Stephanas' house were old enough to believe on the Lord, for Acts 18:8 shows that such were the ones baptized. 1 Corinthians 1:17. Christ sent me not to baptize. This statement has been perverted by some who seek to belittle the importance of baptism, and to represent Paul as thinking little of the ordinance. What he teaches in Acts 19:1-5; Romans 6:3-4; Galatians 3:27 and Colossians 2:12 indicates the weight that he attaches to the ordinance. But as to what person does the physical act of baptizing a believer, because of the wrong use that might be made of the subject, Paul was thankful he had let others do most of it at Corinth. What Paul could do that others could not was to preach the Gospel, which required more than physical strength. And even that great work was not to be accomplished by the use of words or speech that consisted of worldly wisdom, for that would detract from the simplicity of the Gospel of Christ. 1 Corinthians 1:18. The Greek nation was devoted to the importance (as it was considered) of philosophy, or what we would term worldly wisdom. Its people estimated any theory proposed to them in proportion to whether it agreed or disagreed with this philosophy, and it was in view of this truth that Paul wrote as he did in this and several verses following. However, the relation between divine truth and philosophy is somewhat similar to that between it and "science." When this last term is understood, it is found to be in harmony with divine truth. Likewise, when true philosophy is understood, it will be seen that it, too, is in harmony with divine truth. In support of this from the standpoint of history, I shall quote from the Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia: " AND . Both philosophy and religion must first have had some historical development before their relations could appear -for investigation. In fact, they may be said to have proceeded apart until the Christian era, when they openly met as strangers whose mutual interests were yet to be perceived and adjusted. It was not until Christianity had emerged from the symbols of Judaism, that religion stood forth in a mature form, free from philosophic speculation; and it was not until Grecian wisdom had outgrown the myths of Heathenism, that philosophy appeared in a pure state, disengaged from religious superstition. Nor was it strange that the first meeting of the two great powers should have resulted in misunderstanding and conflict. The early Christians, claiming a revealed knowledge from Heaven, could only denounce philosophy as the foolishness of the world; and the philosophers, in their skeptical pride of intellect, were fain to despise Christianity as a mere vulgar superstition. The struggle had its practical issue in the bitter persecutions which prevailed until the triumph of Christianity under Constantine." Corinth was in Greece and the church there was made up in most part of Greeks, hence the occasion of Paul's teaching on the subject of worldly wisdom. The reader should note this paragraph and refer to it frequently as he reads the comments on the following verses. Perish and saved in this verse refer respectively to the philosophers and Christians described in the quotation from Herzog. Before this development, the philosophers were inclined to judge religion by the standard of their theories, and Paul was opposing that position. 1 Corinthians 1:19. This quotation is in Isaiah 29:14. What was once called the wisdom of the sages was proved to be not only unwise, but utterly contrary to natural evidences. 1 Corinthians 1:20. Where is the wise? etc., means what has become of the theories of these so-called wise and great ones? Made foolish means the foolishness has been made apparent by the light of truth. Only one out of the many examples will be cited here. For years the "wise" men of the world taught that the earth is flat, but today the engineers have been compelled to make certain changes in the operation of television in order to compensate for the curvature of the globe. 1 Corinthians 1:21. The world with all its theories that it called wisdom, failed to attain unto that wisdom that would make known to it the true God. Foolishness of preaching. Paul is not admitting that the Gospel is foolish, but is using the term expressed by the professed wise men. What they consider as foolishness is the very means God uses to save the believers. But it must be made known in order to save anyone. The third word in italics is from KERUGMA and is defined by Thayer, "that which is promulgated [publicly proclaimed] by a herald or public crier, a proclamation by a herald; in the N. T. the message or proclamation by the heralds of God or Christ." (See Romans 10:13-18 on the necessity of preaching.) 1 Corinthians 1:22. The Jews professed to believe in a higher form of knowledge than was possessed by mere human beings, but they were critical of any teaching that claimed such a quality unless accompanied with some direct demonstration from heaven. The Greeks were not interested in anything that did not come up to the standard of their own philosophy. (See the long note and historical quotation at verse 18.) 1 Corinthians 1:23. The first clause is virtually the same as the last part of verse 21. The preaching of Christ was always a stumblingblock to the Jews (Romans 9:32). The story of Jesus did not agree with the philosophy of the Greeks, hence they regarded it as foolishness. This was manifested when Paul was in Athens (Acts 17:32). 1 Corinthians 1:24. Them which are called denotes the ones who respond favorably to the Gospel call. There were persons among both Jews and Greeks (Gentiles) who were sufficiently free from prejudice to recognize the merits of the story of Christ, and to them He represented both the power and wisdom of God. 1 Corinthians 1:25. That which seemed like foolishness in the estimation of the ones clamoring for worldly wisdom, was far beyond the best that the philosophers of the nations could display. The weakness of God is used in the same comparative sense as the foolishness of God, using the language of the philosophers for the sake of argument. 1 Corinthians 1:26. Are called has the same bearing as the words in verse 24, namely, those who accept the call of the Gospel. The classes named are among the philosophers and wise men of the nations. The invitation and promises held out by the story of a slain and risen Lord, do not appeal to many of those classes, hence a comparatively small number are willing to accept the favor. 1 Corinthians 1:27. In all of these verses Paul uses such terms as foolish and wise in the sense attached to them by the so-called leaders of thought among the people of Greece especially, and of the world in general. To confound means to confuse and baffle. The unpretentious proclaimers of the Gospel were able to put their adversaries to shame. The case of Stephen in Acts 6:10 is an outstanding one which states: "And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake." 1 Corinthians 1:28. This has virtually the same thought as the preceding verse, with a different set of terms. Base and despised means the subjects that the philosophers looked down upon. Things which are not of any consequence in the eyes of these wise men of the world, were to have such an influence with the sincere believers who hear the sacred story that the things that are so important in the estimation of the proud sages would be exposed and shown to be vain. 1 Corinthians 1:29. No flesh should glory. The self-exalted accomplishments of fieshly man were to be stripped of their show of wisdom, and leave them without anything of which to boast. 1 Corinthians 1:30. Ye in Christ refers to the brethren at Corinth, and Him stands for God in verse 28, who had received these brethren in Christ. Is made unto us denotes that Paul ascribed to them the qualities named in the verse, even though the philosophers might belittle them. 1 Corinthians 1:31. As it is written has such a wide scope of references that it is unnecessary to cite them. The whole teaching of the Bible is that man owes all to God. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1st Corinthians 2 OF THESE IN PAUL’ S AT CORINTH1 Corinthians 2:1-5 1 And I, brethren, when I came unto you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God.—Paul was not a man of commanding appear¬ance or an eloquent speaker, further than the importance of his message and his anxiety to save gave him eloquence. He refers to these when he says that his opponents will say, “ His letters, they say, are weighty and strong; but his bodily pres¬ence is weak, and his speech of no account,” (2 Corinthians 10:10.) God chose a man of this character to bear his testimony to the Gentiles that the salvation might be of God and not of human wisdom, learning, or eloquence. 2 For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.—This embraced his mission to the world, his teaching, his sufferings, death, burial, and resurrection, with all the teaching he gave to the world and sealed with his blood. No appeals of eloquence, no working upon the sympathies by death scenes other than that of Jesus. No human philosophy, but simply love of God to lost men, and the provisions made through Christ Jesus for salvation from sin, would Paul make. Of certain characters the Lord has said, “ Their fear of me is a commandment of men which hath been taught them.” (Isaiah 29:13.) These he would not ac¬cept. The fear of Jehovah must rest upon the fear and love of God. The gospel is God’ s wisdom for the salvation of the world. That is, the gospel according to God’ s wisdom was the best thing to save man from his sins, and it was God’ s power vested to save. 3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear,—[The weakness of which he here speaks was not bodily weakness; for although elsewhere he speaks of himself as weak in body (2 Corinthians 10:10), and as suffering under bodily infirmity (Galatians 4:14), yet here the whole context shows that he refers to his state of mind.] His deportment was that of a man humble and distrustful of his powers, and with a fear lest his work should be vain. and in much trembling.—[It was not the gospel he had to preach that made him tremble; he was not ashamed of that (Romans 1:16), neither was it fear of personal danger; but he was keenly sensitive of the weakness of his situation; he feared a failure similar to that in Athens; and trembling at the thought of the infinite importance of his work— that the salvation of so many men and women was dependent on so feeble an instrumentality.] 4 and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom,—His speech and preaching were without the persuasiveness of eloquence and worldy wisdom, but rested upon God, declared by the presence of his Spirit work¬ing miracles. but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:—The truth was revealed by the Spirit, and confirmed by the miracles per¬formed and gifts imparted to them. Paul relied upon these to carry convictions to their hearts that what he taught was from God. The matter contained in the Gospels, the revela¬tions made, are above human wisdom, and their adaptedness to the needs of the soul shows an origin from God. 5 that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.—These testimonies that God gave to the word spoken by Paul were relied on that their faith might not rest on the reasonings of man, but on the power of God, manifested by his Spirit. GOD’ S WISDOM AND THE METHOD OF ITS 1 Corinthians 2:6-16 6 We speak wisdom, however, among them that are full- grown:—Paul had been disavowing that he had spoken after the wisdom of the world; and now avows that what he had spoken was according to the wisdom of the full grown— those filled with the wisdom of God. [The full grown are those who have advanced beyond the position of beginners in the Christian life into the higher sphere of thorough and compre¬hensive insight into its duties, privileges, and blessings. While admitting their knowledge (1: 5), he appeals to their contentions (3: 1), in proof that they were still babes in Christ, and therefore not prepared for solid food which is “ for fullgrown men, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern good and evil” (Hebrews 5:14). Jesus himself teaches the principle of adaptation to the vari¬ous stages in the Christian life, when he said to his sorrowing disciples: “ I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.” (John 16:12.)] yet a wisdom not of this world, nor of the rulers of this world,— In this he keeps before them that what the world calls wisdom is foolishness with God and his servants. who are coming to nought;— They must fall and their wisdom perish. 7 but we speak God’ s wisdom in a mystery, even the wisdom that hath been hidden, which God foreordained before the worlds unto our glory:—The gospel is God’ s wisdom for the salvation of man. It was provided before the world was — before man was created, it is generally interpreted— to bring man to glory. A mystery was not something that could not be explained or understood, but something unrevealed and unknown. The gospel before it was revealed in Christ was the mystery. 8 which none of the rulers of this world hath known:—The reference is to the Jewish and Roman rulers who engaged in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. It was the world in its princes who rejected the Savior. for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory:— Had they known and understood this mystery, they would not have committed the awful deed. 9 but as it is written,—This was done in fulfillment of the prophecy. Things which eye saw not, and ear heard not, and which entered not into the heart of man, whatsoever things God prepared for them that love him.—The things spoken of in this passage that eye had not seen nor ear heard were the great blessings of salvation through Jesus Christ our Lord. Before he came no human being by human wisdom ever had any con¬ception of what these blessings would be ; but they are now revealed to us by the Holy Spirit through the New Testa¬ment. Hence they are no longer mysteries, but matters of plain revelation. 10 But unto us God revealed them through the Spirit:—The Spirit who dwelt with and knew the mind of God came to the apostles, dwelt in them, and revealed God’ s will to them. for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.—The Spirit of God knew the deep, unrevealed things of God, and made them known to the apostles; and they, through their writings, have made them known to us. 11 For who among men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man, which is in him?—No man knows the thing's that are in man save the spirit dwelling- in him which pervades his whole being and knows all the secrets and pur¬poses of his heart, soul, and body. even so the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God.— The Spirit of God alone knows the mind and purposes of God and searches its deep things, just as none but the spirit of man which is in him knows the things of man. 12 But we received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is from God;—The apostles had received the spirit not of the world, but the Spirit that dwelt with and knew the mind of God. that we might know the things that were freely given to us of God.—The Spirit of God was given to the apostles, that they might know the mind or will of God, and the things that are freely given to them in Christ Jesus. That is, the Spirit which had dwelt with and in God, and so knew his whole mind, was transferred to the apostles and revealed to them the things of God. The Spirit revealed to them the mind, will, and purposes of God with all the blessings freely given to men in Christ Jesus. 13 Which things also we speak,—The things they received of the Spirit they spoke to the world. This is the way others learned of these truths. not in words which man’ s wisdom teacheth,—They spoke them not in the words suggested by the wisdom of the world. but which the Spirit teacheth;—The salvation of man wras wholly of and from God. Man’ s wisdom was not permitted to furnish words through which the mind of God was spoken. [The Spirit taught these things in words, and thus revealed them to the apostles who spoke them in the same words. So the Spirit guided them into the truth revealed (John 16:13).] combining spiritual things with spiritual words.—They spake spiritual ideas in the terms or words of the Spirit. The Spirit chose words suitable to the spiritual truths made known. 14 Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God:—Man by his natural faculties, without revela¬tion, could not learn the will of God; but in order that he might know it, the Spirit of God, who knows the things of God, was transferred to the apostles and made known to them God’ s will, and they revealed it to the people. The natural man, then, is the man who has never heard the will of God, for he has no means of knowing till those who received the revela¬tion make it known to him. Having once been revealed by the Spirit of God, it was committed to writing under the guidance of the Spirit, so that man may come to it and learn it. It means about the same as “ seeing that in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom knew not God, it was God’ s good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save them that believe.” (1:21.) for they are foolishness unto him;— The manifestations are without meaning to him. and he cannot know them,—This does not mean that men to whom the revelation is declared by those possessing the Spirit cannot understand and obey it. It was revealed to the inspired men that they might teach it to others that they might understand and know the way of salvation. because they are spiritually judged.—This endowment of the Spirit enabled the endowed to judge or discriminate whether things revealed were of God or not. Without this they could not. 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things,—He that is endowed with the Spirit discerns and discriminates what is of God, and teaches all things God reveals. and he himself is judged of no man.—Those not endowed with the presence of the divine Spirit are not capable of discriminating and determining whether the things taught by the inspired men are of God or not. An inspired man alone could judge of the fidelity of inspired men in teaching the will of God. This refers to the original revelations. Men now test all teaching by the truths delivered by the inspired men. They instruct us to “ believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” (1 John 4:1.) 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord,—Who, save those endowed with the Spirit of God, know the mind of the Lord? Those having the Spirit of God know his mind. The Spirit revealed it to them. that he should instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.—This does not seem to make sense nor to harmonize with the context. How could knowing the mind of God enable one to instruct God or Jesus? Adam Clarke translates it: “ For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he should teach it?” The nous, the Greek for mind, is masculine gender, and auton, translated him, is masculine, but might agree with it. This would give a clearer idea, but I believe the trouble is in the word translated to instruct. It is translated to instruct or teach only in this one place. The word occurs in the following passages: “ But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews that dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is the Christ” (Acts 9:22); “ Concluding that God had called us to preach the gospel unto them” (Acts 16:10) ; “ From whom all the body fitly framed and knit together through that which every joint supplieth” (Ephesians 4:16) ; “ That their hearts may be comforted, they being knit together in love” (Colossians 2:2); “ From whom all the body, being supplied and knit together through the joints and bands, increaseth with the increase of God” (Colossians 2:19). In these passages it means to understand or know so as to be joined together with him. In the passage before us, it means, “ Who of you uninspired hath known the mind of God, so as to be joined together with him? But we inspired men so understand him that we are united in him in teaching his will, we are laborers together with God.” (2: 9.) The whole trend and meaning of the chapter is that none could know or teach the will of God by human wisdom. They were dependent upon the revelation made by God’ s spirit through the apostles for a knowledge of his will, and only through receiving this could any become co¬workers with him in saving men. This does not refer to the work of preaching what has been revealed. Adam Clarke gives these judicious thoughts: “ This chapter might be considered a good model for a Christian to regulate his conduct by, or his public ministry; because it points out the mode of preaching used by Paul and the apostles in general. This great apostle came not to the people with ex¬cellency of speech, and of wisdom, when he declared unto them the counsel of God. They know little, either of the spirit of Paul, or the design of the gospel, who make the chief ex¬cellence of their preaching to consist in the eloquence of lan¬guage, or depth of human reasoning. That may be their testi¬mony, but it is not God’ s. The enticing words of man’ s wis¬dom are seldom accompanied by the demonstration and power of the Holy Spirit. One justly remarks that ‘ the foolishness of preaching has its wisdom, loftiness, and eloquence; but it consists in the sublimity of its truths, the depths of its mys¬teries, and the ardor of the Spirit of God.’ In this respect Paul may be said to have preached wisdom among those who are perfect,” or inspired. Verse 1 1 Corinthians 2One of the problems in Corinth was related to the pretentious, empty philosophy of the Greeks who so highly regarded the eloquent speeches of the popular leaders of such sophistry; and Paul gave his reasons for not following the popular methods of oratory in his preaching of the word of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:1-5). However, fully mature Christians could look forward to an understanding of the true wisdom of God (as contrasted with the current sophistry); and the mystery of God, far more wonderful than the so-called mysteries of the Greeks, could be participated in by those of genuine spirituality (1 Corinthians 2:6-16). Throughout this chapter, Paul made it clear that the glory of the Christian faith is resident in the content of the gospel and not in the manner of its presentation. And I, brethren, when I came unto you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, proclaiming to you the testimony of God. (1 Corinthians 2:1) Paul had been educated at Tarsus which Strabo preferred as a school of learning above either Alexandria or Athens, and also had been schooled "at the feet of Gamaliel" (Acts 22:3), the famed scholar in Jerusalem. "Paul was a university man, the outstanding scholar of his generation."[1]Nevertheless, he despised the pedantry, superficiality and narrow conceit of those who were received as intellectuals. Paul rejected their methods because he was above them, not because he was inferior to them. Paul had a wide acquaintance with all the learning of his generation. He quoted Aratus (Acts 17:28), Epimenides (Titus 1:12), and Menander (1 Corinthians 15:33);[2] but he counted all such polite learning as mere dross, as compared with the gospel of Christ (Philippians 3:8). Therefore, the meaning of this verse is that when Paul went to Corinth he renounced all of the tricks and devices of oratory, refused to accommodate the gospel to the style of the Greek philosophers, and did not try to adorn the truth with pagan wisdom. That Paul had the ability to do such things may not be doubted for a moment; but he wanted their faith to be in the power of God, not in the ability of human beings (1 Corinthians 2:5). Excellency of speech ... "When the preaching itself is stressed to the degree that it obscures its own content, there is a case of excellency of speech."[3]Testimony of God ... This means that the gospel is founded upon the word and the authority of God himself; and, by this word, as Macknight said, The apostle insinuated that the credibility of the gospel depended neither on its conformity to the philosophy of the Greeks, nor on the eloquence of its preachers, but on the attestation of God, who confirmed it by miracles.[4][1] Henry H. Halley, Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1927), p. 545. [2] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on 1Corinthians (Cincinnati: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 58. [3] F. W. Grosheide, The New International Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 58. [4] James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles and Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1959), p. 32. Verse 2 For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.It is the style among certain commentators to construe Paul's method in view here as a reversal of what he allegedly did in Athens. They say Paul tried to preach philosophically in Athens, sustained a miserable failure, learned his lesson and announced his return to a more simple advocacy of the gospel in these verses. Despite the popularity of such a view, however, there is nothing, either in the word of God or in history, to give the slightest credibility to it. There is no hint whatever, either in this passage or in Acts 17, that Paul preached "Christ crucified" at Corinth because of a sense of failure of the philosophical approach in Athens. As a matter of fact, "His sermon at Athens was not basically philosophical."[5] He preached the resurrection of the dead, and when did that get to be philosophical? Furthermore, his preaching in Athens was in no sense whatever a failure. Dionysius the Areopagite, Damaris, certain men, and others with them were converted (Acts 17:34). An exceedingly large number of people in Athens became Christians. "The church in Athens was one of the strongest congregations in the empire in the second and third centuries,"[6] and Lange pointed out that "A Christian congregation in Athens flourished in an eminent degree."[7] The "others with them" of Acts 17:34 may not be construed as "a mere handful," except arbitrarily and with no logic to support it. It is also most probable that Sosthenes and his household were converted in Paul's work in Athens (see my Commentary on Acts, under Acts 17:34). In the light of the above, we feel that comments to the effect that "There (in Athens) Paul had one of his very few failures";[8] "He feared a failure similar to that in Athens"[9] "Athens was a sad memory for Paul. He never mentions her name in an epistle. He sends no word of greeting to any of her children";[10] etc. - that all such notions are absolutely untenable. For example, how can it be known that Paul never wrote to the saints in Athens, there being at least one letter to the Corinthians which was lost? Grosheide's views on this question are undoubtedly correct. He declared that: The answer to the question of whether Paul had ever preached anything but Jesus Christ must of course be negative. The meaning is not that the apostle did not resolve to preach Christ until he came to Corinth ... but that he had to go on preaching Christ.[11]Determined not to know anything ... has the meaning that Paul would rely upon no earthly wisdom for power in his preaching. Save Jesus Christ and him crucified ... This cannot mean that Paul would henceforth leave off preaching the resurrection, the final judgment, the brotherhood of humanity, the unity of God, the sin of idolatry, etc.; but, as John Wesley said, that here, "a part is put for the whole,"[12] thus indicating that this is another New Testament example of the figure of speech called synecdoche in which a group of related things is denoted by the mention of one or two of them. What a shame it is that Wesley failed to see the same figure in "saved by faith." [5] S. Lewis Johnson, Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 594. [6] Don DeWelt, Acts Made Actual (Joplin, Missouri: College Press, 1958), p. 243. [7] John Peter Lange, Commentary on Acts (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1866), p. 331. [8] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 26. [9] David Lipscomb, First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 39. [10] T. Teignmouth Shore, Ellicott's Commentary on the Holy Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), p. 283. [11] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 59. [12] John Wesley, One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972), in loco. Verse 3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.Such was Paul's dauntless courage that it may not be supposed that this has reference to any fear of physical danger; but it suggests Paul's recognition of human weakness and his realization that the salvation of so many persons was dependent upon so feeble an instrument as himself. Dummelow paraphrased this verse thus: "It was with much anxiety and self-distrust that I preached the gospel to you."[13]ENDNOTE: [13] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 895. Verse 4 And my speech and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.Macknight's paraphrase of this is: Paul's discourses were neither composed nor pronounced according to the rules of Greek rhetoric, yet they were accompanied with the powerful demonstration of the Spirit, who enabled him to prove the things he preached by miracles.[14]Of course, there was a reason for Paul's renunciation of the methods of the rabble-rousers; and that reason he at once emphatically stated. ENDNOTE: [14] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 32. Verse 5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God."What depends upon a clever argument is at the mercy of a clever argument";[15] and Paul desired that the faith of the Corinthians should be grounded in the facts and certainties of the Christian gospel, not in the showy eloquence of polished oratory. There can hardly be any doubt that this paragraph condemns much of the preaching of our own times. Up to this point Paul was stressing the truth that the gospel of Christ owes nothing to human wisdom, and that his renunciation of the popular methods of advocating it had resulted in its being despised by those who considered themselves sophisticated; but, beginning in the next verse, Paul effectively refuted the notion that "Christianity is contemptible, and proceeded to show something of its profundity and dignity."[16] He showed that it is not wisdom which he rejected but false wisdom; he preached God's wisdom, which is higher than man's wisdom, and the only true wisdom. [15] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 594. [16] Leon Morris, Tyndale Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), p. 53. Verse 6 We speak wisdom, however, among them that are full-grown: yet a wisdom not of this world, nor among the rulers of this world, who are coming to naught.Among them that are full-grown ... All Christians begin as "babes in Christ" (1 Corinthians 3:1); but through prayerful study and growth they may attain unto the "stature of the fullness of Christ" (Ephesians 4:13). To all who are thus full-grown is revealed a measure of the knowledge of God's wisdom. The rational and intellectual dimensions of the Christian religion infinitely surpass all of the achievements of mortal intelligence; and Paul's blunt reference to this truth states that it forcefully applies even to "the rulers of this world." Not even they ever attained to any wisdom whatever in any manner comparable to the wisdom of God, the proof of it being that they themselves "are coming to naught." Are coming to naught ... The subject of this clause is "the rulers of this world"; but the meaning is not restricted to such persons as governors and emperors. "Paul had in mind all of those who set the pattern of this world, including the rulers in the sphere of science and art."[17] The proof of what Paul said here came within a few years when the Jewish state, Jerusalem and the temple were utterly destroyed in 70 A.D. Nor was it any less true of Rome, where the period of the phantom emperors soon came; and the mighty empire itself eventually sank under the ravages of the invading hordes of vandals and barbarians. But it is also true of all history. If human wisdom had any genuine merit, the depredations of war, famine and pestilence might be controlled; but every generation has fulfilled its destiny of proving that "It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps" (Jeremiah 10:23). Therefore, human wisdom stands condemned in the very areas where it might be supposed to be effective. And beyond that, "Man's knowledge cannot bring about the redemption of the race."[18]We speak wisdom ... "The plural we implies that Paul did not stand alone among the apostles in his method of teaching."[19] None of the apostolic preachers of Christ taught in any other manner than that of Paul. [17] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 63. [18] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p. 324. [19] T. Teignmouth Shore, op. cit., p. 293. Verse 7 But we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, even the wisdom that hath been hidden, which God foreordained before the worlds unto our glory.Mystery ... The mystery of the Christian religion far surpasses anything affected in the mysteries of the Greeks, and notably in the fact of its having been foreordained in God's purpose even before the creation of the world. The usual definition of mystery, to the effect of its being something once unknown now revealed, while true enough, is inadequate. Some elements of the mystery of God will not even be finished until "the days of the voice of the seventh angel" (Revelation 10:7). Russell said that: The mystery in the scriptures denotes (a) something above the ordinary human understanding (Mark 4:11); (b) something formerly hidden in the counsel of God, but afterward revealed as a plan understood by its own fulfillment; and (c) as something always accompanied by vastness depth and power.[20]THE MYSTERYThe New Testament refers to many mysteries: of Christ and his church (Ephesians 5:32), of lawlessness (2 Thessalonians 2:7), of seven stars and seven candlesticks (Revelation 1:20), of the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:51) of the blindness of Israel (Romans 11:25), of the harlot church (Revelation 17:7), and of the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 13:11). However, it is not to any of these, specifically, that reference is made here. There is a greater and more comprehensive mystery containing all of these and exceeding them. This greater mystery is often mentioned in the New Testament Scriptures where it is called great (1 Timothy 3:16), the mystery (Romans 16:25), the mystery of God's will (Ephesians 1:9), the mystery of Christ (Ephesians 3:4), the mystery of the gospel (Ephesians 6:1), the mystery of God (Colossians 2:3), the mystery of the faith (1 Timothy 3:9), and the mystery of godliness (1 Timothy 3:16) - it is to that mystery that Paul refers here. It is this mystery which dominates the sixty-six books of the Bible. God announced the mystery in Eden; Satan's part in it was revealed; the mystery deepened in the death of Abel; the mystery was progressively unfolded verbally in the Old Testament prophecies, systematically prefigured in the types and shadows of the Mosaic dispensation, explicitly heralded in the lives of great typical men of the old covenant, and came to crisis on the cross of Christ, where in its great essentials, it was fully unveiled. There are many corollaries of the central mystery; and the ultimate goals of it are projected into the future. A six-line summary of this "great mystery" is in 1 Timothy 3:16. Running throughout the entire Bible is the record of the "mystery of lawlessness" which is antagonistic to the true mystery, but which is to be resolved finally in the overthrow of Satan and the purging of wickedness out of God's universe.[21]Unto our glory ... highlights the benevolent purpose of God in the amazing and overwhelmingly comprehensive work of the Father looking to human redemption. [20] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 406. [21] The Mystery of Redemption is more elaborately discussed in a book of that title authored by the writer of this series of commentaries, James Burton Coffman, The Mystery of Redemption (Austin, Texas: Firm Foundation Publishing House, 1976). Verse 8 Which none of the rulers of this world hath known: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory.One great essential element in the mystery is that of the incarnation of God in Christ, this being the precise element of the mystery unknown to the rulers of this world. Christ made it clear that the Jewish religious hierarchy did indeed know who Christ was, in the sense of knowing that he was the lawful heir of the temple, the promised Messiah, a holy and righteous prophet of God, and also the undisputed heir to the throne of David. What they did not know was that the "fullness of the Godhead" dwelt in him bodily (Colossians 2:9). InMatthew 21:38, the Jewish leaders, under the figure of wicked husbandmen, said, "This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and take his inheritance." Had the human wisdom of the world's leaders been capable of recognizing God in Christ, they would not have crucified him. The Lord of glory ... Wesley declared that "The giving Christ this august title, peculiar to the great Jehovah, plainly shows him to be the supreme God."[22] Thus "the Lord of glory," "the Father of glory" (Ephesians 1:17), and "the Spirit of glory" (1 Peter 4:14), indicate that the three members of the Godhead alike receive this title. Psalms 29:3 and Acts 7:2 mention "the God of glory." Crucified the Lord of glory ... "These words brought into juxtaposition the lowest ignominy, and the most splendid exaltation."[23][22] John Wesley, op. cit., in loco. [23] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 60. Verse 9 But as it is written, Things which eye saw not, and ear heard not, And which entered not into the heart of man, Whatsoever things God prepared for them that love him.These words are usually thought of as suggesting heaven and the glories of the future world; but Paul did not hesitate to apply them here to what God has already done for his children. "They certainly belong to the present state, and express the wondrous light, life and liberty which the gospel communicates."[24] "While it is true that heaven will be so wonderful that we cannot comprehend it, Paul was talking about here, the present dispensation."[25]Learned men have conjectured that these lines are from an early Christian hymn, which had been formed by combining certain Old Testament expressions; but, despite this, as Grosheide said: The view that Paul quotes the Old Testament, using passages like Isaiah 64:4, Septuagint (LXX) (Isaiah 64:3 in the Hebrew) for the first and last part of the quotation, and Isaiah 65:17 for the middle, remains the most plausible.[26][24] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and Porter, 1831), Vol. VI, p. 199. [25] George W. DeHoff, Sermons on First Corinthians (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: The Christian Press, 1947), p. 30. [26] F W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 66. Verse 10 But unto us God revealed them through the Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.Unto us ... The things which eye had not seen, etc., were revealed through God's Spirit to the apostles. It is a mistake to construe "us" in this passage as indicative of all Christians, except to the extent of their having received God's revelation through the holy apostles. The Spirit searcheth all things ... This is true, "not in the sense of `needing information,' but in the sense of penetrating all things."[27] Ellicott and Wesley also concurred in the restriction of the emphatic "us" in this verse to "Christ's apostles and (inspired) teachers."[28]The deep things of God ... have reference not to some abstract inscrutability of God but to the concrete work of salvation."[29] The mystery already mentioned is of the deep things of God. [27] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1055. [28] John Wesley, op. cit., in loco. [29] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit. p. 68. Verse 11 For who among men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man, which is in him? even as the things of God none knoweth, save the Spirit of God.The only way to know God is through the revelation of God through the Holy Spirit to the apostles. Greek wisdom, apart from the inspiration of God's Spirit, found the mind of God impenetrable, in the same manner of its being impossible to read another man's thoughts. The things of God none knoweth ... is not to be understood as saying that people know nothing of God, for this would deny revelation. Again from Farrar, "All that is meant is that our knowledge of God must always be relative, not absolute. It is not possible to measure the arm of God with the finger of man."[30]ENDNOTE: [30] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 60. Verse 12 But we received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God; that we might know the things that were freely given to us of God.Not the spirit of the world ... By this, Paul did not mean that such a spirit of the world, comparable in a sense to the Holy Spirit and opposed to him, actually exists. Nor can we agree with Marsh that "It may mean Satan."[31] What Paul had in view here was the secular, materialistic thinking of unregenerated people. The Germans had a word for it, the Zeitgeist, which means "the spirit of the times," or "the intellectual and moral tendencies of an age or epoch." The Spirit which is from God ... "What is meant here is not the perpetual indwelling of the Spirit in the congregation, but the historical fact of his coming."[32] The reference here is to Pentecost and the coming of the Holy Spirit to guide the apostles into all truth. [31] Paul W. Marsh, A New Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 379. [32] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p 70 Verse 13 Which things also we speak, not in words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Spirit teacheth; combining spiritual things with spiritual words.This writer agrees with James Macknight that the declaration here refers to the Holy Spirit's giving "words" of wisdom to the apostles, not leaving them free to clothe ideas and impressions in their own words merely, but in words which "the Spirit teacheth."[33] Some deny that anything of this kind is meant; but when they deny it, they are left with no explanation whatever of what Paul meant. Combining spiritual things with spiritual words ... is a disputed rendition. Grosheide translated it, "comparing spiritual things with spiritual";[34] Macknight rendered it, "explaining spiritual things with spiritual words,"[35] holding that Paul had in view here what Paul called "the form of sound words" (2 Timothy 1:13). The theory that God gave people the ideas without imposing any vocabulary upon them breaks down when it is asked, "How may any idea be conveyed without the use of words?" Clearly, the "combining" in this verse pertains to what the Spirit of God did, not to what Paul did; and the fact of the Spirit's combining spiritual things (ideas) with spiritual words would leave the choice of words to the Spirit, not to people. How otherwise can the writings of the New Testament be understood? [33] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 41. [34] F. W. Grosheide op. cit., p. 72. [35] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 41. Verse 14 Now the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judgedThe natural man ... is rendered from the Greek "physical man," and has the meaning indicated by Macknight, being that of "an animal man."[36] It is an abuse of this passage to make it mean that unregenerated people cannot understand spiritual things until God, in some independent action, opens their hearts, or regenerates them. The receiving of the truth by the unconverted is not in view here at all. DeHoff gave this exegesis: Paul means that ordinary man cannot receive or give a revelation from God, because God has not selected him and filled him with the Holy Spirit. Only the apostles and certain other writers of the New Testament were so selected and guided.[37]The application of this in its primary context is that none of the brilliant orators of Greece had the slightest knowledge of the wisdom of God, such wisdom appearing to the sophists as foolishness. [36] Ibid. [37] George W. DeHoff, op. cit., p. 32. Verse 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, and he himself is judged of no man.This applies to the company of inspired apostles and evangelists who delivered the great corpus of Christian doctrine. Such men, "endowed with the Holy Spirit could discern and discriminate what is of God, and teach all things God revealed."[38]He that is spiritual judgeth ... himself is judged of no man ... In context, this applied to Paul himself, especially, as an affirmation of the authority he was about to exercise in correcting the disorders in Corinth. In the wider application, it means that only the inspired men of Paul's generation were to be credited with any capability whatever, as regards what is, or is not, the truth of God. The inspired company of apostles and evangelists were "judged of no man." As Lipscomb emphatically stated it, "This applies to the original revelations."[39] However, he went on to point out that Christians are instructed to "Believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1), adding that "Men now test all teaching by the truths delivered by the inspired men."[40] This, however, is a secondary application of Paul's affirmation in this verse. That secondary application, nevertheless, is valid, as outlined by Metz: The Christian has a spiritual capacity to sift, to investigate, to examine, and to discern all things within the framework of the divine revelation of redemption. On the other hand, the natural man does not have the ability to subject the Christian way of life to examination and judgment, for he is completely unacquainted with the meaning of spiritual life.[41][38] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 43. [39] Ibid., p. 44. [40] Ibid. [41] Donald S. Metz, op. cit., p. 328. Verse 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he should instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.David Lipscomb and Adam Clarke concurred in rendering this verse, "Who hath known the mind of the Lord that he should teach it (that is, teach the truth)?"[42] This would appear to be preferable, because the thought of any mortal "instructing God" is evidently not in the passage at all. The thought is that `none of you uninspired men have any notion whatever of what the truth of God may be.' But we have the mind of Christ ... "We" indicates that Paul did not claim this status for himself only, but for all of the inspired apostles and evangelists of the New Testament dispensation. Isaiah 40:13 speaks of Jehovah in words like those Paul here used of Christ. "This is another passage significant for Paul's view of Christ. The passage in Isaiah refers to the MIND OF JEHOVAH, but Paul moved easily to the MIND OF CHRIST."[43] By this Paul made the mind of Christ to be equivalent to the mind of Jehovah, thus attesting the deity of our Lord. THE MIND OF CHRISTPrecisely what is it to have the mind of Christ? There are a number of expressions in the New Testament which clearly have reference to the same condition: Being "in God," God's being "in us," our being "in Christ," Christ's being "in us," the Holy Spirit's being "in us," our being "in the Holy Spirit," or our having the word of Christ dwell "in us," and our having the mind of Christ "in us," as here and in Philippians 2:5, are all references to the saved condition, not to eight different conditions. There is a distinction, however, between the Christians of all ages having the mind of Christ and the fact of Paul and the other inspired teachers of the New Testament era having the mind of Christ as affirmed in this verse. It is a matter of degree; and they had plenary power to preach God's word to mankind. "The whole trend and meaning of the chapter is that none could know or teach the word of God by human wisdom."[44] Today, all people are dependent for a knowledge of the will of God upon the revelation made by God's Spirit through the apostles and inspired teachers of that era. "No man ever had any greater right than Paul to say, `We have the mind of Christ.' "[45][42] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 62. [43] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 62. [44] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 45. [45] John Wesley, op. cit., in loco. "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE " Chapter Two IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To appreciate Paul's method of proclaiming the gospel 2) To see the need for inspiration and understand the process by which it took place SUMMARY Continuing to demonstrate the folly of boasting in human wisdom, Paul reminds them of how he came to them. Instead of depending upon excellent speech or persuasive words of wisdom, he proclaimed Jesus Christ and Him crucified, confirming his testimony with a demonstration of the Spirit and power (1 Corinthians 2:1-4). This he did that their faith might rest in God's power, not in the wisdom of men (1 Corinthians 2:5). He did proclaim a type of wisdom, however, that wisdom which comes from God (1 Corinthians 2:6-9). He describes the process by which God has revealed this wisdom through His Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:10-13). Paul then contrasts the difference between the "natural man" (one who depends upon his own human wisdom) who does not receive the things of the Spirit, and the "spiritual man" (one led by the Spirit of God, such as Paul) who has the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:14-16). OUTLINE I. PAUL'S MANNER OF (1 Corinthians 2:1-5) A. HE "JESUS CHRIST AND HIM " (1 Corinthians 2:1-3)1. Declaring the testimony of God without excellence of speech or wisdom (1 Corinthians 2:1) 2. Determined not to know anything among them but Jesus and Him crucified (1 Corinthians 2:2) 3. Done in weakness, fear and much trembling (1 Corinthians 2:3) B. WITH OF THE SPIRIT AND OF POWER (1 Corinthians 2:4-5)1. Not with persuasive words of human wisdom (1 Corinthians 2:4) 2. That their faith would rest in the power of God, not the wisdom of men (1 Corinthians 2:5) II. THE TRUE WISDOM OF GOD (1 Corinthians 2:6-16) A. THE "HIDDEN" NATURE OF GOD'S WISDOM (1 Corinthians 2:6-9)1. The apostles do speak a sort of wisdom (1 Corinthians 2:6) a. Among those who are mature (1 Corinthians 2:6 a) b. But it is not the wisdom of this age or its rulers, which is coming to nothing (1 Corinthians 2:6 b) 2. The wisdom of God they speak has been a "mystery" (1 Corinthians 2:7-9) a. Ordained before time began, but hidden (1 Corinthians 2:7) b. Unknown by the rulers of this age, which is why they crucified the Lord (1 Corinthians 2:8) c. Man had not discovered what God has prepared for those who love Him (1 Corinthians 2:9) B. THE SPIRIT'S OF GOD'S WISDOM (1 Corinthians 2:10-13)1. Revealed through His Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:10-11) a. The Spirit searches for the deep things of God (1 Corinthians 2:10) b. Only the Spirit of God can know the things of God (1 Corinthians 2:11) 2. Made known to the apostles (1 Corinthians 2:12) a. Who have received the Spirit from God (1 Corinthians 2:12 a) b. So they might know the things freely given by God (1 Corinthians 2:12 b) 3. Spoken now by the apostles (1 Corinthians 2:13) a. Not in words according to human wisdom (1 Corinthians 2:13 a) b. But in words taught by the Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual (1 Corinthians 2:13 b) C. THE "NATURAL MAN" VERSUS THE " MAN" (1 Corinthians 2:14-16)1. The "natural man" (e.g., a philosopher) does not receive the things of the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:14 a) a. They are foolish to him (1 Corinthians 2:14 b) b. Because they are "spiritually" discerned (1 Corinthians 2:14 c) 2. But with the "spiritual man" (e.g., an apostle), such is not the case (1 Corinthians 2:15-16) a. He is able to judge all things properly (1 Corinthians 2:15 a) b. No one is able to properly judge him (1 Corinthians 2:15 b) c. For he has "the mind of Christ" (1 Corinthians 2:16) REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER 1) List the main points of this chapter- Paul's Manner Of Preaching (1 Corinthians 2:1-5) - The True Wisdom Of God (1 Corinthians 2:6-16) 2) How does Paul describe his preaching among them? (1 Corinthians 2:1-2)- Not with excellence of speech or of wisdom - Determined to preach only Jesus and Him crucified 3) How does Paul describe his feelings among them? (1 Corinthians 2:3)- In weakness, in fear, and in much trembling 4) What accompanied Paul as he preached the gospel? (1 Corinthians 2:4)- Demonstration of the Spirit and of power 5) What six phrases in verses 9-13 (1 Corinthians 2:9-13) help to explain the process by which the hidden mystery of God was made known?- "Things which God has prepared" - "God has revealed...through His Spirit" - "We have received...the Spirit" - "That we might know the things...freely given to us by God" - "These things we also speak" - "In words...which the Spirit teaches" 6) What phrase teaches the concept of "verbal inspiration"? (1 Corinthians 2:13)- "not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual" 7) What is said about the "natural" man? (1 Corinthians 2:14)- Does not receive the things of the Spirit of God - They are foolishness to him - He cannot know them, for they are spiritually discerned 8) What is said about the "spiritual" man? (1 Corinthians 2:15-16)- Able to judge all things - None can rightly judge him - Has the mind of Christ Questions by E.M. Zerr For 1st Corinthians Chapter 21. What did Paul not bring with him to Corinth? 2. State what he came to declare. 3. What was his determination? 4. Tell his state of mind while there. 5. What use did he make of man’ s wisdom? 6. What kind of words did man’ s wisdom use? 7. Tell what he demonstrated. 8. State the kind of power he demonstrated. 9. What was his motive for all this? 10. In how many ways can faith stand? 11. Did he use any kind of wisdom? 12. To whom did this kind appeal? 13. What will come of the worldly wisdom? 14. State the mystery referred to in this place. 15. How long ago was it ordained? 16. For what purpose was this mystery ordained? 17. Who had overlooked this mystery? 18. Had they not done so, what then? 19. What quality is here attributed to the Lord ? 20. What about the eye and ear? 21. Is his eye and ear physical? 22. For whom had God made preparation ? 23. Does this teach “ The half has never yet been told” ? 24. Have both halves been told? 25. Through whom was the telling accomplished? 26. By what means did he do this ? 27. State the qualification of the Spirit? 28. What part of man understands the man? 29. How does the Spirit exceed man in knowledge? 30. Tell what spirit Paul had not received. 31. For what purpose was this spirit of God given? 32. What things did he speak ? 33. Which source of words did he reject? 34. Why reject these ? 35. How were spiritual things “ compared” or expressed ? 36. Which man receives not things of the Spirit? 37. Why is this? 38. Is it possible for him to know these things? 39. State the reason. 40. What man is able to judge all things ? 41. From what source is this ability? 42. Yet by whom is he not judged? 43. Does this rule out all judging by man ? 44. Does mere man know the mind of the Lord? 45. How may we know the divine mind? 46. In which direction does instruction flow? 47. What mind did Paul possess ? 48. Who constitute the “ we” with Paul? 49. State general subject of this chapter. 50. Tell two sources of wisdom. 1 Corinthians 2:1. The vanity of worldly wisdom is still the main subject of this part of Paul's epistle. He verifies his attitude on the matter by referring to the work which he did when he brought the Gospel to them, recorded in Acts 18:1-11. Speech and wisdom mean the same as "utterance" and "knowledge" in chapter 1:5. 1 Corinthians 2:2. Know is from EIDO, and the definitions and explanations of Thayer occupy nearly two pages in his lexicon, which indicates the wide range of its meaning. In the present verse it has the sense of "to pay attention, observe; have regard for, cherish." It means that Paul determined not to be concerned about anything but the story of the cross, with its offered mercies to the children of men. 1 Corinthians 2:3. Even an inspired man may feel anxious and insufficient for certain tasks. In Acts 18:9 Paul seemed to have some of these signs of personal weakness, for the Lord saw fit to encourage him and tell him to "be not afraid, but speak." In this great center of worldly learning, he trembled lest he might not do the work justice. However, he determined to depend solely on the Lord's help and wisdom. 1 Corinthians 2:4. Speech means the language to be used, and preaching denotes the public proclamation of that language. Paul asserts that neither of these items of communication was counted on to persuade the hearer because of its wisdom from man. Instead, he depended on the power imparted to him by the Holy Spirit to be so efficient that its true worth would be demonstrated or made to become manifest. 1 Corinthians 2:5. Whatever means that would be used to enlist men in the service of the Lord, would need to be relied on as a motive for remaining faithful. The wisdom of man is changeable, and if this faith was based on such a foundation, it would fall as soon as the wisdom of man was exposed. 1 Corinthians 2:6. The notes at chapter 1:18 should be consulted again. Perfect is used in the same sense as called in chapter 1:24. Those who accept the Gospel from the heart will see in it a genuine wisdom that is beyond all comparison with that of the world. Princes of this world means the leaders among the philosophers of Greece. 1 Corinthians 2:7. Mystery is from , which Thayer defines at this place, "a hidden purpose or counsel," then explains it to mean, "In the N. T., God's plan of providing salvation for men through Christ, which was once hidden but now is revealed." The word does not necessarily mean something that is complicated and beyond the understanding of ordinary men. As long as anything is not known it is a mystery, regardless of its character. Hence a popular theory that the Gospel is today a mystery and cannot be understood by uninspired persons, is erroneous and calculated to hinder people from studying God's word. Before the world denotes that God planned the salvation of man even before the age of human existence. Not that any certain man was ordained to be saved, but the scheme by which all men might be saved if they would. 1 Corinthians 2:8. None of the princes of this world knew because it had not been revealed. Those who crucified Christ did not realize he was the Lord of glory (Luke 23:34). 1 Corinthians 2:9. This verse has been perverted in song and speech for years, and made to mean that the story of divine love for man, including the reward that is to be given to God's servants, is still a mystery that is to be revealed at some future time. That idea is not even any part of the meaning of the passage. The eye, ear and heart of man means the natural senses of the human being. No man living, even among the wise sages of the so-called learned world, could discover through his human faculties what the Lord had in store for the faithful. 1 Corinthians 2:10. This verse must be considered in connection with the preceding one. Since the natural mental faculties could not discover these great spiritual truths, it was necessary to give a revelation of them, and that was done by the Spirit bestowed in great measure upon the apostles and 'other New Testament writers. Verse 11. The spirit of a man knows what his thoughts are, and likewise the Spirit of God knows the thoughts of Him. Being an intelligent and supernatural being, this Spirit could communicate between God and man and carry the thoughts of the former to the mind of the latter, thus making him acquainted with the truths that his human philosophy and wisdom could not discover. 1 Corinthians 2:12. Spirit of the world refers to the matter of human philosophy that has been under consideration through many verses. The spirit which is of God is the source of divine inspiration, and by receiving such a spirit it would reveal the things that are gifts from God. This is the same thought as shown in verses 9, 10. 1 Corinthians 2:13. While the apostle used the language of humanity (Romans 6:19), he did not form it on the basis of man's wisdom as the philosophers taught it. Instead, he was guided in the selection of terms by the Holy Ghost, so that he would use such of the words of man's language as had a spiritual bearing, in order that they would convey the ideas that were in keeping with the thoughts of the Spirit, Comparing might well be rendered "expressing," meaning that Paul expressed spiritual thoughts with such words as would impart the desired ideas. 141 Corinthians 2:14. Natural is from , and literally means the animal part of man. In a sentence like our verse, Thayer says it means, "governed by the sensuous nature with its subjection to the appetite and passion." A man thus interested in the things only that will gratify his fleshly desires, will not receive and appreciate the things offered by the Spirit of God, for they are not composed of matters that would give carnal pleasure. Hence they will seem foolish in his estimation so that he will not know or realize their real worth. They are spiritually discerned. They can be discerned or their true value be recognized only by those who take a spiritual interest in them, seeking only that which will impart spiritual benefits. 1 Corinthians 2:15. He that is spiritual--he who does take such a spiritual view of these subjects coming through the Spirit of God, as set forth in the preceding verse, will be able to realize what they mean, which is denoted by the phrase judgeth ["discerneth"] all things. He himself is judged ["discerned"] of no man. The last word means the natural man described in verse 14. Such a man will not recognize the spiritual truths possessed by the man described in the first phrase of this verse. 1 Corinthians 2:16. No man can know how to instruct the Lord (verse 11), therefore all spiritual information must travel the other way--from the Lord to man. Paul claims that such a flow of instruction had taken place in that he had the mind of Christ. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1st Corinthians 3 REPROOF FOR LACK OF WISDOM AS EVINCED BY THEIR CARNAL 1 Corinthians 3:1-4 1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal,—Paul had told them that they were dependent on the inspired apostles for the knowledge of the truth by which they might become spiritual beings. He could not speak unto them as though they were taught by the Spirit, but as though they were fleshly, or led by the impulse of the flesh. as unto babes in Christ.— Not grown, were undeveloped under the instruction of the Spirit. As the spiritual element in them is developed under the instruction of the Spirit the flesh loses its rule, but they had learned slowly, had not grown in spirituality as they should have done, so he chides them that they are yet carnal when they ought to be spiritual. He uses the term here in a modified sense. [The term is sometimes used in a good sense. (1 Peter 2:2.) Here, how¬ever, it is taken in a bad sense, as referring to the understanding. For we must be children in malice, but not in understanding. (14: 20; Ephesians 4:14.) ] 2 I fed you with milk,—Babes are fed with milk, food suited to the digestive powers of their weak and helpless condition. not with meatAfter they grow stronger they are fed with stronger, more strengthening food, suited to their infantile state, and not with stronger spiritual food suited to a greater spiritual growth. for ye were not yet able to bear it:—Sufficient time had elapsed for them to have reached a more vigorous and healthful growth, but they had not improved and grown in the spiritual life as they should, so were babes unfit to receive the stronger spiritual food. He had treated them with tenderness, had not been chargeable to them as he might have been when laboring among them, and had not fully impressed on them the obligation to deny themselves all fleshly lusts and appetites, and sacrifice all things for the sake of Christ. nay, not even now are ye able:—Men fail to improve themselves so that when they ought to be skilled in the word, eat meat and grow strong, able to bear heavy burdens and help others, they are yet weak babes, needing themselves to be nursed on milk and carried by others. This was the condition of these Corinthians; and many yet always remain babes to be nursed, fed, and carried by others. [Christ is at the same time milk to babes and strong meat to those who are of full age (Hebrews 5:13-14), the same truth of the gospel is administered to both, but so as to suit their capacity. Hence it is the part of the wise teacher to accommodate himself to the capacity of those whom he has undertaken to instruct, so that in dealing' with the weak and ignorant, he begins with such principles as they are able to understand, and does not go higher than they are able to follow. (Mark 4:33; John 16:12.) At the same time these principles will contain everything necessary to be known, no less than the further advanced lessons that are communicated to those that are stronger. Some, however, present Christ at such a dis¬tance, and cover over with so many disguises, that they constantly keep their hearers in destructive ignorance.] 3 for ye are yet carnal:—They had not grown from under the rule of fleshly passions. [This word has a wide scope. It is not confined to sexual, or even sensual sins, but covers those tempers and dispositions that express themselves in strife and dissensions.] for whereas there is among you jealousy and strife, are ye not carnal, and do ye not walk after the manner of men?— This refers to the parties noticed in 1: 11, 12. These all grow out of the predominance of the works of the flesh. Paul gives the natural fruits of the flesh: “ Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these: fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousies, wraths, factions, divisions, parties, envyings, drunkenness, revellings, and such like.” (Galatians 5:19-21.) Where these exist, the flesh rules. Had they been spiritual, they would have looked to Christ and not been partisans of men. 4 For when one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos;—Their divisions and strifes had arisen concerning the teachers that had labored among them, especially over Paul and Apollos. Neither of these countenanced this partisanship in his favor. An idea has gone abroad that there was great rivalry between Paul and Apollos that gave rise to the parties in the church at Corinth; but there is no ground what¬ever for this conclusion, for Paul always speaks of Apollos with the highest esteem and affection. At the time of the writing of this epistle, he was with Paul, or in easy reach of him, and knew of his writing, for Paul says: “ But as touching Apollos the brother, I besought him much to come unto you with the brethren: and it was not at all his will to come now; but he will come when he shall have opportunity.” (16: 12.) Paul was writing to condemn the divisions that had grown up concerning him and Apollos and desired Apollos to go help correct the evils. are ye not men?—He places before them the truth that divi¬sions and parties, even for inspired men, are sinful, and grow out of the lusts and passions of the flesh. PROPER OF AS BY THEIR WORK 1 Corinthians 3:5-15 5 What then is Apollos? and what is Paul?—What posi¬tion does Apollos and Paul occupy that they should divide over them? [From the answer given it is implied that the par¬tisanship of their followers does not accord with the spirit of the leaders they have chosen, and is condemned as carnality.] Ministers through whom ye believed;— Here is an emphatic statement that Apollos and Paul were nothing else than mere ministers, servants of God. [They are thereby designated as instruments in God’ s hands for the production of faith, and such they were in their function as preachers and teachers of the truth.] and each as the Lord gave to him.—Each ministered as the Lord gave him ability and knowledge, so God, not his servant, is the leader to follow. 6 I planted,—Paul first preached the word of God, which is the seed of the kingdom (Luke 8:11), among them, and planted the church there. Apollos watered, Apollos taught afterward, encouraging the disciples, so watered. Others came in likely under his teaching. A seed is sometimes planted, but germinates or grows and bears fruit only as it is watered and cultivated. but God gave the increase.-—While, each had done the part for which he was fitted by God, and to which God had called him, God gave the increase. [Paul’ s generous reference to Apollos here, as following up the work which he himself had begun, is a rebuke of the Corinthian party spirit, which set them up as rivals.] 7 So then neither is he that planteth anything, neither he that watereth;—The work that each did as servants of God was necessary to the growth of the plant, but all the power that produced the fruit come from God. but God that giveth the increase.—God does what is accomplished through the provisions he makes and the agents he uses, both in the natural and spiritual world. He gave the increase through the works of these, his servants, as he gives increase of fruit in the material world. 8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one:— They are one in position and relation. They are servants through whom God works. They are equal— not one to be exalted above another. Neither is entitled to any credit. but each shall receive his own reward according to his own labor.—They only do what God directs them to do, and each shall be rewarded according to his faithfulness in doing the will of God. 9 For we are God’ s fellow-workers:—The apostles and faithful teachers are God’ s fellow workers, working together with him, doing and teaching what he directs. ye are God’ s husbandry,—The church is God’ s husbandry, is the field planted with the seed God gave, and is cultivated and nourished by God’ s servants. [This metaphor is frequently used in the Scripture which shows that it plainly rests upon a far-reaching harmony of things natural and spiritual. (See Isaiah 5:1-7; Matthew 13:3-30; Luke 13:6-9; John 15:1-6.) All agriculture is man working together with God. For every pious farmer feels that his harvest is a result and reward proportionate to his own toil and skill, and yet altogether God’ s gift to him. Just so, the servant of the Lord places the word of God in its appropriate soil, the human heart, and from the word, in virtue of its life-giving power, there springs up a fruitful plant of an obedient believer and a devoted Christian life.] God’ s building.—The church is the temple of God, builded of living stones. (1 Peter 2:5.) Jesus Christ is the chief cornerstone. God is fitting the stones and placing them into the building through his workmen. God builds the house, and through the Spirit dwells in it. As we give honor, not to the workmen who execute, but to him who planned and provided for the building, so the honor for this spiritual house belongs to God. 10 According to the grace of God which was given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder I laid a foundation;—According to the gifts and spiritual blessings bestowed on Paul as a wise master builder under God, he laid the foundation of the church at Corinth by preaching that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. He first preached that truth in Corinth. and another buildeth thereon. But let each man take heed how he buildeth thereon.—He warns every one to take heed, be careful how he builds. There is danger by false teaching, or false methods, of building unworthy material upon the foundation which Paul had laid. 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.—There is but one foundation on which a church of Christ can be laid. Paul had laid that foun¬dation when he preached in Corinth that Jesus is the Christ. When Peter confessed his faith in Jesus, saying: “ Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” Jesus said unto him: “ Upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:16-18.) There is controversy as to what constitutes the rock on which Christ would build his church; but Paul says that Christ is the only foundation that can be laid. 12 But if any man buildeth on the foundation—The church is compared to a building into which may be builded both good and bad material. gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, stubble;— The members built into the church are compared to these two classes of material. 13 each man’ s work shall be made manifest:—Every man’ s work will be tried with fire, and so its character will be revealed or made known. If tried by fire, the wood, hay, and stubble will be burned up. for the day shall declare it, because it is revealed in fire;— There is some doubt as to what day is meant. It is a day of testing to the unfaithful that is coming whether in this world or in the world to come. Some think it is the day of persecu¬tion that will come upon the church as a fiery trial that will destroy and purge out the unworthy. Others interpret it as referring to the day of judgment. and the fire itself shall prove each man’ s work of what sort it is.—The point of comparison is: fire will purge and purify the gold, silver, and precious stones. It will burn up and consume wood, hay, and stubble. So the day of trial will purge and purify the good, and they will shine the brighter; but it will bring to ruin the unworthy. This is true of the classes, whether it refers to a time of persecution and trial here or to the future judgment. 14 If any man’ s work shall abide which he built thereon, he shall receive a reward.—If the work done in building up the church of Christ abides, he who does it will receive a reward. [Paul is here speaking of the material built into the church upon the one foundation, which may be good or bad. When a laborer builds wood, hay, and stubble upon the foundation, all such will turn back to the world, yield to its temptations, and thus be overcome by fiery trials; and in such cases the laborer loses his reward. On the other hand, those of his converts who prove themselves to be as gold, silver, and costly stones in the service of God will be admitted “ into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:11), and this will be a reward to him.] 15 If any man’ s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as through fire.—When this test by fire is made has been a question of some doubt. It seems to be that if one brings in ill-prepared material, it will be destroyed. Paul says of his converts: “ Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men” ; (2 Corinthians 3:2), and “ For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of glorying? Are not even ye, before our Lord Jesus at his coming? For ye are our glory and our joy.” (1 Thessalonians 2:19-20.) If these converts were to be the ground of his reward, the loss of them would cause him to suffer a corresponding loss, yet he would be saved, but the fire that destroyed his bad work would test him. This teaching of Paul was clearly intended to warn the church he had planted and taught and among whom he had determined to know nothing but “ Jesus Christ, and him crucified,” against teachers who would come into their midst and teach the commandments of men, that would corrupt and defile the temple of God. OF THE SOURCE OF THE AT CORINTH AND THE SAME 1 Corinthians 3:16-23 16 Know ye not that ye are a temple of God,—Solomon erected a temple in Jerusalem, that was recognized as “ the house of Jehovah,” “ the house of God,” and “ Jehovah’ s house.” In it was Jehovah’ s name recorded; in it was the mercy seat; in it must the offering of prayer or praise be presented. The temple itself, with its corner and foundation stones and comely stones of its walls, was typical of the spiri¬tual temple, the church, “ built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone” (Ephesians 2:20), of which every Christian is a living stone “ budded together for a habitation of God in the Spirit.” [The lessons of care and sanctity and reverence taught con-cerning the temple of God in Jerusalem are examples to teach how reverential and careful we must be in reference to the spiritual temple and how we should make it after the pattern given. It must not be neglected; it must not be defiled; it must not be made secondary to anything in the world.] and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?—God’ s Spirit in the beginning had dwelt upon the earth with man. Man sinned, the earth was defiled, and his Spirit ceased to dwell with man. Altars were built and consecrated where he met the worshipers. Then the tabernacle, then the temple in Jeru¬salem, now the spiritual temple or the church of God. In this spiritual temple he makes his permanent dwelling place among men. (See 6: 19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Hebrews 3:6; 1 Peter 2:5.) 17 If any man destroyeth the temple of God,—The church is destroyed as God’ s temple by so defiling it that God will not dwell in it. The earth was defiled by man introducing practices into it not ordained of God, following the evil one instead of God, by substituting the will of man for the will of God. The same course will destroy the church as a temple of God. In the tabernacle, and the temple in Jerusalem, every person who served, and every vessel and instrument of service were sanctified by the typical blood of bulls and goats. To bring persons or things not sealed by this blood into the tem¬ple so defiled it that God would not dwell in it. Every person built into the spiritual temple of God must be sanctified by the blood of Christ. Every ordinance and appointment of service is consecrated by that blood. To bring a person or service into the church not sealed by the blood defiles it. The persons who enter according to the terms laid down in the New Testament, and the ordinances and the provisions there made for serving God, are sealed by the blood of Christ. None others are. To bring into the church those not admitted by the law of Christ is to defile the temple of God, so that God refuses to dwell in it. The temple of God is holy, consecrated to God’ s service. All its appointments and ordinances have been sealed by the blood of Christ. him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, and such are ye.—As Nadab and Abihu brought strange fire into the earthly tabernacle and were destroyed by that fire, so also shall whosoever brings into the church of God, or performs any service not ordained, and so consecrated by God, be de¬stroyed by that unconsecrated, unordained service. 18 Let no man deceive himself.—He warns against the dan¬ger of the wisdom of this world. It is intimately connected with this defilement of the temple. To introduce things resting on human wisdom defiles the temple of God. To use those ordained by the wisdom of God, sealed by the blood of Christ, is to keep the temple holy and sacred. If any man thinketh that he is wise among you in this world, let him become a fool,—If a man seems or affects to be wise after this world and so thinks he may bring things resting on this wisdom into the church of God, let him become a fool to this world. These admonitions are most needful to men, for they often deceive themselves. God is never deceived as to man’ s char¬acter or as to his ability or to the motives that actuate him in anything he does. Self-deception is the most common phase of deception among men. Our neighbors as a rule understand us better than we understand ourselves. They see us more clearly than we see ourselves. Paul cautions: “ Be not de¬ceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth unto his own flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth unto the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap eternal life.” (Galatians 6:7-8.) This warning grows out of man’ s tendency to deceive himself. Many of us while gratifying the flesh imagine we are follow¬ing the Spirit. Many preachers preach for money and ease and imagine they are preaching to save souls. Often we build fine houses to gratify our pride and persuade ourselves that we are doing it to serve God. Most of life’ s failures come from self-deception. We deceive ourselves as to our abilities, and undertake to do things we have no capacity to do. After years of close observation I feel sure that nine-tenths of the failures in life come from overweening confidence in self. One so self-confident never stops to investigate or properly con¬sider the difficulties in the way of his carrying out a work. Solomon in his counsels of wisdom cautions: “ Trust in Jehovah with all thy heart, and lean not upon thine own understanding. . . . Be not wise in thine own eyes” (Proverbs 3:5-7) ; and Paul says: “ Be not wise in your own conceits” (Romans 12:16). Self-conceit causes men to depend upon their own wisdom and strength instead of that of God, and leads them to ruin financially and spiritually. that he may become wise.—To learn that the wisdom of this world is foolishness is to prepare oneself to accept the wisdom of God. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.—He here applies the truths presented in the conclusion of the first chapter. To be wise after the world is to be a fool before God. To be wise with God is to be a fool with the world. God has ordained that every institution and organization by man shall be engulfed in the destroying vortex of ruin. The disposition to introduce things into the service of God based on human opinions or judgments has been the besetting sin of man from the beginning. It has been the fatal rock on which he has made shipwreck of his faith and on which he has for¬feited the favor of God, and the same thing is true even to this day. Men become infidels by introducing their own opinions into the service and worship of God. It is done first with a view to adding interest and efficiency to the service. This trains men to rely more and more upon their opinions and judgment, less and less upon the institutions of God until they erect their own judgment and opinions into the standard of right, and whatever in the word of God does not agree with this standard of their own, they reject. Whenever men reject the word of God, or any part of it, because it does not agree with their own conceptions of what is right, they are in essential ele¬ments infidels. When a man tests the Bible and its truth, or any part of it, by his own judgment and opinions of what is right or wrong, he has rejected the word of God as the rule of faith for man. God has ordained that those who thus walk shall come to ruin. He shall fall into the pit he has digged. For it is written, He that taketh the wise in their craftiness: —God so overrules as to destroy men with that by which they had devised to save themselves. 20 and again, The Lord knoweth the reasonings of the wise, that they are vain.—God knows all the plans of the wise that they are vain, and will lead to ruin. All the provisions of human wisdom for the advancement of the church of God result in evil to the church and to the world. There never has been an age in the past when there were so many and such costly attractions to draw people to church— fine and luxuri¬ously equipped houses, fine mechanical musical instruments furnishing the best music, well-paid and eloquent ministers, preaching on topics of current interest, with all the societies and helps to attract and entertain the young and the old— yet the people cease to attend. Never before have there been so many human devices and so much money expended at home and abroad to hold and convert the people, and yet the denomi-national churches are growing relatively weaker and are losing ground. The Lord has taken the wise men of the churches in their own craftiness. They have thought that they could improve, by their wisdom, on the ways of God, and God has shown them that they bring weakness to the churches and drive men from God and the church. The church of God is defiled, and it is growing weaker day by day under the addition of these human organizations and helps. They are parasites that sap the life from the church, while for a time seeming to add to its vigor and life. Yet with all these warnings of God in the Scriptures confirmed by the examples of the destructive effects of the human inventions, churches and men claiming to be wise, and to believe in the Bible, follow the same path of ruin. There have drifted into the churches many who do not believe the Scriptures. The disposition to bring human organizations into the work and worship of the church comes from a feeling of wordly wisdom which is foolishness with God. It is a manifestation of unbelief and it must be thrust out of the churches before they can be blessed of God. 21 Wherefore let no one glory in men.—Do not glory in men or follow the works and inventions of men. [To glory in men is to boast of one’ s relation to them, to trust in them as the ground of confidence, or as the source of honor. Thus men are said to glory in the cross because Christ, as crucified, is regarded as the ground of confidence and the source of blessedness. The Corinthians gloried in men when they said, “ I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas.” ] For all things are yours;—All that the men sent from God teach is the common heritage of all who believe in God. They all minister good to all who seek to know and do the will of God. No revelation to man was for personal use, but for the good of all the children of God. 22 whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas,—He makes special application of this truth to himself and others. Paul, Apollos, and Cephas are all sent for the good of all the children of God, and every child of God should receive all the teachings of all the faithful teachers if they would grow into a well-rounded likeness of Jesus Christ in character. This truth is applicable now. Uninspired teachers are more liable to be one-sided and imperfect than the inspired ones were. And often what of God’ s teachings is presented by one teacher is not preached by another, and often men would be benefited by learning' from different teachers, and men of diverse temperaments, and characteristics. All should be watch¬ful to learn and do the will of God. or the world,—[This denotes the material universe and all its providential arrangements. All things that are in it that are not sinful may be made serviceable to the happiness and progress of the Christian, and to the glory of God. However evil men may usurp possession meanwhile, it is the saints that inherit the earth. (Matthew 5:4.) It is maintained for their use, ordered with a view to their spiritual welfare.] or life,—[The term of our sojourn on earth, with all that it brings, is ours. Life is a mighty gift— a great field in which to sow eternal seed. It is ours for two purposes— being and doing, the culture of the new life within us and the promotion of our neighbor’ s well-being— in these two directions life is our opportunity. “ For to me to live is Christ.” (Philippians 1:21.) There are ways of promoting God’ s glory which are peculiar to this life, and which can never come to us again.] or death,—[That grim, horrid thing, whose face strikes ter¬ror to the stoutest heart, and whose icy grasp freezes the fountains of life— that, too, becomes our servant, ministers to our advancement. “ To die is gain.” (Philippians 1:21.) It releases from pains, and toils, and conflicts, and limitations of this mor¬tal state, and ushers us into the enjoyment of the eternal inheritance.] or things present, or things to come; all are yours;—[The present and the future in the most comprehensive sense. Our actual lot is ours, whether it be easy or hard, pleasant or distressing. It is ours to serve us, if we will only let it do its work and turn it to the best account. The future is still hid from us, but it can bring us nothing which shall not be for our good. Whatever form the things to come may take, we are assured that they are ours. (Romans 8:28.) ] 23 and ye are Christ’ s; and Christ is God’ s.—So that in becoming Christ’ s, they become God’ s. “ And we know that to them that love God all things work together for good, even to them that are called according to his purpose.” (Romans 8:28.) [What a climax! How the last words light up the whole situ¬ation and show how unworthy, how indescribably foolish and wrong was the party strife of the Corinthians. As there is one God over all, and one Lord Jesus Christ, so there is one church, in whose unbroken life the peace of God should find itself reflected.] Verse 1 1 Corinthians 3This chapter falls logically into two divisions having reference to fellow-laborers in God's field (1 Corinthians 3:1-9 a), and to fellow-workers in God's building (1 Corinthians 3:9-17), with a short summary and recapitulation of the apostle's argument in the epistle to this point (1 Corinthians 3:18-23). THE FIELDThe unspiritual, worldly conduct of the Corinthians, glorying in various parties, was the occasion for Paul's introduction of the metaphor of farm workers, such a comparison no doubt coming to the recipients of this letter as somewhat of a shock. And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as spiritual, but as unto carnal, as unto babes in Christ. (1 Corinthians 3:1) Brethren ... Tempering the stern things he was about to say, Paul began with this word of loving affection. Spiritual ... carnal ... "There is little profit in seeking out the technical denotation of the Greek words from which these terms are translated, because Paul himself explained exactly what he meant. The were those who, after conversion, had continued to grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord, no longer continuing as "babes in Christ." TheCARNAL were those who were continuing to live like the unconverted, full of envy, jealousy and strife. The background of Paul's words here was probably the allegation of false apostles (2 Corinthians 11:12-15), or teachers, who had made the simplicity of Paul's teaching (when the Corinthians were converted) an excuse to "criticize him as a shallow teacher,"[1] insinuating that Paul was deficient, as compared with themselves. This verse is thus a refutation of the false teachers. Paul flatly told the Corinthians that their immature spiritual condition rendered them incapable of receiving any more advanced instruction than he had provided. It appears that some of the Corinthians had been impressed by the pretentious claims of false teachers; but Paul in this chapter affirmed that "Their philosophical pretense was a sign of their spiritual infancy, produced faction, tended to destroy the church (1 Corinthians 3:17), and resulted in no permanent value (1 Corinthians 3:12-15)."[2] Speaking of such a false teacher, Macknight said, "He had represented Paul as either ignorant or unfaithful, and boasted concerning himself that he had given them complete instruction."[3]Babes in Christ ... It is evident from the next verse that Paul did not blame them for being immature at the time of their conversion; nevertheless this expression, as used by Paul, "was deprecatory."[4] See Hebrews 5:11 ff Hebrews 6:11. [1] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on First Corinthians (Cincinnati: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 62. [2] Henry H. Halley, Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Company, 1927), p. 545. [3] James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles and Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1969), p. 44. [4] T. Teignmouth Shore, Ellicott's Commentary on the Holy Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), p. 295. Verse 2 I fed you with milk, not with meat; for ye were not able to bear it: nay, not even now are ye able.Milk ... meat ... Hebrews 5:11-14,1 Peter 2:2 employ this metaphor and explain it. The milk is the first principles (Hebrews 6:1-2); meat is more advanced learning. "It is the symbol of preaching in which it is possible to unfold the full richness and magnificence of the gospel."[5]Not even now are ye able ... is written as censure. "This describes a condition wholly inexcusable; by now they should have grown up."[6] It is expected of young Christians that they should be weak "as babes," this having been true of the Twelve themselves, of whom Jesus said, "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now" (John 16:12). [5] F. W. Grosheide, The New International Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 71. [6] Paul W. Marsh, A New Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Company, 1969), p. 380. Verse 3 For ye are yet carnal for whereas there is among you, jealousy and strife, are ye not carnal, and do ye not walk after the manner of men?Carnal ... Paul by this word did not deny that the Corinthians were Christians; they were still "brethren"; but their lives were marred by serious failures. Russell declared that Paul used this word, Not in the modern meaning of "sensual," but as meaning earthly secular, worldly, having the worldly spirit of partisan strife, like (some) politicians rather than Christian disciples.[7]Jealousy and strife ... These call to mind Paul's list of the works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21); and "Where these exist, the flesh rules. Had they been spiritual, they would have looked to Christ and would not have been partisans of men."[8]After the manner of men ... means "like ordinary, unconverted men." [7] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 407. [8] David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 47. Verse 4 For when one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not men? What then is Apollos? and what is Paul? Ministers through whom ye believed; and each as the Lord gave to him.I am of Paul ... It is incorrect to suppose that either Paul or Apollos encouraged or approved any such divisions, nor is there the slightest hint that any rivalry existed between them. "Paul always spoke of Apollos with the highest esteem and affection."[9]What then is Apollos ... Paul ... Certainly, such persons even as Paul and Apollos are nothing worthy of receiving any adoration and glory from men who have been redeemed by the blood of Christ. Significantly, it appears here that Paul and Apollos were instruments only, and not, in any sense, the source of divine grace. The second word is not that the Corinthians believed "in" Paul and Apollos, but "through" them. Ministers ... Although Paul was the grandest apostle of the New Covenant, he nevertheless refers to himself here with a title which, as variously translated in the New Testament, means "servant," "minister," or "deacon." Paul would countenance no party, not even one that proposed to honor him as a man. And each as the Lord gave to him ... Any benefit that had come to the Christians at Corinth originated not with the instruments through whom it was conveyed, but with the Lord of glory. Following up on the humility that should pertain to all mortal servants of God, Paul climaxed his argument with an analogy in which he and Apollos were represented merely as laborers working on a farm belonging to another. ENDNOTE: [9] Ibid. Verse 6 I planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth anything, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: but each shall receive his own reward, according to his own labor.The location depicted here is fully identified later as "God's field" (1 Corinthians 3:9). The thought is that Paul planted the crop; Apollos cultivated and watered it. There is no reference to baptism in "watered." Are one ... They were one in mutual love and respect for each other, one in purpose, one in status as God's servants, and one in their reliance upon the Lord who would reward both. According to his own labor ... reveals that the gospel preacher's reward will be measured according to his work, and not according to his success. The injunction of God is not that men shall go and "convert" all nations, but that they shall "preach the gospel to the whole creation." Verse 9 For we are God's fellow workers: ye are God's husbandry, God's building.God's fellow-workers ... is ambiguous, and may refer either to men who cooperate with God, or to men who cooperate with each other in God's service."[10] Despite the fact of there being a sense in which Christians are God's partners at the present time, and that this partnership shall be expanded at the judgment (Matthew 25:23), it is hard to believe that Paul was stressing such a thought here. Marsh said that the Greek text favors the idea of partnership with God, and that the context indicates the other meaning,[11]Since the oneness of Paul and Apollos had just been mentioned, it is natural to assume that the meaning here is "fellow-servants" under God. It would not have suited Paul's purpose to announce himself as "God's partner." However, the higher meaning of this expression, "occurring only here in the New Testament,"[12]may not be denied. The Greek text has: "God's fellow-workers; God's husbandry; God's building." Ye are God's husbandry ... In the analogy, the Corinthian congregation was the vineyard, or field, where Apollos and Paul had been fellow-workers. Shore thought that this word "husbandry," which is translated from a Greek word , "might have been the cause of the Christian name `George' becoming so popular in the church."[13]Paul dramatically shifted to another metaphor in the same line, that of God's building, house, or temple. God's building ... Practically all of the next eight verses have reference to the church as the temple of God. For extended remarks on the church as the true temple, see under Acts 7:47-50 in this series of commentaries (Commentary on Acts, pp. 142-144). See also under 1 Corinthians 3:16. [10] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 82. [11] Paul W. Marsh, op. cit., p. 381. [12] Ibid. [13] T. Teignmouth Shore, op. cit., p. 296. Verse 10 According to the grace of God which was given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder I laid a foundation; and another buildeth thereon. But let each man take heed how he buildeth thereon.A foundation ... The foundation which Paul laid at Corinth is Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 3:11), and this was done through the faithful proclamation of the whole gospel of our Lord. Another buildeth thereon ... Although Farrar believed that "the allusion here may be to Apollos,"[14] it may be that Paul, in this new metaphor, considered that both Apollos and himself had laid the foundation in the preaching of Christ, a work which had also been shared by all of the apostles and inspired teachers. The entire apostolic community could do little more than lay the foundation (of Christ); and Christians themselves were expected to continue the building of God's true temple, the church. As Grosheide said: They leave the work of building to the congregation itself. The Corinthians were actually engaged in building, but in a way the apostle felt obliged to condemn. Paul was not content with what the Corinthians had done themselves[15]The words ANOTHER and EACH MAN are too indefinite to apply to Apollos, having rather an application to all who labor in God's building. [14] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), p. 94. [15] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 74. Verse 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.In Matthew 16:15, Jesus declared that his church would be built upon the rock, and here is revealed what the rock is; it is Christ. "Paul said that Christ is the only foundation that can be laid."[16] No man may begin anywhere else. "This is still worthy of emphasis in a day when so many build their `Christianity' without Christ, on a foundation of good works, humanism or science."[17] Of course, this is not the only metaphor of Christ's preeminence in his kingdom. He is also called the door of the sheepfold (John 10:7), the chief corner stone (Ephesians 2:20), the head of the body (Ephesians 1:22-23), etc. [16] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 51. [17] Leon Morris, Tyndale Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), p. 67. Verse 12 But if any man buildeth on the foundation gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, stubble.Two widely held misconceptions are grounded on this verse, which is understood (1) as "applicable primarily, if not exclusively to teachers,"[18] and (2) as applying to of two classes, (a) gold, etc., and (b) wood, etc. It is evident, of course, that the six kinds of building materials are of two classes: (1) the valuable and permanent and (2) the cheap and destructible; but the conviction of this writer is that the two kinds of people built into God's temple, the church, constitute the reality indicated here. If these words had been directed primarily to Christian teachers, it seems inconceivable that Paul would have used the words "each man" and "any man" no less than six times in 1 Corinthians 3:10-15. Ministers as a class of persons different from the rank and file of Christians were not a feature of the churches of that era, every Christian being a builder in God's temple; and such is indicated by these words. Regarding the view that the six classes of materials are various doctrines used in building God's temple, a view advocated by an unbelievably large number of scholars, was nevertheless refuted by Macknight thus: As the apostle is speaking of the Christian church, consisting of the believers of all nations, of which church Christ is the foundation, it is evident that the materials built on this foundation (gold, silver, etc.) cannot represent the doctrines, but the disciples of Christ ... In no passage of scripture is the temple or church of God said to consist of doctrines, but of the disciples of Christ, who are called living stones built up of a spiritual house or temple (1 Peter 2:5-6)[19]In addition to the views of Macknight cited here, there is also the consideration that all of the true doctrine of Christianity is comprehensively included in Christ himself, that the totality of his doctrine is the foundation, and that there remain no more doctrines of gold, silver, hay or stubble that are to be built into God's church by men. The two classes of materials must refer, therefore, to the two kinds of people built into God's temple (the church) by the advocates of Christianity, whether by ministers and teachers, or by the so-called laity. As for seeing only two classes in these six kinds of materials, McGarvey observed that: The first three kinds were found in their fireproof temples, materials worthy of sacred structures; and the latter three were used in their frail, combustible huts, but which were in no way dedicated to divinity.[20]McGarvey made the application of this verse as follows: The church should be built of true Christians, the proper material; and not of worldly-minded hypocrites, or of those who estimate the oracles of God as on a par with the philosophies of men. The day of judgment will reveal the true character of all who are in the church.[21][18] John Wesley, One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids:. Baker Book House, 1972), in loco. [19] James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles and Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1969), p. 52. [20] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 64. [21] Ibid. Verse 13 Each man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it is revealed in fire; and the fire itself shall prove each man's work of what sort it is.The day ... according to McGarvey, and many others, is a reference to the judgment day when Jesus shall be revealed from heaven "in flaming fire" (2 Thessalonians 1:7); but some have understood it as a day of terrible persecutions such as the "fiery trial" (1 Peter 4:12) prophetically mentioned by both Paul and Peter. Despite the fact of there being an element of testing in times of great persecution, agreement is felt with Morris who declared: "THE DAY is clearly the day when Christ returns, the day of judgment."[22]Only the judgment day will reveal what is and what is not a part of the true temple of God; and, according to Christ himself it will be a time of many surprises (Matthew 7:15-23 Matthew 25:34-46). ENDNOTE: [22] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 68. Verse 14 If any man's work shall abide which he built thereon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as through fire.The fact that people do not fully understand this passage is implicit in the truth that some have built up the theory of purgatory, based partly on what is stated here. The whole concept of purgatory is foreign to the word of God, but the advocates of it are still deriving immense revenues through the preaching of it. Again from Macknight: The Romish clergy, seeing that this doctrine properly managed, might be made an inexhaustible source of wealth to their order, have represented this fire of purgatory as lighted up from the very beginning of the world, and have kept it burning ever since, and have assumed to themselves the power of detaining souls in that fire, and of releasing them from it; whereby they have drawn great sums of money from the ignorant and superstitious.[23]This writer is grieved to know that even now there are some, who were once baptized into Christ and served as elders of God's church, whose children are paying to get them prayed out of purgatory! What this verse actually means is that the persons led to Christ through the efforts of any Christian may defect from the faith, proving themselves wood, hay or stubble, and that the loss of such souls will not affect the salvation of a Christian teacher, whose reward would in some manner unknown to us have been far greater if they had not defected, and whose salvation "so as through fire" is understood by such language to be only by the narrowest margin, "by the skin of his teeth" (Job 19:20). Yet so as through fire ... has the meaning of "something resembling" an escape from fire, as in "snatching them out of the fire" (Jude 1:1:23); and it is certain that this phrase has absolutely nothing in it of actual fire. It is a figure of speech, prompted possibly by Paul's reference to the judgment and the fire of that day, but not to be identified as the same thing. The doctrine of purgatory is not merely unscriptural and anti-scriptural, there being not one word in the entire scriptures to support such a monstrous thesis; but it is effectively refuted in a single question: "If any church believes in such a thing, and in their own power, through prayer, to deliver people from it; why do they not pray all people out of it immediately for sweet charity's sake?" ENDNOTE: [23] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 53. Verse 16 Know ye not that ye are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?The words of this text are sometimes applied to individuals; but, as Morris said, "The reference here is to the church."[24] There is no article before "temple" in the Greek; and it would be more accurately translated, "Ye are a temple of God."[25] "The building of which the apostle speaks is the Christian church, called in this verse The Temple of God."[26]THE CHURCH THE TEMPLE OF GODOf all the beautiful metaphors of God's church such as the bride of Christ, the vineyard of the Lord, the household of God, the pillar and ground of the truth, the spiritual body of Christ, and the flock of Christ, none is more beautiful or intriguing than "The Temple of God." The first suggestion ever made regarding a temple for the one true God was made by David, whose conscience was stricken with the thought of his own house of cedar compared with the humble tent-shrine which housed the ark of the covenant. Nathan the prophet, however, explained to David that God had never once expressed any desire to have such a house (temple), stating emphatically that after David's death, David's son would build God a house, that his kingdom would be established for ever in the person of that "seed" (which was Christ, of course). See 2 Samuel 7:1-13. Concerning the Greater Son of David, who is Christ, it was prophesied that he would build a house (temple) for God's name and that his throne would be established for ever. From the remarkable teachings in this passage from Samuel it is absolutely clear that God never intended that a physical temple would be constructed in Jerusalem. The departure of Israel from God's word in 2 Samuel 7 is exactly parallel to their departure from God's word in 1 Samuel 8. How did David react to the prophet's forbidding him in God's name to build a temple, and promising that "the Son of David" would build God's temple (a prophecy of the church)? He said, in effect, "Well, that has to be Bathsheba's boy! Solomon will build the temple!" To be sure he did so, but there is no evidence whatever that the building of a material temple in Jerusalem was any different in the sight of God than the setting up of the earthly monarchy in the days of Samuel. God permitted both. He used both. He accommodated to the hardness of the people's heart; but that extravagant earthly temple of the Jews was only a second outcropping of the fleshly desire of Israel to be like the nations around them, which had their richly ornamented temples erected to pagan deities. It is known that God would not permit David to build the temple because of his wickedness. He was a man of blood. But was Solomon any less wicked and bloody? His notorious debaucheries were the scandal of forty generations. Moreover, the temple proved to be as big a stumbling block to the Jews as the secular kingdom was. Christ's first announcement to his generation included the fact that "One greater than the temple is here!" (Matthew 12:6). While Christ was on earth, the true temple was "his body" (John 2:21); and after Pentecost, the true temple has been nothing other than the spiritual body of Christ. This was the element of Stephen's speech that so infuriated the religious partisans in Jerusalem that they mobbed him. See under 1 Corinthians 3:9. Therefore, Paul's designation of the body of Christ in this passage as the temple of God is of the utmost significance. Paul himself had, with difficulty, come to understand this. As soon as he was converted, he went straight to that old secular temple; and God told him to get out of the place, even out of the city (Acts 22:17-21); and Paul, even after that, returned to the temple where he was mobbed; and in the behavior of the temple partisans (including the high priest), Paul finally read the will of God as it had been declared by Jesus that the temple was nothing but a "den of thieves and robbers" (Mark 11:17), that it was not God's house at all, but the house of the Jews, and that it was left unto them "desolate" (Matthew 23:38). The above reflections are not denied by the fact of God's using the temple after the Jews constructed it against his will; he did the same thing with the secular kingdom. The true temple of God, therefore, has never been anything else except the church of Jesus Christ our Lord. In it alone, not in some man-made shrine, men are called to worship and serve the Lord of glory. Meeting houses are not, in any sense, "true" sanctuaries. The fact of God's Spirit dwelling in the spiritual body of Christ which is the church does not deny the residence of the Spirit of promise in the hearts of individual Christians (Acts 2:38 ff; Ephesians 1:13). [24] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 69. [25] Ibid. [26] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 46. Verse 17 If any man destroyeth the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, and such are ye.The conduct of the Corinthians was such that the Spirit of God would be grieved and denied of any place in their hearts, thus destroying God's true temple; and just as any defilement of the ancient tabernacle had been punishable by death, there would be fearful retribution against all who defile the church. In context, this was a terrible warning to the Corinthians, but it applies to all who ever became a part of God's church. As Grosheide declared: "It is clear that the judgment of God is meant; it may refer to suffering loss (1 Corinthians 3:15), but also to eternal life."[27]ENDNOTE: [27] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 89. Verse 18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man thinketh that he is wise among you in this world, let him become a fool, that he may become wise.A SUMMARY OF Here begins the summary of what Paul had written up to here. This through 1 Corinthians 3:23 gives the highlights of what Paul had written up to this point. Dummelow's paraphrase of this is: Do not deceive yourselves; but if there be any of you priding himself on his worldly wisdom, let him quickly unlearn it, that he may learn the true wisdom.[28]Macknight gave another interesting paraphrase of the same verse: Let no teacher deceive himself with false notions of prudence. If any teacher among you thinketh to be wise, in this age of spreading the gospel, by misrepresenting its doctrines for the purpose of making it acceptable to bad men, let him become a fool in his own eyes, by preaching the gospel sincerely, that he may be really wise.[29]This verse is a short summary of much Paul had written in Corinthians thus far; and it has the effect of condemning intellectual pride, one of the most hurtful of human vanities. In this vivid phrase Paul urged the man who would be wise to become a fool. "This is a simple way of urging a man to be humble enough to learn."[30][28] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 898. [29] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 55. [30] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1954), p. 39. Verse 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He that taketh the wise in their craftiness.As Shore observed: With the exception of the reference in James 5:11 to the "proverbial patience" of Job, this is the only allusion to Job, or to the book of Job in the New Testament.[31]Paul's quotation is from Job 5:13, where Eliphaz the Temanite was speaking against Job, declaring that "God frustrates the devices of the crafty ... and taketh the wise in their own craftiness." Eliphaz was wrong in his application of these words to Job, but the words themselves are true. Adam Clarke gave an example of God's doing just that type of thing when: The pagans raised up persecution against the Church of Christ in order to destroy it; but this became the very means of quickly spreading it over the earth, and of destroying the whole pagan system. Thus the wise were taken in their own craftiness.[32]Of course, history affords countless examples of the same thing. [31] T. Teignmouth Shore, op. cit., p. 297. [32] Adam Clark, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and Porter, 1831), Vol. VI, p. 206. Verse 20 And again, The Lord knoweth the reasonings of the wise, that they are vain.This quotation is from Psalms 94:11. The teaching is not merely that "Human thought is fruitless in the sense of not producing anything of spiritual value that redeems man from sin,"[33] but that it is likewise ineffectual in devising any worthwhile solutions of the secular, political, economic and social problems which plague the entire world. ENDNOTE: [33] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p. 337. Verse 21 Wherefore, let no one glory in men. For all things are yours.The brief summary concludes with the first clause here, except for the beautiful doxology. As Grosheide said, "Paul is here recapitulating all he has said before. The Corinthians named themselves after men; and those who do that love the wisdom of the world."[34]Therefore, this verse makes it crystal clear what Paul condemned in 1 Corinthians 1:12. It was the sin of their calling themselves after the names of men; and, as the name Christ is not that of a man in the sense of the words use here, there cannot be the slightest condemnation upon those who said they were "of Christ." This same truth is evident in the next verse also. ENDNOTE: [34] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 93. Verse 22 For all things are yours; whether Paul, Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours.This precious doxology reminds one of the famous passage in Romans 5:31-37; but this has a positive implication not in evidence there. "Things present, things to come, etc.," are there viewed as opposing the Christian but failing to thwart him; here the Christian is viewed as the possessor of everything in Christ. This means that Christians are not to choose certain things, such as certain teachers; for all things are theirs. A Christian is in fact a member of no sect or party, because he has entered "into the possession of a fellowship and love which are as wide as the universe."[35]Paul, Apollos, or Cephas ... Conspicuous by its absence is the so-called "Christ party" in this list, proving that the words "And I am of Christ," spoken in 1 Corinthians 1:12, are the words of the apostle Paul himself, and not the slogan of any kind of a sect at Corinth. ENDNOTE: [35] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 40. Verse 23 And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's.Of course, the Christian's possession of all things in Jesus Christ derives absolutely from the fact of who Jesus Christ is; he is God incarnate in human flesh, the eternal Word, one with the Father, who is and was and will be before all time and now and for ever. That Christ is God's, as here stated, "in no way detracts from his deity."[36] His essential oneness and equality with God are not under discussion in this verse, "but his subordination for the sake of human redemption."[37][36] Paul W. Marsh, op. cit., p. 382. [37] Ibid. "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE " Chapter Three IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To see the proper place of preachers and teachers in relation to their work 2) To appreciate God's view of the church as the temple of God SUMMARY Paul continues to deal with the problem of division in this chapter. Its seriousness is seen in its carnality, which prevented Paul from being able to speak as to spiritually mature people (1 Corinthians 3:1-4). To help them see the folly of exalting preachers over each another, Paul shows their relation to one other and to their work, which is building the temple of God (1 Corinthians 3:5-17). To the warning not to defile the temple of God, Paul adds another not to glory in the wisdom of this world nor in men (1 Corinthians 3:18-23). OUTLINE I. THE CARNAL NATURE OF (1 Corinthians 3:1-4) A. CARNAL AT CORINTH (1 Corinthians 3:1-2)1. Prevented Paul from speaking to them as to spiritual people (1 Corinthians 3:1 a) 2. Their carnality indicated that they were still babes in Christ, unable to receive solid food (1 Corinthians 3:1-2) B. OF THEIR (1 Corinthians 3:3-4)1. The envy, strife, and divisions among them (1 Corinthians 3:3) 2. As expressed in their calling themselves after men (1 Corinthians 3:4) II. OF TO THEIR WORK (1 Corinthians 3:5-17) A. ARE , USED BY GOD (1 Corinthians 3:5-7)1. Ministers given the opportunity to serve God in various ways (1 Corinthians 3:5-6 a) 2. But it is God who gives the increase (1 Corinthians 3:6-7) B. THEIR TO ONE ANOTHER AND THEIR WORK (1 Corinthians 3:8-17)1. United in their work, though their labor and rewards may differ (1 Corinthians 3:8) 2. Fellow workers with God, they work on God's building (1 Corinthians 3:9) a. Laying the foundation (as Paul did) of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 3:10-11) b. Building upon the foundation, using various materials to be tested at the Last Day (1 Corinthians 3:12-15) 3. A strong warning, since this building is the temple of God and indwelt by the Spirit (1 Corinthians 3:16-17) III. AVOID IN WORLDLY WISDOM OR MEN (1 Corinthians 3:18-23) A. REASONS NOT TO GLORY IN WORLDLY WISDOM (1 Corinthians 3:18-20)1. You will only deceive yourself (1 Corinthians 3:18) 2. The wisdom of this world is foolishness with God (1 Corinthians 3:19-20) B. REASONS NOT TO GLORY IN MEN (1 Corinthians 3:21-23)1. All things (including men) are yours (1 Corinthians 3:21-22) 2. You are Christ's, and Christ is God's (1 Corinthians 3:23) REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER 1) List the main points of this chapter- The Carnal Nature Of Division (1 Corinthians 3:1-4) - Relation Of Preachers To Their Work (1 Corinthians 3:5-17) - Avoid Glorying In Worldly Wisdom Or Men (1 Corinthians 3:18-23) 2) What prevented Paul from speaking to the Corinthians as unto spiritual people? (1 Corinthians 3:1-3)- They were carnal, still babes in Christ 3) What manifested their carnality? (1 Corinthians 3:3-4)- Their envy, strife, and divisions, as manifested in calling themselves after men 4) Who was more important, he that planted, or the one that watered? (1 Corinthians 3:6-7)- Neither, it was God who gave the increase 5) Upon what foundation is the church built? (1 Corinthians 3:11)- Jesus Christ 6) When will the work of ministers be fully made manifest? (1 Corinthians 3:13)- At the last Day 7) If those converted by preachers are lost, will the preachers be lost? (1 Corinthians 3:14-15)- No, but their reward will not be as great 8) What sort of building is the church? (1 Corinthians 3:16)- The temple of God, indwelt by His Spirit 9) What is the wisdom of this world to God? (1 Corinthians 3:19)- Foolishness 10) Why should we not glory in men? (1 Corinthians 3:21-22)- Because they are but instruments of God used to benefit us 11) And to whom do we belong? (1 Corinthians 3:23) - Christ Questions by E.M. Zerr For 1st Corinthians Chapter 31. Into what state had the Corinthians fallen? 2. How did it affect Paul’ s speech to them? 3. Tell the illustration here drawn from humanity. 4. What had to be their food? 5. Is this here regarded an unfavorable criticism? 6. Does this contradict 1 Peter 2:2? 7. How does it compare with Heb. 5: 12-14? 8. What did Paul say was among them? 9. To whom is their walking compared ? 10. Whom does Paul use among them for figures? 11. Do all men perform the same kind of work? 12. In the growing who is given credit for the harvest ? 13. Will this come if man does no planting? 14. Which is greater, the one who plants, or waters? 15. On what basis will each man be rewarded? 16. As what are we associated together with God? 17. What constitutes God’ s husbandry? 18. State what constitutes the building of God. 19. What kind of master did Paul consider himself? 20. How could he modestly make this claim? 21. It was according to what favor? 22. Did he claim to do all the work of the building? 23. What part came first? 24. What warning does he give to builders ? 25. State the number of foundations. 26. Identify the true foundation. 27. How could Paul lay such in view of 1 Peter 2:6? 28. Can more than one material be used in building? 29. How many classes of material are considered? 30. How many grades of each class? 31. To what will every man’ s work be subjected? 32. Is this element referred to a literal one? 33. Does a workman’ s salvation depend on this test? 34. Does his reward depend on it? 35. Will all this harmonize with 2 John 8? 36. What does Paul wish them to know? 37. What dwells in this edifice? 38. State the threat Paul gives as to this building. 39. What reason is here given for this warning? 40. Is it possible for a man to deceive himself ? 41. What is necessary to become really wise ? 42. How does God view wisdom of this world? 43. What Old Testament statement does Paul quote? 44. What man spoke that? 45. State the Lord’ s estimate of thoughts of the wise. 46. What Jewish character stated this? 47. In what are we told not to glory ? 48. Had the Corinthians been doing this? 49. How general was their access to service of men? 50. State the mutual relation between them and God. Verse 14. If a man does his part by teaching the people what is right, and the converts remain faithful, he will have the reward that consists of a joyous observation of such steadfastness. This reward is described in 2 John 1:8 and 3 John 1:4. Verse 3. Envying, strife, and divi sions are prompted by their personal desires, hence the apostle charges them with being carnal. Walk as men denotes a conduct that is prompted by the human or fleshly appetites. Verse 4-5. See the comments at chapter 1:12. Verse 6-7. The argument in this verse is that the Lord's servants do not all have the same talents or work, even as the production of a crop involves the services of more than one man. Yet all the work of men would avail nothing if God did not give to nature the power of growth. Verse 8. These men are one in the eyes of the Lord. If each will do what he can, he will receive his due reward from God and not from any man. Verse 9. We means Paul and Apollos as laborers in God's vineyard, according to the figure In verse 6-8. God's building is another figure, that of a structure in which various men labor to erect it. Verse 10. Cooperation or Joint labor under God is still the subject of Paul, and he is continuing the figure of a building for his illustration. He gives the grace of God the credit for being able to work as a wise masterbuilder. The first thing such an architect will do is to lay the foundation. Paul did this when he introduced the Gospel of Christ to the people of Corinth (Acts 18:1-11). After he had done this, others came into the community and gave further teaching to the brethren, and that constituted building upon the foundation of truth that he had laid. Take heed means that any man offering further teaching should be careful that what he teaches will be in harmony with the original foundation of truth the apostle had laid. Verse 11. There is but one foundation and that is Christ, which God laid in Zion which is the church, and it was done once for all when He died in Jerusalem and rose from the grave. When Christ was preached to the Corinthians or to any others, that is what is meant by laying the foundation there. Verse 12. Building upon this foundation means to induce men to accept the Christ as the foundation of their hope. The three degrees of comparison, whether favorable or unfavorable, refers to the different kinds of persons who profess to accept Christ. Verse 13. No preacher is a mind reader, consequently be may be misled by some who are not acting with sincerity. However, he should heed the admonition given at the end of verse 10, and not use any unscriptural teaching to persuade his hearers to act. The final test of a man's work will come when Jesus is revealed at the last day. But it may be that some of his "converts" will prove unfaithful even while in the life of the preacher, so that he will behold them falling under the fiery trials that are to come before the professed servants of Christ (1 Peter 4:12). Verse 15. If a man's "converts" fail to stand the test of persecutions or the self-denials required, he will lose this reward described in the preceding verse. But if he has not shunned to declare all the counsel of God, he will be saved from the fire of God's wrath that is to come upon the unfaithful. In other words, a preacher's salvation does not depend upon the steadfastness of those whom he brings to Christ, but on his own faithfulness in preaching and living the truth. Verse 16. Ye are the temple of God means them as a congregation, which was built upon the foundation laid for them by Paul when he preached Christ to them. The church is the spiritual building in which the Holy Spirit dwells (Ephesians 2:22). Verse 17. The temple is the church, and such divisions and contentions as were being conducted in Corinth were defiling the temple. Paul is warning the brethren of the wrath of God which they were liable to receive if they continued their variances. Verse 18. This verse refers to those who were placing undue emphasis on the personal wisdom and special qualifications of certain men in the congregation. Such men were vain and self-deceived, and as long as they maintained such an attitude they would shut themselves off from real wisdom. Let him become a fool is an accommodative expression, meaning that if he will admit to himself that he is not a wise man, he will then be in the proper frame of mind really to learn. Verse 19. The quotation is in Job 5:13, and is the statement of one of Job's friends. It is an uninspired re mark but is the truth, hence Paul gives it approval. Verse 20. The wise means those who boast of their worldly wisdom; all such are vain in the estimation of the Lord. Verse 21. No man glory in men. One man is no more important in God's sight than another, regardless of his apparently great qualifications. All things are yours denotes that all of these seemingly great things have been provided for the benefit of the brethren and not for their worldly glorying. Verse 22-23. Again referring to the men as he did in chapter 1:12, Paul takes in more scope in his general summing up of the lesson at hand, including other persons and also other things, both present and future. This all shows that the specific point in view is yet to be brought out, which we will see in the next chapter. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1st Corinthians 4 OF THE SETTING FORTH THE TRUE VIEW OF WORTH AND 1 Corinthians 4:1-5 1 Let a man so account of us, as of ministers of Christ,— Paui returns to the question, in what esteem the inspired teachers of the gospel should be held. Let all esteem them as servants, underworkers of Christ to whom has been commit¬ted the things heretofore unrevealed, to be made known by them to men. and stewards of the mysteries of God.— The office of a stew¬ard is to receive from the master and distribute as he directs. Of themselves, and apart from Christ, they had nothing, and could give nothing. 2 Here, moreover, it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.—God entrusted to the inspired men the truths he revealed to them through the Spirit. These truths were given to them to be taught to others for their salvation and edification. They were entrusted with the great spiritual truths brought to light in Christ Jesus for the salvation of the world. So Peter tells the Corinthians: “ According as each hath received a gift, ministering it among yourselves, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.” (1 Peter 4:10.) Paul says: “ For the bishop must be blameless, as God’ s steward.” And Luke (Luke 16:1-12) gives an account of the unjust steward who was not honest in the use of the master’ s goods. So it is important that those entrusted as stewards with the truth of God should be honest and faithful in teaching to the world all that God has revealed for the salvation of the world. Not to teach all God’ s commands is to leave the world in condemna¬tion with its blood on the stewards who failed to teach the truths God committed to them. So Paul, to the elders at Ephesus, in leaving them, said: “ Wherefore I testify unto you this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. For I shrank not from declaring unto you the whole counsel of God.” (Acts 20:26-27.) Paul was an honest steward, distributing to others what God had entrusted to him for their good. Teachers today are in a limited sense stewards of God to deliver his teaching to the world. He who refuses to teach the whole will of God is dishonest toward God and unfaithful to man. [Nothing short of an unswerving adherence to the simple gospel of Christ is divinely regarded as filling the required measure of this faithfulness as may be seen by the following exhortation: “ And the things which thou hast heard from me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.” (2 Timothy 2:2.) “ Take heed to thyself, and to thy teaching. Continue in these things; for in doing this thou shalt save both thyself and them that hear thee.” (1 Timothy 4:16.) ] 3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you,—[It was a matter of little concern to Paul that he should be judged by any of the Corinthians as to his faith¬fulness or unfaithfulness. His responsibility was not to them. They had not sent him ; he was not their steward.] or of man’ s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.—He leaves all to the judgment of God. He had no standard by which to judge himself save by the will of God. 4 For I know nothing against myself;—He was conscious of no failure to do his duty as a minister of God. yet am I not hereby justified:—His failure to know anything against himself did not make it sure that he was guiltless. but he that judgeth me is the Lord.—God might know something against him even if his own heart did not condemn him. John said: “ Hereby shall we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our heart before him: because if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, [and will make our condemnation the greater], and knoweth all things. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, we have boldness toward God [that he will not condemn us].” (1 John 3:19-21.) So Paul here, while knowing nothing against himself gives him hope, it does not make it certain that God will not see something wrong in him and condemn him. 5 Wherefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who will both bring to light the hidden things of darkness,—Wait for the Lord’ s judgment when he will bring to light all things now hidden in darkness. and make manifest the counsels of the hearts; and then shall each man have his praise from God.—He will then open to view the secret motives of the heart and then every man, faithful as a steward, shall have the praise of God. Paul had confidence that God would justify him and Apollos in all the things over which the Corinthians had divided and for which they had been condemned. This does not mean that men should not test themselves by the word of God by which God will judge them. REASON FOR BY A BETWEEN THE ASSUMED SELF- OF THE AND THE REAL OF THE 1 Corinthians 4:6-13 6 Now these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us ye might learn not to go beyond the things which are written;—This was said to impress upon them that in their esteem for teachers they should not follow them further than they do the will of God as it is written. Bishop Pierce paraphrases the verse thus: “ I have made use of my own and Apollos’ name in my arguments against your divisions, because I would spare to name those teachers among you who are guilty of making and leading parties, that in us you might learn not to follow any one with a party.” Paul and Apollos did not make the parties. Other ambitious men fomented the parties and used the names of Apollos and Paul to do it. that no one of you be puffed up for the one against the other.—This may mean that the division was not concerning Paul, Apollos, or Peter; but that he had used their names to show the evil of following men. If it was not right to follow them, much less the uninspired men. 7 For who maketh thee to differ?—Who made them leaders of parties arrayed one against another? [This glorification and depreciation of rival teachers sprang from unwarrantable arrogance. It involved a claim to superiority, and a right to sit in judgment, which they did not possess.] and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?—What did they have in the way of gifts and knowledge that they did not receive from those to whom God gave his Spirit? but if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it?—If they received it from the apostles, why did they boast and set themselves against them, and set themselves as leaders as though they had not received it from those whom they now oppose ? 8 Already are ye filled, already ye are become rich, ye have come to reign without us:—In this he reproaches them for their assumption of worldly wisdom. They acted as though they were already filled of all the good things of earth, had become rich in spiritual things, and were reigning as kings without those from whom they had received all they had from Christ. [The strong irony in these expressions, taken in con-nection with what he had already said, must have stung them to the heart. For there is a striking contrast between the comfortable, full-fed, self-satisfied Corinthians and the depression and the scorn in the midst of which the apostles lived. It is not an unusual thing for many people to forget, if not despise, the men through whom they were brought to the knowledge of the truth; and take up others to whom, in things of God, they owe nothing.] yea and I would that ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.—He would have rejoiced at their reigning as real kings and priests of the Lord that those who had converted them and had bestowed on them all the real good they pos¬sessed might reign with them instead of suffering want and persecution as they were then suffering. 9 For, I think,—[The Corinthians thought themselves wise, and Paul, in contrast, thought God had set forth the apostles the lowest in this world. They fared worse than even the prophets, who, though grievously afflicted and tormented, were sometimes honored.] God hath set forth us the apostles last of all, as men doomed to death:—He speaks this in view of the great perse¬cutions the apostles were called upon to suffer before the world. [The word translated “ doomed” occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, and denotes the certainty of death. It implies that such were their continued conflicts, trials, and persecutions, that it was certain that they would terminate in their death. This is a very strong expression, and denotes the continuance and intensity of their sufferings in the cause of Christ.] for we are made a spectacle unto the world, both to angels and men.—They were appointed to suffer unto death for Christ’ s sake, a spectacle before heaven and earth. [It is quite likely that the reference here is to the ancient amphitheatre, whose arena was surrounded by circular seats, capable of accommodating thousands of spectators. In this arena trained athletes struggled for prizes in the games, at the close of which, when the spectators had been sated with bloodless performances, criminals condemned to death were brought in to fight with wild beasts or with one another. They came into the arena knowing that they could never leave it alive. While others sat comfortably looking on, with curtains to shade them from the heat and refreshments to save them from exhaustion or from faintness at the sight of blood, they were in the arena, exposed to wounds, ill-usage and death. On such an arena Paul speaks of himself and fellow laborers as struggling, the objects not only of human, but angelic, specta¬tors. Such were the sufferings of the apostles that men and angels gazed on them with wonder.] 10 We are fools for Christ’ s sake,—According to the world’ s wisdom, the apostles were fools for Christ’ s sake. but ye are wise in Christ;—By the same rule, while claim¬ing to be the servants and teachers of Christ, they enjoyed honor, plenty, and every worldly good. we are weak, but ye are strong; ye have glory, but we have dishonor.— The apostles were among them “ in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling” (2: 3), and thought not of themselves, but of their Master’ s message, and this humbled them; whereas their opponents assumed stately airs and claimed to be strong in Christ, and were honored by the heathen around them. The apostles, who gloried in no such pretensions, were dishonored by those teachers and the world. [The contrast between the two situations enunciated in verses 8 and 9 is expressed in this verse in three antitheses which are withering blows to the proud Corinthians. These words are addressed especially to these proud party leaders, but at the same time to all the members who sympathized with them: (1) As to teaching, the apostles had to face the reputation of foolishness which the gospel brought upon them, while at Corinth there was found a way of preaching Christ so as to procure a name for wisdom, the reputation of profound philos¬ophers and men of most reliable judgment. Paul might have become as celebrated as Gamaliel; but for Christ’ s sake he consented to pass as a fool. The Corinthians knew better how to manage— they made the teaching even of the gospel a means of gaining celebrity for their lofty wisdom. (2) As to conduct. They came before the public with the feeling of their strength. There is in them neither hesitation nor timidity. They succeeded in becoming wise, strong, and honorable in consequence actually of their being Christians. They had turned their relationship to Christ in an effective means to restore them to worldly greatness, in another form, which they once surrendered in order to become Christians. The apostles did not condescend to these grand lordly airs. They thought not of themselves, but of their Master and his message, and this, instead of exalting, humbled them. For Paul says of himself, and he expressed the sentiment of all : “ Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Wherefore I take pleasure in weaknesses, in injuries, in necessities, in persecu¬tions, in distresses, for Christ’ s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.” (2 Corinthians 12:9-10.) (3) The welcome received from the world by the one and the other. The proud party leaders were honored, feted, and regarded as the ornament of cultivated circles; there was ri¬valry to do them honor, while the apostles were reviled and calumniated.] In verses 11-13 he tells them how the true teachers who converted them and taught them all they knew of Christ— who while among them lived in want working with their own hands that they might not burden them- -are still persecuted, reviled, despised, suffering- for want of all things, and in it all they returned good for evil, blessings for curses, while these unworthy teachers enjoyed good. This was a reminder that they were not following the teachings of Jesus. 11 Even unto this present hour—[The emphasis is on the ceaselessness of the hardships, privations, sufferings, and hu¬miliations to which the apostles were subjected. The fact that Paul gladly submitted to all these afflictions presented his case in glaring contrast with that of his opposers at Cor¬inth, who exposed themselves to no such sufferings out of zeal for Christ.] we both hunger, and thirst,—Like their Master, the apostles were poor, and in traveling from place to place, it often hap¬pened that they scarcely found entertainment of the poorest kind. Of this his own language is the best comment: “ In hunger and thirst, in fastings often.” (2 Corinthians 11:27.) and are naked,—[They were insufficiently clad. In their la¬bors their clothing became old and badly worn, and they had no friends to replace them, neither had they money with which to buy new ones.] and are buffeted,—[Slapped in the face. Such insults, to¬gether with scourgings, frequently fell to the lot of Paul (Acts 16:23 Acts 23:2), and the other apostles. It shows the utter contempt with which they were treated.] and have no certain dwelling-place;—[This homelessness was among the severest of all trials. They wandered in dis¬tant lands; when driven from one place they went to another; and thus they led a wandering, uncomfortable life amidst strangers and foes. All this was for the sake of the gospel that men might have eternal life.] 12 and we toil, working with our own hands:—[Paul sup¬ported himself and his companions in labor by the dreary toil and scant earnings of a tentmaker, in the express determina¬tion to be no burden to those who accepted the gospel under his preaching in Corinth. (2 Corinthians 11:7-9.) Such conduct was more noble because all mechanical trades were looked down upon by the Greeks. It is quite likely that this is mentioned to put the false teachers at Corinth to shame, who not only demanded maintenance from them, but were living in ease and luxury through their liberality to them.] being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we endure;— [The picture of the ignominious condition of Paul and his fel¬low laborers is continued, and its effects heightened by the contrast of their demeanor. They are so utterly empty and devoid of all honor with others that, as respects those who re¬viled, persecuted, and slandered them, they did not in any wise defend themselves or seek vengeance against them.] 13 being defamed, we entreat:—They wished good to their revilers, remained quiet and patient towards their persecutors, and gave beseeching words to their slanderers. In all this they followed the example of their Master: “ Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously.” we are made as the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things, even until now.— [This has reference to that which is collected by sweeping a house, or that which is collected and cast away by purifying or cleansing anything; hence any vile, worthless, and contemptible object. It was applied to men of the most vile, abject, and worthless character. This shows in a very strong light the indignities and sufferings which Paul and his fellow laborers endured in the service of Christ. Notice how severely this description rebukes the self-conceited disturbers among the Corinthians. In the presence of such tremendous earnestness and such forgetfulness of self, they could not but feel how utterly contemptible was all thought of their own learning or skill. What are we doing for him for whom Paul did and suffered so much!] OF THE AND SPIRIT OF HIS AND 1 Corinthians 4:14-21 14 I write not these things to shame you,—He does not write these things to shame them for their neglect of him and his fellow laborers. but to admonish you as my beloved children.--- He warns them that they are not following Christ and are in danger of making shipwreck of their profession. A holy, devoted life would bring upon them the sufferings and persecutions the apostles were enduring; hence the Corinthians were deceived in supposing that they were serving God while enjoying the worldly good. [Paul’ s object in drawing such a contrast be¬tween their case and his was not to mortify them; but out of his love to them as children to bring the truth to their minds, and let them see what they really were, as contrasted with what they imagined themselves to be.] 15 For though ye have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers;—They had many teachers in Christ, yet they had but one father in the gospel. The father cared more for them than any teacher, especially those making gain of them. for in Christ Jesus I begat you through the gospel.—By the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven, Paul preached the gospel, the word of God, which is the seed of the kingdom, to the Corinthians ; they received it into the heart as the incorruptible seed, and by it they were begotten or made alive. James says: “ Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.” (James 1:18.) Peter says: “ Having been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God, which liveth and abideth. . . . And this is the word of good tidings which was preached unto you.” (1 Peter 1:23¬25.) Connect with this what Jesus said to Nicodemus (John 3:3-5), and it is clear that the Holy Spirit begets by imparting the word of God, the incorruptible seed, to the heart of man through the gospel. 16 I beseech you therefore, be ye imitators of me.—Here he asserts his fidelity to Christ, his nearness to them as their father, and so pleads with them for their own good as beloved children to imitate him in Christ, [in humility, self-denial, and faithfulness. To what extent he wished them to imitate him, he shows in these words: “ Be ye imitators of me, even as I also am of Christ.” (11:1.)] 17 For this cause have I sent unto you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord,—To the end that they imitate him, he sent Timothy, who also was his son in the gospel, and faithful in the Lord, who as his son imitated him as he besought them to do. who shall put you in remembrance of my ways which are in Christ, even as I teach everywhere in every church.— [Timothy’ s description of Paul’ s conduct would correspond with Paul’ s actual behavior as a Christian and a teacher, which he declares emphatically to be the same everywhere. This was said to assure them that, in laying upon them the necessity of unanimity and humbleness of mind, he did not inculcate what he did not universally teach and practice himself. His public teaching and private life were the same everywhere. What he taught in Corinth was the same that he taught and practiced in Philippi and everywhere else.] 18 Now some are puffed up, as though I were not coming to you.—These false teachers were puffed up, haughty, thinking he would not come unto them. [His sending Timothy was no indication whatever that he did not intend to visit Corinth, as some in their pride and self-importance affirmed. Paul’ s writings clearly indicate that the false teachers in different ways endeavored to destroy his influence among them by calling in question his apostleship (9:1-3; 2 Corinthians 12:12) ; accusing him of fickleness (2 Corinthians 1:17) ; and asserting that his “ bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account” (2 Corinthians 10:10). These detractors and their followers were the ones who were puffed up. They were so conceited as to their own importance, and as to the success of their injurious representa¬tion respecting him, as to make it appear that he was afraid to come to Corinth, and therefore sent Timothy in his stead.] 19 But I will come to you shortly,—[It was from no fear of them that he was kept away; and to convince them of this] he firmly asserts that he would come to them soon. if the Lord will;— [With Paul this expression was far more than a mere form. It was a recognition both of the providen¬tial and spiritual government of the Lord. He recognized that the accomplishment of any purpose depended on his will and felt that his life wras in his hands.] and I will know, not the word of them that are puffed up, but the power.—He would know not the eloquence and pre¬tensions of the false teachers, but would test their power. They claimed to be greater than Paul, and denied that he wras an apostle sent of God. The test that one’ s apostleship was from God, and that God approved him, was manifested in God’ s presence in enabling him to work miracles. Paul proposed to test their power as to whether the presence of God was with them. 20 For the kingdom of God is not in word,—God’ s kingdom does not rest on eloquent and persuasive words. (2: 4.) [The kingdom of God implies here, as usual in the language of Paul, the living fellowship established by the Savior, which lives in the soul, and manifests itself in the essential character of the loving obedience of those belonging to it.] but in power.—The presence of God’ s Spirit with the teach¬ers, which is the power to work miracles. 21 What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod,—This divine power was sometimes used to punish pretenders, as in the case of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11) ; and Elymas, the sorcerer (Acts 13:8-12). Some think Paul meant something of this kind. It certainly meant that Paul would show the presence and power of the Spirit with him in contrast with the lack of it in the false teachers. It was with them to say by the course they pursued whether he would come to them with a rod of authority and power to assert his claims as an apostle, or should he come to them as a father to his children. or in love and a spirit of gentleness?—God is gentle, kind, forgiving to the penitent; but will by no means clear the guilty. Is stern and unyielding in his punishment of the wicked. His servants should cherish his spirit. Verse 1 1 Corinthians 4Paul had stressed the inspiration of the apostles in the previous chapter; but in the first paragraph here he pointed out that even apostolic authority was not absolute and that even he himself and Apollos were but stewards of Christ, their first concern being to please the Lord, and not to accommodate their teaching to win favor with false teachers. He stated that the lower courts of conscience and public opinion were inferior to the judgment of the Lord (1 Corinthians 4:1-5). We agree with Adam Clarke that a more logical division of the chapters would have been to extend chapter 3 through the fifth verse here.[1]In 1 Corinthians 4:6, Paul pointed out that his use of his own name and that of Apollos was not to be construed as an admission that he and Apollos had actually headed any divisive parties in Corinth, but that he had used these names figuratively for the purpose of teaching against all divisions. Most of the remainder of the chapter deals with the false teacher, without naming him, ending with a dramatic promise that he would return to Corinth, the Lord willing, and that the Lord would enable him to vanquish the false teacher and set the Corinthians once more in the right way of humility and service. He severely condemned their vain-glorious boasting, egotism and conceit (1 Corinthians 4:7-21). ENDNOTE: [1] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and Porter, 1831), Vol. VI. p. 207. Let a man so account of us, as of ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. (1 Corinthians 4:1) This refers to both Paul and Apollos, and the word "minister" here is not the same as in 1 Corinthians 3:5. "It is [@huperetes], and originally meant an under-rower in a trireme."[2] This is very similar to a word Luke used of ministers. "The word Luke used (Luke 1:2 Luke 4:20) is [@huperetai], used in medical terminology to refer to doctors who served under a principal physician."[3]Stewards of the mysteries of God ... There are two extremes to be avoided in the Christian's attitude toward teachers. "We should love and respect them; but we ought not, however, to worship them or seek to form a party about them."[4] Stewards in ancient times were very important people. The steward was the "major domo", in charge of the whole administration of the house or estate. He controlled the staff, issued supplies and rations and ran the whole household; but he himself was still a slave where the master was concerned.[5]However, as will appear in the next verse, it was not so much the importance of a steward that Paul stressed; it was his faithfulness. [2] Paul W. Marsh, A New Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 382. [3] Herschel H. Hobbs, An Exposition of the Gospel of Luke (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1966), p. 19. [4] George W. DeHoff, Sermons on First Corinthians (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: The Christian Press, 1947), p. 41. [5] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 41. Verse 2 Here, moreover, it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.Trustworthiness was the outstanding characteristic of a good steward, and it was that which Paul brought into view here. Furthermore, the proper person to pass on such a question was not to be found among the people who knew the steward or did business with him, but he was the steward's lord. The next three verses would deal with that thought. In the New Testament, the term "steward" was applied to all Christians, "as good stewards of the manifold grace of God" (1 Peter 4:10), to elders of the church; "A bishop then must be blameless as God's steward" (Titus 1:7), and to apostles and preachers of the gospel in this verse. "It is important that those entrusted with the truth of God as stewards should be faithful and honest."[6] A failure to teach people God's truth leaves the blood of the lost on the hands of unfaithful stewards who neglected or refused to teach it. ENDNOTE: [6] David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 59. Verse 3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment; yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing against myself; yet am I hereby not justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.In this and the following verse, Paul considers the three tribunals of judgment, these being: (1) conscience, (2) the court of public opinion, and (3) the Lord the righteous judge of all people. The supremacy of that court of last resort is dramatically affirmed. The implication of Paul's words here as directed toward the false teacher is as follows: If I do not regard my own opinion of myself as of high value, I cannot be suspected of undervaluing you when I say that I do not much regard your opinion. If I do not estimate highly my own opinion of myself, then it is not to be expected that I should set a high value on the opinions of others.[7]Farrar's paraphrase of the thought is: The verdict of my own conscience acquits me of all unfaithfulness; but this is insufficient, because God sees with clearer eyes than ours. Who can understand his errors? (Psalms 19:12).[8]Regarding the lower and higher courts which come into view in this passage, the following is submitted: LOWER AND HIGHER COURTSI. The court of public opinion. Later on in this epistle, Paul indicated that, despite its inferiority, the court of public opinion is of some importance and not to be ignored by Christians. These Corinthians were bringing the whole Christian movement into disgrace by their ecstatic tongue-speaking; and Paul wrote: "If therefore the whole church be come together in one place, and all speak with tongues ... will they not say that ye are mad?" (1 Corinthians 14:23). Timothy was instructed to have regard to this court through the requirement that any man appointed as a bishop should have a good report from "them that are without" (1 Timothy 3:7). The sacred evangelist Luke stressed that Jesus himself advanced in favor with men (Luke 2:52), and that the believers in Jerusalem had "favor with all the people" (Acts 2:47). Nevertheless, desirable as a favorable public opinion undoubtedly is, it should always be courted within the strictest limits of absolute fidelity to the Lord Jesus Christ. Public opinion is a lower court, not a higher one. Paul said, "I for my part care very little about being examined by you or by any human court." All people should have this attitude where any question of faithfulness to the Lord is involved; and what a pity it is that there are some like the wretched parents of the man born blind (John 9) who would not even acknowledge the Lord of glory out of deference to the wicked Pharisees. "Vox Populi Vox Dei" (the voice of the people is the voice of God) is a suitable motto in politics, but not in holy religion. The voice of the people is frequently the voice of Satan, as when the people cried, "Make us gods to go before us" (Acts 7:40), or when the people prepared to offer sacrifice to Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:11). God pity the poor soul which pauses on the threshold of any clear duty and asks, "Will this be popular?" II. The voice of conscience. This is a higher court than that of public opinion, but not the highest court. It is exceedingly important that people respect it, for "If our heart condemn us, God is greater than our hearts" (1 John 3:20). Paul always respected and honored the court of conscience (Acts 23:1 Acts 24:16), being far more attentive to it than to the court of public opinion. And yet we are indebted to Paul for the information that, regardless of its value, this court is still not the final tribunal. He said, While my conscience does not trouble me at all, that does not prove that I am innocent."[9]The great difficulty with conscience is that it is much like a watch, the value of which (as a timepiece) is determined by the accuracy of its synchronization with the correct time, determined not by the watch, but by the movement of the sun over a certain meridian. Just so, a man's conscience must be monitored and adjusted to be in perfect harmony with the will of God before it can be of much value. Like a watch, conscience can have many things wrong with it. It can be evil (Hebrews 10:22), seared (1 Timothy 4:2), defiled (Titus 1:15), ignorant (1 Timothy 1:13), choked with dead works (Hebrews 9:14), etc. Is there any wonder then, that it was a proverb millenniums ago that said "He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool" (Proverbs 28:6)? III. The highest court of all. This is the great assize at the Last Advent of Jesus Christ, when the dead, small and great, as well as all who are then alive, shall be summoned before the Great White Throne for the final judgment. None shall escape the judgment and sentence of this court (2 Corinthians 5:10); it shall be presided over by Jesus Christ our Lord (Acts 10:42). Then shall be exposed the secrets of people's hearts (Romans 2:16). The court crier, an angel of light, shall stand with one foot on the land and one on the sea, and blow the trumpet that shall herald the gathering of the myriads of earth to the final judgment before the King of kings and Lord of lords. How infinitely blessed shall be those who are able to stand before that tribunal of righteousness and truth! I judge not mine own self ... In 1 Corinthians 11:31, Paul said, "If we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged"; but "two different words are used. There the apostle is emphasizing the necessity of self-examination";[10] but in this statement, he is saying: "I myself am not competent to assess the quality of my apostolic service and pronounce a verdict on it; only One can do that; and I shall submit myself to his decision: "It is the Lord who judges me.[11][7] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1949), 1Cor., p. 69. [8] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 132. [9] Edgar J. Goodspeed, The New Testament: An American Translation (Chicago: The University of Illinois Press, 1923), p. 318. [10] F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972), p. 90. [11] Ibid. Verse 5 Wherefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and make manifest the counsels of the hearts; and then shall each man have his praise from God.It is a mistake to read into such passages as this and in 1 Corinthians 15:51 that "Paul evidently expected the Advent of Christ within the lifetime of himself and his converts."[12] Since the time of the Second Advent was unknown by all of the apostolic preachers, and not even known by the Lord himself as a man (Matthew 24:36), it was altogether proper that the certainty of that event (whenever it was to come) was a legitimate basis of appeal and motivation for Christians of EVERY generation, including the first. It is a positive certainty that both Christ and his apostles taught that the Second Coming was an event to be expected at a very remote time in the future, although not impossible at ANY TIME. See my Commentary on Luke, pp. 456-457. Paul's great prophecy of the apostasy (2 Thessalonians 2:1-2) makes it certain that he did not expect the coming of Christ in his own lifetime; and the apostle John devoted the last chapter of his gospel to shooting down the proposition that Jesus had promised to come in John's lifetime (John 21:23). The import of this verse, according to Morris, is "Stop judging!"[13] This injunction is necessary because: (1) the only judgment that matters will be announced by the Lord at the final judgment and, besides that; (2) people do not have sufficient information or competence to judge one another, not even themselves. Each man shall have his praise from God ... Shore's perceptive comment on this is: "God, unlike man who selects only some one for praise, will give to every worker his own share of approval."[14] Moreover, it must not be supposed that no blame will be assigned in the judgment, for "The word rendered praise denotes in this place reward,"[15] indicating that God will reward every man according to his works "whether good or bad" (2 Corinthians 5:10). Some misunderstand this place as teaching universal salvation, as Johnson for example, "Wonder of wonders - every man (believer) shall have some praise from God!"[16]Regarding Paul's probable reason for stressing praise rather than blame in this verse, Farrar noted that: He was thinking of faithful teachers like Cephas, Apollos and himself, who were depreciated by rival factions; and like all the apostles, he had an invariable tendency to allude to the bright side, rather than the dark side of judgment.[17]The hidden things ... and "counsels, of the hearts ..." show "how much that is needful for a correct estimate of people's conduct lies now under an impenetrable veil."[18]The background of Paul's teaching in these profound lines was a sordid condition among the community of Corinthian believers. There must have been a very considerable group of church leaders, Paul's own converts, who, in Paul's absence, had become influential and self-important, and were trying to run away with the church. They had become haughty, overbearing, and boastful in their attitude toward Paul.[19][12] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 898. [13] Leon Morris, Tyndale Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), p. 76. [14] T. Teignmouth Shore, Ellicott's Commentary on the Holy Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House), p. 298. [15] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 71. [16] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p 599 [17] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 133. [18] John Wesley, One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972), in loco. [19] Henry H. Halley, Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1927), P. 545. Verse 6 Now these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us ye might learn not to go beyond the things which were written; that no one of you be puffed up for the one against the other.The first clause here was spoken by way of anticipating and refuting any notion that Paul had conceded (in his use of the names of himself and Apollos) any approval of factions, the allegation here being that Paul had used these names as a figure of what was going on, the real culprits being, not himself or Apollos, but the factious leaders in Corinth. That ye might learn not to go beyond the things which are written ... The traditional use of this clause as a commandment that Christians should order their lives and their service of God by the holy scriptures, and that it is prohibited that they should go beyond the word of God is without any doubt whatever the true interpretation. Farrar said that "This text, like so many others, has only a very remote connection with the sense in which it is usually quoted";[20] but like all such denials, it is unsupported by any logical evidence. There is no other valid meaning of this passage except that traditionally assigned to it. Not to go beyond what is written ... is in the Greek literally, "Not beyond what is written."[21] "These words must be a sort of quotation, or in any case a standing expression,"[22] associated with the preaching of Paul and all the apostles. It has the effect of a universal proverb among Christians, "well known to the Corinthians, so that Paul could assume the words to be clear."[23] Russell declared the meaning to be: "The things which are written ... no special text, but the teaching of the scriptures as a whole, which no leader, however gifted, may supersede."[24] "This was a catch-cry familiar to Paul and his readers directing attention to the need for conformity to scripture."[25] There is no need to multiply scholarly support of the usual view of this place; no other explanation is tenable. And, of course, it was precisely in this matter of going beyond the word of God that the factions in Corinth had developed. They were evaluating the word and authority of people upon a parity with the holy scriptures, thinking of people more highly than they should, and spurning the meekness and humility taught throughout the Bible. Thus, as Grosheide said, "The whole question of factions was raised to a higher level,"[26] namely that of violating the scriptural rule of faith for the believer. "It is not his own words that Paul insists that the Corinthians must not go beyond; it is the word of God."[27]Puffed up for the one against the other ... An interesting phase of this rebuke is that instead of puffing up their favorite teachers, it was themselves which had become puffed up! This is a sure result of "blowing up" any man. [20] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 134. [21] Paul W. Marsh, op. cit., p. 382. [22] F. W. Grosheide, The New International Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 103. [23] Ibid. [24] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 408. [25] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 78. [26] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 103. [27] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 43. Verse 7 For who maketh thee to differ? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? but if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not received it?It is God who gives to every man life, talent, ability, opportunity, health, personality, strength - everything that he is or has; and what kind of conceit blinds the eyes of people who behave as if this were not so? Verse 8 Already are ye filled, already ye are become rich, ye have come to reign without us: yea, and I would that ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.The first three clauses are directed against the false teachers, who had promoted themselves in the eyes of their admirers, were receiving honors and emoluments from them, and affecting all the airs of "big men," not merely in the church, but in the whole city. The three pungent clauses are spoken in irony and disapproval, the true state of such impostors being far different from what they imagined. I would that ye did reign ... has the equivalent meaning of "Oh, if it were only true, what you think of yourselves because if it were true, together we could go on building up the temple of God." Verse 9 For, I think, God hath set forth us apostles last of all, as men doomed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, both to angels and men.Beginning with 1 Corinthians 4:7, the remainder of this chapter is devoted to the rebuke of the false teachers and exposure of their sins of worldliness, vanity, conceit, vain glory and division. At the very moment of their sporting all those prideful airs of popularity and success, Paul in this verse reminds them how it is with theGENUINE teachers of the true faith, the holy apostles. The imagery here is that of the Roman Coliseum. "Paul pictures himself and fellow apostles as `the last and most worthless band' brought forth to die in the great arena, where the whole world, including men and angels, view the spectacle."[28]We are not informed in scripture of the exact manner in which angels are concerned with earth life; but the fact is plainly stated. See my Commentary on Hebrews, p. 35. There is a similar scene suggested byHebrews 12:1. ENDNOTE: [28] T. Teignmouth Shore, op. cit., p. 299. Verse 10 We are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye have glory, but we have dishonor.The power of these words derives from the truth that Paul was himself the founder of the church in Corinth. He had rescued them from the temples of vice and debauchery, preached to them the unsearchable riches of Christ, nurtured them in their weakness and immaturity as Christians, and suffered and toiled among them, even working in order to eat bread; and now, at the first visible signs of material prosperity among them, they openly despised their teacher, heaped unto themselves popular, shallow leaders after their own lusts, and were indulging the most amazing boastfulness and conceit. It was truly a disgusting development; and Paul's words here exposed the moral ugliness of their behavior. Fools ... means "fools in the eyes of the world." We ... yet, etc. ... contrasts Paul with the Corinthians in terms of their own egotistical reversal of the true values. Forsaking the true values and methods as taught by the apostles, those at Corinth had discovered a way of preaching "so as to procure a name of wisdom, reputation and profundity."[29] To discover such a way and then to walk in it has been a temptation to every preacher of the word of God who ever lived. ENDNOTE: [29] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 65. Verse 11 Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwelling place.All of these terms refer to genuine, bitter hardships, involving insufficient food and clothing, beatings and chastisements by enemies of the truth, and that lonely itinerancy which was the invariable mark of apostolic preachers. The false teachers in Corinth suffered none of these injuries or discomforts. Verse 12 And we toil, working with our own hands: being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we endure.And we toil ... "The Greeks despised all manual labor, regarding it as the duty of slaves or people mentally unfit for anything else."[30] Paul was a tentmaker by trade and frequently worked in order to support himself. Reviled ... persecuted ... Instead of retaliating in kind, Paul returned good for evil, blessing for reviling, and patient endurance for persecution. ENDNOTE: [30] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p. 343. Verse 13 Being defamed, we entreat: we are made as the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things, even until now.The imagery here is still that of the Coliseum, where, after the bloody games were over, the grounds-keepers cleaned the theater by the removal of the bloody corpses, the offal and the debris. Paul, in this remarkably blunt, shocking paragraph, merely stated the true facts with a view to bringing the giddy and irresponsible Corinthians to their senses. Verse 14 I write not these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my dear children.What a wealth of abused and suffering love lies in such a tender appeal as this! Not a word of blame, in the sense of recrimination not a trace of bitterness, just the appeal of a loving father for his wayward children. The great thrust of this whole argument was accurately seen by Morris "as an emphasis on the contradiction between the values of true Christians, and those of the worldly-wise Greeks."[31] The Corinthians had simply become mixed up regarding what were true values and what were not. The word from which "admonish" is translated in this place is the root of the cognate noun "admonition" (Ephesians 4:4), where "It is used of the duty of a father to his children."[32] Thus the metaphor of his being the father of the Corinthians was already in Paul's mind. [31] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 82. [32] Ibid., p. 83. Verse 15 For though ye have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I begat you through the gospel.Ten thousand tutors ... An element of humor is in this, for certainly that many tutors is too many; and if the word is rendered "guides," as by some, it would still be far too many. Just how many guides could one follow, anyway? As McGarvey said, "The large number rebukes their itch for teachers."[33] The meaning both of "tutor" and of "guide" derives from the Greek word here, [@paidagogos], "who was a slave who escorted his master's child to school."[34] Of course, such an attendant might form a strong attachment for a child, but his love would never approach that of a father. I begat you through the gospel ... This is used loosely in a metaphorical sense; because in the highest sense, people are begotten only by the gospel. As Farrar put it: "We are begotten only by the will of God, by that word of truth (James 1:18), to which Paul alludes here in the words `through the gospel.'"[35][33] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on First Corinthians (Cincinnati: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 70. [34] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing House, 1970), p. 1057. [35] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 136. Verse 16 I beseech you therefore, be ye imitators of me.Paul never meant this in any absolute sense but in the sense of "Be ye imitators of me, even as I also am of Christ" (1 Corinthians 11:1). See also Ephesians 5:1, Philippians 3:17,2 Thessalonians 3:9,1 Thessalonians 1:6. Verse 17 For this cause have I sent unto you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, who shall put you in remembrance of my ways which are in Christ, even as I teach everywhere in every church.From this, it is clear what Paul meant regarding imitation of himself namely, that they should imitate his ways "in Christ," meaning as Paul was truly in the Lord and fully identified with Christ, ways of which Timothy would shortly remind them. Paul had sent Timothy and Erastus to Macedonia, probably with instructions to go to Corinth if convenient; since it is not certain that Timothy will arrive there (1 Corinthians 16:10). This was probably while Paul was at Ephesus (Acts 19:22).[36]ENDNOTE: [36] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 78. Verse 18 Now some are puffed up, as though I were not coming to you.Some considerable time had elapsed following Paul's dispatch of Timothy to Corinth; and, when the word came of Timothy's intended arrival, some of the factionists said, "Ah, Paul is afraid to show his face here and is sending Timothy instead of coming himself" However, Paul would explode that misconception with the stern warning written a moment later. Verse 19 But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord will; and I will know, not the word of them that are puffed up, but the power. For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power. What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love and a spirit of gentleness?If the Lord will ... Paul's purpose of going to Corinth to set things in order was dependent only upon the divine pleasure. These words have the effect of "unless providentially hindered." Not the word ... but the power ... not in word, but in power ... Paul was conscious of his own apostolic power. Elymas had been stricken blind for opposing Paul's teaching at Paphos (Acts 13:11), and many other notable miracles had been wrought by him; and there can be no doubt that Paul counted fully upon the confirmation of the word of God which he proclaimed at Corinth by just such signs and wonders and mighty deeds as God had enabled previously. What will ye ...? has the effect of "All right, do you really want to put me to the test? If so, I am ready." Paul concludes this particular admonition with a suggestion that it would be far better if they amended their behavior to enable Paul to come to them in loving affection, rather than for the purpose of punishing their wickedness. THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE Chapter Four IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To learn further how we should regard preachers and teachers 2) To learn a lesson in humility by observing the examples of the apostles SUMMARY With this chapter Paul brings to a conclusion his treatment of the problem of division as it existed in the church at Corinth. He describes the proper estimate one should have of those who serve God, and why we should leave the ultimate evaluation of such men to God (1 Corinthians 4:1-5). Having already used himself and Apollos as examples to help them see the errors of their arrogance (cf. "puffed up"), Paul also uses the example of the apostles in a passage filled with irony (1 Corinthians 4:6-13). His purpose is not to shame them, but to warn them, for he is sending Timothy to remind them of what is proper, and he himself is coming to deal with those who are "puffed up", if necessary (1 Corinthians 4:14-21). OUTLINE I. THE PROPER OF PAUL &OTHERS (1 Corinthians 4:1-5) A. &(1 Corinthians 4:1-2)1. Servants of Christ, stewards of the mysteries of God (1 Corinthians 4:1) 2. Their chief responsibility: faithfulness (1 Corinthians 4:2) B. THE PROPER JUDGE OF SUCH THINGS (1 Corinthians 4:3-5)1. Not Christians, or any human court (1 Corinthians 4:3 a) 2. Not even one's own self, but rather, the Lord (1 Corinthians 4:3-4) 3. Therefore leave it up to Him (1 Corinthians 4:5) II. LESSONS IN (1 Corinthians 4:6-13) A. PAUL &APOLLOS ALREADY USED AS (1 Corinthians 4:6)1. To learn in them not to think beyond what is written (1 Corinthians 4:6 a) 2. That none be "puffed up" on behalf of one against the other (1 Corinthians 4:6 b) B. REBUKE IN THE FORM OF IRONY (1 Corinthians 4:7-8)1. For they act as though they were the source of what they have (1 Corinthians 4:7) 2. With irony, Paul rebukes them (1 Corinthians 4:8) C. THE EXAMPLE OF THE (9-13)1. Made a "spectacle" to the world (9) 2. Contrasted with the pride of the Corinthians, using more irony (1 Corinthians 4:10) 3. The plight of the apostles (1 Corinthians 4:11-13) III. PAUL'S PURPOSE IN WRITING THESE THINGS (1 Corinthians 4:14-21) A. NOT TO SHAME, BUT TO WARN (1 Corinthians 4:14-16)1. Those whom he considers as beloved children (1 Corinthians 4:14) 2. Those whom he has begotten through the gospel (1 Corinthians 4:15) 3. Those whom he charges to imitate him (1 Corinthians 4:16) B. TO VISITS BY TIMOTHY AND HIMSELF (1 Corinthians 4:17-21)1. He is sending Timothy to remind them (1 Corinthians 4:17) 2. He himself will soon come, Lord willing, to deal with those who are "puffed up" (1 Corinthians 4:18-21) REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER 1) List the main points of this chapter- The Proper Estimate Of Paul And Others (1 Corinthians 4:1-5) - Lessons In Humility (1 Corinthians 4:6-13) - Paul's Purpose In Writing (1 Corinthians 4:14-21) 2) What two terms properly describe preachers of the gospel? (1 Corinthians 4:1)- Servants of Christ - Stewards of the mysteries of God 3) Who is to be the judge of those who serve the Lord? (1 Corinthians 4:3-5)- The Lord 4) Why was Paul writing these things? (1 Corinthians 4:6)- That none be "puffed up" on behalf of one against the other 5) What technique did Paul use in teaching lessons about humility? (1 Corinthians 4:8 1 Corinthians 4:10)- Irony 6) Who did Paul use as an example of humility? (1 Corinthians 4:9-13)- The apostles 7) Why was Paul writing these things to them? (1 Corinthians 4:14)- To warn those he loved 8) How had Paul become like a "father" to them? (1 Corinthians 4:15)- Through teaching them the gospel by which they had been "begotten" in Christ Jesus 9) Why was he sending Timothy to them? (1 Corinthians 4:17)- To remind them of Paul's ways in Christ 10) What one phrase is used repeatedly in this chapter to describe some at Corinth? (1 Corinthians 4:6 1 Corinthians 4:18-19)- "puffed up" 11) What choices did Paul leave them as to how he might come to them? (1 Corinthians 4:21)- With a rod - In love and a spirit of gentleness Questions by E.M. Zerr For 1st Corinthians Chapter 41. Whose minister was Paul? 2. In what other relation of service was he ? 3. Is a steward required to be successful? 4. State the estimate of Paul on human judgment. 5. Did he consider his own better than others? 6. Does absence of human criticism justify one? 7. From whom does the judgment come that does count? 8. Then what should we defer till the day of Christ ? 9. At that time what will the Lord bring to light? 10. Will make manifest what? 11. Then what shall every man receive from God? 12. Does this teach universal salvation? 13. What had Paul transferred? 14. Who or what constituted the fignre ? 15. What did he expect them to learn by this figure ? 16. What attitude toward each other would it cause? 17. Does any man differ from another? 18. What do we have that we did not receive? 19. In view of this what about our glorying? 20. What were the Corinthians glorying over ? 21. Had they been fortunate in their religious life? 22. State whether Paul regretted their success. 23. Give reason for your answer. 24. How may a Christian reign when Christ is king? 25. What did Paul "think” ? 26. In what sense could the apostles be last? 27. To what were they appointed ? 28. Could this apply to a literal death? 29. For whom were they exhibited as a show ? 30. Was this show one of worldly honor? 31. How did Paul and Corinthians compare in favor of man? 32. What was he made to experience ? 33. Where was his dwelling place? 34. What activities did he have beside preaching? 35. When reviled what did he do? 36. How about his attitude in persecutions? 37. When he was defamed what did he do? 38. State the comparison to refuse of the world. 39. For what purpose did Paul write these things ? 40. How many fathers did the Corinthians have ? 41. To whom did this refer? 42. How can one beget another in Christ ? 43. State his request as to their following. 44. Whom did he send unto them ? 45. Tell the good things he said of him. 46. Of what was he to remind the Corinthians ? 47. On what were some puffed up ? 48. On what condition did Paul determine to come? 49. What inquiry did he propose to make then? 50. Describe the Kingdom of God as to word and power. 51. How did Paul prefer to come to them? 1 Corinthians 4:19. Not the speech . . . but the power. Paul did not propose to be worried by the arrogant assertions of those leaders, but intended to test their real abilities. 2 1 Corinthians 4:2. A steward or agent is supposed to be honest in handling the affairs of his master, for which he would not deserve any special thanks. 3 1 Corinthians 4:3. Paul was the agent of the Lord, and it was to Him that he would have to answer. Man might approve of his conduct, but that would be a very small thing, for human judges might pass favorably on his case while the Lord would not. 4 1 Corinthians 4:4. Even though Paul could think of nothing in himself that was wrong if measured by the wisdom of man, yet that alone would not satisfy him, for the Lord was the one who was to have the final word as to his standing. 5 1 Corinthians 4:5. Judge nothing as to the merits of human accomplishments by human standards of wisdom or philosophy. The Lord will come in judgment someday, and then all will be given due reward for any virtue they possessed, whether their brethren appreciated it or not. 6 1 Corinthians 4:6. The words figure transferred are from , and Thayer's definition is, "to change the figure of, to transform." He then explains the definition at this passage to mean, "to shape one's discourse so as to transfer to one's self what holds true of the whole class to which one belongs, i.e. so as to illustrate by what one says of himself what holds true of all." The reader may refer to what is said about this verse at chapter 1:12. The four persons named were not really the ones over whom the Corinthians were contending. Paul now explains that he was using the names by way of illustration, in order that, they would "see the point" without having their resentment aroused against being personally criticized. The men over whom all these contentions were being waged were right there in the congregation. That is why Paul uses the language that no one of you be puffed up for one against another. This proves beyond a doubt that the trouble was over men who belonged to the congregation in Corinth. None of the men named in chapter 1:12 even lived in that city, hence the contention was not over them. Furthermore, the name of Christ is included with the ones over whom they were contending. It is inconceivable that in their partisan strife, one of them would say he was for any teacher as against Christ. No, the men who were the objects of the trouble were those in the congregation with spiritual gifts. The possession of those powers was considered of such importance that it had split the congregation up into groups, not formally but in sentiment, the various sets adhering to the particular gifted man whose gift happened to strike them as the most important. It must be observed that not every member of a congregation would be possessed with a gift, but only a sufficient proportion to accomplish the Lord's plans. This contention over the spiritual gifts was so serious that Paul devoted three chapters-12, 13 and 14--to the subject, which will be commented upon when we come to them in this work. This long note will not be repeated in full, hence the reader should mark it for convenient reference when occasion arises. 7 1 Corinthians 4:7. The meaning of this verse will be clear when considered in light of the preceding one. The word another has been supplied by the translators, so that neither the first nor third personal pronoun is used by the apostle. The entire argument applies to the men of the Corinthian congregation. What least thou that thou didst not receive? This refers to the various gifts that were possessed by members, who were puffed up with pride over such attainments; and it was made worse by the contentions of the groups in the congregation that were arraying themselves as partisans in behalf of their respective "heroes." Paul is rebuking them for this pride by the question just stated. Those gifts were not anything that had been accomplished by them, for they had received them as direct bestowments through the Spirit and hence they had nothing of which to boast, much less to suffer the congregation to be divided up into contentious groups over it. 8 1 Corinthians 4:8. Full is from which Thayer defines, "to satiate, sate, satisfy." Rich is from PLOUTEO and Thayer's definition is, "to be richly supplied." These are such excellent conditions that Paul would surely not seriously attribute them to these brethren after having just given them such a severe rebuke for their pride over gifts that had been bestowed upon them through no personal merit. The only conclusion, then, that we can reach, is that he used it in irony as a further reproof of them for their pride over the gifts. Reigned as kings without us (the apostles). Some more irony, referring to their feeling of self-sufficiency, to the extent that they did not feel the need of apostolic help. Would to God ye did reign is a serious phrase, expressing the unselfishness of the apostle. He would have rejoiced had the Corinthians been as strong as they felt, for in that case he also could share in the accomplishment, seeing he was the one who put them into the work to begin with. 9 1 Corinthians 4:9. The apostles really possessed qualifications far beyond all that the Corinthians could rightfully claim, yet Paul was not being puffed up over it. Instead, he wanted them to know that those very peculiar attainments caused the apostles to be placed in an unpleasant position before both angels and men. Last means as to personal advantage, the thing of which the Corinthians were boasting. In spite of all their worth-while gifts, the apostles were exposed to the ridicule and persecutions of the world. Spectacle is from , which Thayer defines, "a public show; a man who is exhibited to be gazed at and made sport of." The illustration is drawn from the Roman practice of the public theatre. When the main show was over, certain men who had been doomed to die, were brought forth into the arena for the "final act"; their clothing was removed and their bodies were exposed to the beasts to devour, for the entertainment of the audience. Thus Paul says the apostles were exposed as it were appointed to death. 0 1 Corinthians 4:10. See the notes on verse 8 where the language is used with a similar meaning to that here. In their own estimation the Corinthians were wise, strong, and honorable. The apostles were making no pretensions to greatness, but were submissive to the humiliation resulting from the unpopular work of preaching the Gospel. 3 1 Corinthians 4:13. Being defamed, we entreat. This does not contradict the preceding verse. Paul never made any unofficial or personal retort against those who tried to injure his good name, but that did not prevent him from taking the necessary legal steps for his protection. That is what he did when he "appealed unto Caesar" (Acts 25:11). 4 1 Corinthians 4:14. The Corinthian brethren were entitled to being shamed, but that was not Paul's motive in writing as he did. His purpose was to induce them to correct their selfish ways, and hoped to do so by calling their attention to his own experiences. Sometimes the example of a loving father will make more of an impression on his sons than will his direct instructions. 5 1 Corinthians 4:15. There might be no limit to the number of persons who could instruct others, but since a man can be begotten once only, there can be only one person to lead him into primary obedience by making him know what he must believe in order to become a child of God. Paul had done this for the Corinthian brethren, and it is in that sense that he says I have begotten you through the Gospel. 6 1 Corinthians 4:16. Thayer defines the original for follower as "an imitator." A son would do well to imitate the example set by a righteous father. If the Corinthians would do that in regard to the life of Paul, they would cease to be puffed up over the comparatively small matter of spiritual gifts. 7 1 Corinthians 4:17. Son is used figuratively,, and Thayer explains the original in this and many other passages to mean, "just as in Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, Persia, so in the N. T., pupils or disciples are called children of their teacher, because the latter by their instruction nourish the minds of their pupils and mould their characters." In chapter 16:10, 11 is a statement of Timotheus' journey to Corinth, but he had not reached the city when Paul wrote this statement; the apostle wished to have a welcome in readiness for him when he arrived. Paul was not seeking any personal praise for his work, but wished the Corinthians to have the testimony of Timotheus (Timothy) that he was doing all his teaching as Christ would have it done. 8 1 Corinthians 4:18. Puffed up means to "be proud" or act in a boastful manner. The ones who were having that feeling were not especially eager for Paul to come, lest he chastise them orally and severely for their contentious behavior. When they learned that Timothy was coming instead of Paul at that time, they triumphantly asserted that the apostle was not coming. 0 1 Corinthians 4:20. Not in word (only), for many loud and boistrous talkers have come into the world, but their real power or efficiency has been exposed as a sham. 1 1 Corinthians 4:21. This verse is a challenge for them to make the necessary changes in their conduct that would put them in a condition to receive the apostle's approval, and thus receive his spirit of meekness instead of the rod of chastisement. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1 Corinthians 5 1 Corinthians 5:1 to 1 Corinthians 6:20 CENSURE OF THE OF A GROSS CASE OF INCEST1 Corinthians 5:1-8 1 It is actually reported—[It was a matter of common noto¬riety, talked among the people generally and caused great scandal.] that there is fornication among you,— With the confluence of strangers and of commerce, were associated the luxury and licentiousness which gave the name of Corinth an infamous notoriety, and which connected in the case of the Temple of Aphrodite with religious rites, requiring licentious acts in its devotees, it is not surprising that such sins would be committed by some of those who professed to be followers of Christ. For sins that are common and popular in a community will trouble a church in that community. and such fornication as is not even among the Gentiles,— Here is a type of licentiousness in the church that was not tol¬erated among the heathen. [It was held in detestation by them as a shameful and abominable monstrosity.] that one of you hath his father’ s wife.—It is probable that the father had been guilty of the folly of marrying a woman better suited in age for his son. But it was a gross outrage upon chastity and virtue, and yet the church was tolerating it and glorying over it. [The marriage of a son to his step¬mother was forbidden among the Jews under the penalty of death (Leviticus 18:8 Leviticus 20:11; Deuteronomy 22:30 Deuteronomy 27:20); and it was a violation of the Roman law and held in abhorrence by them. From the complete silence as to the crime of the woman, it is inferred that she was a heathen.] 2 And ye are puffed up,—Looseness in faith, heresy, divi¬sion and strife breed indifference to morality and virtue, and open the way for all shames and sins to follow. So these people in their departures from the faith had admitted all types of immorality. This case was probably among the wealthy and influential, or belonged to an influential party, and instead of condemning him for the sin, they were arrogant, defied criticism, and did not feel that his course was a source of sorrow and shame for the persons sinning and for the church so dis-graced and humiliated by the crime. [It does not mean that they were puffed up because of this outrage, but in spite of it. It ought to have humbled them to the dust, and yet they re¬tained their self-satisfied complacency. Their morbid self-im¬portance, which made them so intolerant of petty wrongs (6: 7), made them tolerant of deep disgrace.] and did not rather mourn,—[The church should have risen as one man, and gone into a common act of humiliation and mourning, like a family for the death of one of its members. It should have been a day of repentance, on which the whole church before the Lord deplored the scandal committed, and cried to him to lead them to expel the guilty person from the fellowship in irrepressible horror at his conduct.] that he that had done this deed might be taken away from among you.—That he should be refused fellowship or recognition in the church. Loss of fellowship involved loss of recognition and association among Christians. It should be considered a great disgrace and shame yet to be excluded from the membership of the church of Christ. It is noteworthy that God always holds the man the more guilty party in such sins. It is to the shame of society that this order has been reversed in modern times. 3 For I verily, being absent in body but present in spirit,— [Paul was fully informed by the Spirit of God in all the circumstances, and instructed by him in the way he should act.] have already as though I were present judged him that hath so wrought this thing,—His spirit was present with them and he had already decided as to the guilt and condemnation of him who had done the deed. [This is a remarkable assertion of apostolic power. After reading this letter, they would know that he who had wrought miracles with such power among them was spiritually and effectually present, and weak though he was in personal appearance and speech, was able to exercise sharp discipline on the whole body, unless they submitted to the voice of God through his mouth.] 4 in the name of our Lord Jesus,—Acting for and in the stead of the Lord Jesus. [The phrase includes, on the one hand, the denial that the thing was done by virtue of his own authority; and on the other, the claim of the right to act as the representative of Christ.] ye being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus,—When they were gathered together, Paul himself present in spirit gave his decision in this letter, with the power of the Lord Jesus Christ. When the church acts according to his directions, its action is clothed with the power of Christ. The act of the body in such case is the act of Christ. [A question of much importance is, Does the apostle by the words, “ ye being gathered together,” mean that he waits for their assent to his ruling in this matter? Most assuredly not. The whole tone, not only the passage which is now before us, but of the whole epistle up to this point, is that he would have them look upon him as the apostle— the special messenger of Christ—standing towards them in the place of Christ. There is not the faintest hint of making the pronouncing of the sentence dependent on the vote of the assembly which is to be held, as if the apostle’ s decision could be annulled by the contrary opinion of a majority. For his part everything is decided, and with his apostolic competency he has judged to deliver over the offender. There will be joined to Paul, in the assembly which he convokes, “ the whole church” (Acts 15:22), to take part in this act.] 5 to deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.—What the deliverance of the body to Satan may mean, how the flesh is destroyed, and what the day of the Lord Jesus is, are questions of doubt and have produced much dis¬cussion. It probably means that he was separated from the fel¬lowship of the church, from all association with the brethren in Christ, regarded and treated as a heathen; that by these in¬fluences he might be brought to realize the enormity of his sin, and turn from fleshly lusts, and be restored to a life of ho¬liness, and to the fellowship of the church that he might at last be saved. The church by the direction of Paul put him away from among them (2 Corinthians 2:10), and at a later period he directs them to forgive and comfort the one who had been separated from the fellowship, supposed to be the same per¬son, “ lest by any means such a one should be swallowed up with his overmuch sorrow.” (2 Corinthians 2:7.) The exclusion from the fellowship of the saints and the privileges of the house of God is a serious and awful matter. When one has been excluded from the fellowship of the church, Christians should make him feel that he forfeits the esteem and associa¬tion of all the members of the church, yet he should be warned and admonished as a brother. (2 Thessalonians 3:15.) [Disorderly conduct must be dealt with by the church in the way the Lord appoints. Immorality is not to be tolerated among the followers of Christ. The whole action of the church is moral and spiritual, and the extremest infliction it can impose in any case is exclusion from the fellowship. The necessity for exercising such discipline is for the following reasons: (1) The honor of Christ, which is sadly impeached when open sin is allowed among those who profess to be his followers. To make Christ a minister of sin is a grievous offense. (2) The welfare of the offender himself is never to be lost sight of. The wise, kindly, deliberate action of the church may save the erring one. And hence, however humiliating and terrible the exclusion may have been, the door is always left open for return. Its object, so far as the offender is concerned, is his recovery, and if he repents and comes to a right state of mind, nothing stands in the way of his restoration to the fellowship. (3) The welfare of the church requires that the transgressors shall be dealt with. For sin is a spreading leprosy. It may begin in a small obscure place, but unless speedily arrested will increase and diffuse itself till the whole body is infected. A moral gangrene must be cut out.] 6 Your glorying is not good.—The glorying and self-justifi¬cation were not good. If not put away from among them, it would soon work the corruption of the whole body. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? — As a small quantity of leaven pervades the entire mass of dough and communicates its nature to the whole of that with which it comes in contact, so the least sin tolerated affects the whole church, and communicates its nature to the whole of that with which it comes in contact. It is therefore applied to all sin voluntarily tolerated by the individual or the church. To be indifferent to grave misbehavior is to become partly re¬sponsible for it, and to lower the standard of Christian living. [Here the stress of the argument lies less in the evil example of the offender than in the fact that toleration of this conduct implies concurrence (Romans 1:32), and debases the standard of moral judgment and instinct. To be indifferent to grave mis¬behavior is to become partly responsible for it. A subtle atmo¬sphere, in which evil readily springs up and is diffused, is the result. The leaven that was infecting the Corinthian church was a vitiated public opinion.] 7 Purge out the old leaven,—Here is an allusion to the order given by Moses (Exodus 12:15 Exodus 12:20 Exodus 13:7) to remove all leaven from the Jewish house before the Passover, and carried out with such scrupulous care that on the fourteenth day of the month they searched with lighted candles even the darkest places in their houses to see whether any remained. that ye may be a new lump,—The position of Christians is analogous to that of Israel, and they should put away the evil and purge out the leaven of sin that is among them that they may be a pure unleavened lump of holiness. even as ye are unleavened.—They were purged of the leaven of evil in coming into Christ. For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ:—As when the passover lamb was sacrificed they must put away the leaven, so Christ is our passover, a perpetual sacrifice for us, so we must put from us the leaven of evil as the children of God. 8 wherefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven,—Since Christ is our passover, sanctified for us, let us keep the feast perpetually. That is, live holily. The whole life of the Christian should be a joyous and pure feast of services to God in sincerity and truth, none of the old leaven of heathenism being retained in the body, the church. [To the Christian, Christ is a perpetual sacrifice, an ever-present paschal Lamb, demanding and enforcing constant vigilance and unceasing cleanliness. The individual must put away every sinful habit of the old life. The church must purge itself of all whose lives are sources of corruption.] neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness,— [Malice is ill will in the mind; wickedness is ill will expressed in ac¬tion.] but with the unleavened bread of sincerity—[The word “ sincere” sets forth before the mind the material image from which the spiritual quality takes its name. The honey free from the smallest particle of wax, pure and transparent. The word used here conveys a similar idea. It is derived from the custom of judging the purity of liquids or the texture of cloths by holding them between the eye and the sun. What is here set forth as necessary to the Christian character is a quality which can stand this extreme test, and does not need to be seen only in an artificial light. It brings before us a pure transparent sincerity which is genuine; and acceptance of Christ which is real, and which is rich in real results.] and truth.—[This means far more than veracity. In its subjective sense, it means the inward state which answers to truth; fullness, straightforwardness, integrity of purpose; that moral and spiritual condition which conforms to the law and character of God. All corresponds to an unsullied, uncontam¬inated, and genuine Christian character.] OF THEIR OF A GIVEN AS TO WITH 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 9 I wrote unto you in my epistle—Some think he means that he had so written them in this letter. This the expres¬sion would not allow, for he intends to modify now directions hitherto given. So Paul had doubtless written a letter to them before this, in which he had given the directions here noted. to have no company with fornicators;—A fornicator is one who has sexual intercourse with an unmarried person, but the word is frequently used to denote all unlawful intercourse. (Matthew 5:32 Matthew 19:9.) To have company with is to associate with and treat one as worthy of companionship and association. The Christian is not to treat the guilty person as such. The object, no doubt, is to make the fornicator feel the dis¬grace and shame of his course and bring him to repentance. 10 not at all meaning with the fornicators of this world,— He now modifies the command so as to apply to fornicators in the church and not to those in the world. or with the covetous—The covetous are those who seek to obtain what is another’ s in an unlawful way. The man who sacrifices honesty to the acquisition of wealth is heinous in the sight of God. He cannot be a Christian and should not be recognized as such. and extortioners,—An extortioner is one who by power or threats takes what is not his own or more than is right. The man who takes advantage of another’ s poverty, or his necessities, to obtain exorbitant gain, is an extortioner. or with idolaters;—Prior to the preaching of the gospel in Corinth, by Paul, all the inhabitants therein, with the exception of a few Jews, were idolaters. for then must ye needs go out of the world:— He did not mean to so treat those guilty of the sins just mentioned. They were so common among the people that if they refused to associate with them it would be like going out of the world, withdrawing as a recluse, having no association or dealing with mankind. 11 but as it is, I wrote unto you not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one no, not to eat.—Personal association with those claiming to be Christians guilty of these sins is prohib¬ited. [Christians must tolerate no such sins among them¬selves ; they must exclude from the social circle any one who, bearing the name of Christ, indulges in these vices of the heathen world. The church is to be the light of the world and not the recipient of the world’ s darkness.] The question is sometimes raised as to whether the eating means the Lord’ s Supper or a common meal. The context plainly shows that it means the latter. The association here forbidden with the sinner calling himself a Christian is per¬mitted to men of the world guilty of the same sins. But we are not permitted to eat the Lord’ s Supper with the sinners without. Therefore, this cannot refer to the Lord’ s Supper, but must refer to an ordinary meal. Then, too, to eat a com¬mon meal with a man was to acknowledge him as a worthy equal. The Jews would not eat with the publicans and sin¬ners, and strongly condemned Jesus for doing so. 12 For what have I to do with judging them that are without?—[They should have easily understood his meaning, for it was well known to them that] he had nothing to do with judging those not members of the church. [The phrase “ them that are without” is frequently used by Paul (1 Thessalonians 4:12; Colossians 4:5), and their awful condition he graphically describes as follows: “ Ye were at that time separate from Christ, alien¬ated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise, having no hope and without God in the world.” (Ephesians 2:12.)] Do not ye judge them that are within?—As churches they were to look after and deal with those within that they might be kept from evil influences. [Their own practice should have saved them from misunderstanding him. It is possible that his meaning had been purposely wrested by interested persons to bring discredit upon his teaching concerning fornicators.] 13 But them that are without God judgeth.—They were to leave those without to the judgment of God. Put away the wicked man from among yourselves.—In pursuance of the truth set forth here, he commands them to put from them this wicked person, who had taken his own father’ s wife. There was no choice left the church. It must do just what Paul under the guidance of the Spirit directed them to do. There was no voting, but obedience to plain directions in carrying out the case. Verse 1 1 Corinthians 5This entire chapter is devoted to the case of the incestuous member of the church in Corinth, the woman involved having apparently no connection with the church; as no rebuke or teaching of any kind concerning her is recorded. It is actually reported that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not even among the Gentiles, that one of you hath his father's wife. (1 Corinthians 5:1) "Paul was vitally concerned about a new morality!"[1] The old morality of the Corinthians had already been discredited, exposed and revealed in the degradations and shameful debaucheries which invariably resulted from it. The new morality had come to Corinth in the preaching of Jesus Christ. Chastity, sobriety, honesty, truthfulness and kindness were among the features of the new ethic which came to mankind through Jesus Christ, that ethic being the only "new morality" ever heard of on earth. "Paul was also relevant in his preaching!"[2] He pointed the finger of divine condemnation squarely at the offender, also making the whole congregation to blame for the complacency with which they had looked upon so brazen a resurgence of the old morality. Fornication ... is here used as a general term for all sexual vice, incest being the specific sin here. For further elaboration of this subject, see my Commentary on Hebrews, p. 325. "Shocked as Paul was at this sin, he was even more shocked by the attitude of the Corinthian church,"[3] which condoned it and went on being puffed up with pride. Johnson thought that they might have been "even proud of their liberty";[4] and Guthrie also believed that their leaving such a glaring sin uncondemned was "Presumably on the ground of their `liberty' in Christ."[5]Not even among the Gentiles ... does not mean that incest was not practiced by the Gentiles, but that such vice was unacceptable among them. The feelings, even of pagans, were shocked by it; and Cicero spoke of such a crime (near Corinth), saying, "Oh, incredible wickedness, and, except in this woman's case, unheard of in all experience."[6]Hath his father's wife ... "Hath refers not to just one trespass, but to a life of sin."[7] Speculations on the circumstances attending this sin, as to the question of whether the father was alive, or divorced, or the question of whether the incestuous couple were married or not, are all fruitless. The relationship itself was sinful, no matter what the circumstances; and if it had been profitable to know more of the details of this sordid incident, it is safe to conclude that Paul would have provided them. Some have identified the man who "suffered the wrong" (2 Corinthians 7:12) as the father in this case; and; if correct, this would prove that the father was alive. Farrar was of this opinion.[8] Lipscomb expressed the opinion of McGarvey and many others that, "From the complete silence as to the crime of the woman, it is inferred that she was a heathen."[9][1] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p. 346. [2] Ibid., p. 347. [3] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 49. [4] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 601. [5] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1058. [6] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 165. [7] F. W. Grosheide, The New International Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 120. [8] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 166. [9] David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 72. Verse 2 And ye are puffed up, and did not rather mourn, that he that had done this thing might be taken away from among you.Puffed up ... Barnes understood this thus: "They were not puffed up on account of this wickedness, but they were filled with pride notwithstanding it, or in spite of it."[10]Mourn ... "This is the word that is used in mourning for the dead";[11] and when such a sinful contradiction of truth and righteousness as this case of incest exists in a congregation of believers, it should be an occasion of the most intense sorrow. What an incongruous thing was that prideful boasting of the Corinthians contrasted with this wretched immorality tolerated among them! [10] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1949), p. 83. [11] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 49. Verse 3 For I verily, being absent in body but present in spirit, have already as though I were present judged him that hath so wrought this thing, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, ye being gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of the Lord Jesus.The question of Paul's coming to Corinth had just been mentioned (1 Corinthians 4:21); but by the first clause here, Paul said, "I do not have to be present in Corinth to judge such a shameful sin as this. My spirit is already with you in the general assembly which I now order you to convene for the purpose of throwing the offender out." In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ ... may be applied to a number of things in this passage; but the principal thrust of the words is to invoke the authority of Christ himself (through the apostle) for casting out the offender. They must not seek to separate from him privately, or in any hushed-up manner; the whole church was commanded to pronounce the apostolic judgment on the sinful member. Verse 5 To deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.Deliver ... to Satan ... This was the apostolic sentence; but the full meaning of it is not fully clear, there being a great many things that people simply do not know concerning what is here revealed. Some things are crystal clear. Paul denounced this sin in the strongest language found in the New Testament; and such a judgment could have been pronounced and executed only by an apostle of Christ. There is a hint that Paul expected that the man would die upon the announcement of his judgment, in the same manner as Ananias and Sapphira had died in Jerusalem. The salvation held out as a hope for the condemned was not envisioned as following his return to the congregation, but as something he would receive "in the day of the Lord Jesus," a certain reference to the final judgment. If these implications should be allowed, this exceedingly severe judgment "might have been an act of mercy, as well."[12] See my Commentary on Acts, under Acts 5:5. The opinion that this offender repented and came back into the congregation is founded upon 2 Corinthians 7:12; but there is little certainty that this application is correct. If that is what happened, then what became of "the destruction of the flesh" enunciated in this judgment? The frequent opinion that "The sinful man (was) delivered to Satan, to suffer physical affliction, to bring him to repentance and turn out for the good of his soul,"[13] is another example of what the passage is thought to teach. Another thing that is certain, with reference to this, was pointed out by Adam Clarke: No such power as this remains in the Church of God; none such should be assumed; and the pretensions to it are as wicked as they are vain. It was the same power by which Ananias and Sapphira were struck dead, and Elymas the sorcerer struck blind. Apostles alone were entrusted with it.[14]Even an apostle like Paul exercised such power and authority only upon rare occasions, another instance being that of Hymenaeus and Alexander (1 Timothy 1:20). [12] F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1954), p. 114. [13] F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972), p. 91. [14] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and Porter, 1831), Vol. VI, p. 213. Verse 6 Your glorying is not good. know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?Your glorying ... Their glorying failed to take any note at all of the cancer of immorality in their very midst. A little leaven ... Although there are exceptions, leaven in the New Testament usually refers to some evil principle, in this case unrebuked immorality, which was fully capable of destroying the whole church. This would account for the severity of the judgment imposed. Verse 7 Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, even as ye are unleavened. For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ.Ye are unleavened ... This is a figure for "you are not contaminated with sin." Despite the sinful lapses visible in the church, the action of their being cleansed in the blood of Christ was constant and effectual. Serious sins would be punished and purged from the Lord's church;, and the essential purity of it was affirmed even in this moment of her shameful deficiency. This purity was not of themselves, but of Christ "in whom" they continued to be. CHRIST; OUR In the above verse, Paul affirmed that Christ is our passover; but, as in most analogies, there are points of likeness and unlikeness. I. Points of likeness: A. In both the Jewish passover and the passover of Christians (who is Christ), there is the death of a sinless, blameless victim (John 14:30 John 8:46; Hebrews 4:15). B. In both, there is the design of deliverance from the wrath of God; in the Jewish Passover, it was from the destruction of the death angel, and for Christians it is from God's eternal wrath (Romans 1:18). C. In both, deliverance carne through the vicarious death, in their case, that of the lamb, in our case, that of Christ who died for us (Romans 3:25 Romans 5:6; Matthew 20:28; 1 Peter 3:18). D. In both, the slain victim became the food of the redeemed. The Jews actually ate the Passover lamb; and Christians partake of Christ who is their spiritual food (John 6:53). E. In both, a personal participation on the part of the redeemed was an absolute requirement. The lamb had to be slain for every family; each member had to eat; the blood was sprinkled on every door. Every man must be "in Christ" to be saved (1 Corinthians 12:13). F. In both, the line of demarcation between the saved and lost is clear and emphatic. Egyptians did not partake of the Passover. The evil men of the world do not partake of Christ. G. In both, there is a pledge of fellowship. Eating together is one of the oldest bonds of fellowship; and, in both dispensations, God made use of this instrument to cement the bonds of fellowship among his people. II. Points of unlikeness: A. There is a contrast in the redemptions procured, one being temporal and earthly, the other being heavenly and eternal. B. There is a contrast in the victims provided. Is not a man of more value than a sheep? C. There is a contrast in the efficacy of the blood offered, that of animals being unable to take away sin (Hebrews 10:4), but the blood of Christ providing remission of sins (Hebrews 9:14). D. There is a contrast in that which was purged out, in the case of the Jews being the old leaven of actual bread, but in the case of Christians the purging of sin from the hearts of those saved. III. The entire institution of the Passover was typical of the entire institution of Christianity: A. The Passover lamb, sacrificed the first day, was fulfilled by the crucifixion of Christ at the very hours the lambs were slain. B. The lamb was a type of the person of Christ in that it was innocent, died vicariously, was a male of the flock, and without blemish, and in that not a bone of it was broken (Psalms 34:20). C. Just as the Passover was slain and eaten in Jerusalem so Christ suffered, died, and rose again in the same city. D. The Passover was typical of the Lord's supper in some ways, though not in others. Both were divinely instituted, both were commemorative, both were continuative, moving for millenniums through history; both began a new kingdom, the Passover that of the Jews; the Lord's Supper distinguished the kingdom of Christ; and in both cases the actual beginning of the kingdom was a little later than the institution of the rite. Who but God could have so designed the religious economy of Israel that all of it would have served to typify and identify the Christ who should come into the world? Verse 8 Wherefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.Keep the feast ... It seems incredible to this student that anyone would apply this to keeping the Jewish Passover. "We are obliged to keep the feast, the feast of unleavened bread."[15] This whole paragraph is absolutely metaphorical; for, when Paul commanded the Corinthians to "purge out thy old leaven," he referred to purging out sin. Therefore "feast" in this place has the meaning of Christian life and fellowship. Farrar read it "Keep the feast of Christ's resurrection in the spirit of holiness."[16] Barnes interpreted it as "Let us engage in the service of God by putting away evil."[17] "Keeping the feast suggests the continuous life of the Christian, a day-by-day walking in holiness, strength and joy."[18] There is not a reference here to the Lord's Supper specifically; but of course it is included in the larger sphere of the entire Christian pilgrimage. Not with old leaven ... This is a reference to the old morality of the Corinthians, under the figure of the Jews' actions at Passover. All sexual vice, as well as malice and other forms of wickedness, are specific examples of what Paul meant by "leaven." Unleavened bread ... refers to the new life in Christ from which the old works of the flesh have been purged and replaced by "sincerity and truth." [15] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 126. [16] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 168. [17] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 88. [18] Donald S. Metz, op. cit., p. 355. Verse 9 I wrote unto you in my epistle to have no company with fornicators; not at all meaning with the fornicators of this world, or with covetous and extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.In my epistle ... This most probably refers to another epistle Paul had written to the Corinthians, but which was lost; and, since they misunderstood it, perhaps it was lost providentially. Skilled efforts to make this a reference to previous passages in this same epistle are unconvincing. The crux of Paul's teaching here is that when he had commanded the Corinthians not to keep company with fornicators (in that lost letter), the congregation had taken it to mean that they were not to associate withANYBODY guilty of that sin, whether in the church or out of the church. Paul here stated that he did not mean that "at all"; and, if he had meant that, they could have obeyed him only by leaving the present world! What a commentary this is upon the depraved condition of Corinth and the whole world of that era. Fornicators ... covetous ... extortioners ... idolaters ... Significantly, Paul here extended the prohibition to include association with any grossly wicked people, specifically the four classes mentioned, who might be called "brethren." Furthermore, despite the fact of its being allowable for Christians to associate with the wicked in the necessary business and commerce of the world, such persons having no connection with Christianity, this is definitely not meant to encourage such associations. Every time a child of God is in the company of the wicked, even in cases where it is necessary and allowable, he runs a certain risk; and there is no way that he should be satisfied and comfortable in such associations. Wall, as quoted by Macknight, said: It is an everlasting rule that a conscientious Christian should choose, as far as he can, the company, intercourse, and familiarity of good men, and such as fear God; and avoid, as far as his necessary affairs will permit, the conversation and fellowship of such as Paul here describes.[19]ENDNOTE: [19] James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles and Commentary (Grand Rapids. Baker Book House, 1969), p. 79. Verse 11 But as it is, I wrote unto you not to keep company, if any man that is named a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such a one no, not to eat.But as it is ... or "Now I write ..." as in the English Revised Version margin (1885). I wrote unto you ... carries the meaning of "what I meant when I wrote to you." The blanket rule laid down here requiring the Christian to forego any association with unfaithful Christians was stated thus by Russell: Have no familiar intercourse with one that is named a brother but is false to his profession; withdraw from all associations indicating brotherhood. He does not mean that Christians should go out of the world; monastic seclusion is not for a moment contemplated.[20]ENDNOTE: [20] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 410. Verse 12 For what have I to do with judging them that are without? Do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Put away the wicked man from among yourselves.Despite what was said under 1 Corinthians 5:5 of the unique authority involved in delivering the sinner "to Satan," it may not be supposed that putting away evil men out of the Christian fellowship has no relevance now. However it is to be done, it must be done. Morris said, "Paul's main point is that the church must not tolerate the presence of evil in its midst, and this is clearly of permanent relevance."[21]Paul also guarded against any thought that the wicked "without" shall escape judgment; God will judge them. Regarding the last verse here, Macknight wrote: The apostle wrote this and the preceding verse to show the Corinthians the reason why, after commanding them to pass so severe a sentence on the man, he said nothing to them of the woman who was guilty with him. The discipline of the church was not to be exercised on persons out of it. Hence it appears that this woman was a heathen.[22][21] Leon Morris, Tyndale Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), p. 93. [22] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 80. "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE " Chapter Five IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To understand the need for proper church discipline 2) To understand the nature of church discipline SUMMARY Having dealt with the problem of division in the first four chapters, Paul now addresses the problem of immorality in the church at Corinth. He describes the particular case at hand, one which even pagan Gentiles would find shameful (1 Corinthians 5:1). Rebuking them for being "puffed up" instead of mourning (1 Corinthians 5:2), Paul then instructs them to "deliver such a one to Satan", giving them reasons why this action is necessary (1 Corinthians 5:3-8). Clarifying what may have been written in an unknown earlier epistle, Paul concludes by limiting towards whom such action is to be taken, and describing how it is to be carried out in practice (1 Corinthians 5:9-13). OUTLINE I. THE PROBLEM OF IN THE CHURCH AT CORINTH (1 Corinthians 5:1-2) A. THE CASE AT HAND (1 Corinthians 5:1)1. Something not even the Gentiles would approve! (1 Corinthians 5:1 a) 2. A man was living with his father's wife (1 Corinthians 5:1 b) B. HOW THE WERE IT (2)1. They were "puffed up" (1 Corinthians 5:2 a) 2. Rather than mourning that such conduct might result in the removal of the offender (1 Corinthians 5:2 b) II. FOR DEALING WITH THIS PROBLEM (1 Corinthians 5:3-13) A. HOW TO CHURCH (1 Corinthians 5:3-5 a)1. Must exercise judgment, as Paul though present has already done (1 Corinthians 5:3) 2. When assembled together in the name of Jesus, deliver such a one to Satan (1 Corinthians 5:4-5 a) B. WHY CHURCH IS NEEDED (1 Corinthians 5:5-8)1. To save the sinner (1 Corinthians 5:5 b) a. By destroying the flesh (its pride and works) b. That his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord 2. To save the church (1 Corinthians 5:6-8) a. "A little leaven leavens the whole lump" (1 Corinthians 5:6) b. Christ, our "passover", should be kept with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth (1 Corinthians 5:7-8) C. CHURCH (1 Corinthians 5:9-13)1. Not to be exercised toward those who are of the world (1 Corinthians 5:9-10) 2. But towards brethren in Christ who remain in sin, with such don't even eat (1 Corinthians 5:11) 3. For God judges those outside the church, while we must judge those inside (1 Corinthians 5:12-13 a) 4. The nature of church discipline: "put away from yourselves that wicked person" (1 Corinthians 5:13 b) REVIEW FOR THIS CHAPTER 1) List the main points of this chapter- The Problem Of Immorality In The Church At Corinth (1 Corinthians 5:1-2) - Instructions For Dealing With This Problem (1 Corinthians 5:3-13) 2) What was the nature of the immorality that existed in the church at Corinth? (1 Corinthians 5:1)- A man had his father's wife 3) What was the attitude of the church in this regard? (1 Corinthians 5:2)- They were "puffed up" 4) Why does a church "deliver such a one to Satan"? (1 Corinthians 5:5)- For the destruction of the flesh - That his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord 5) Why should a church be diligent in exercising church discipline? (1 Corinthians 5:6)- A little leaven leavens a whole lump 6) Who is the "passover" for Christians? (1 Corinthians 5:7)- Christ 7) How should we observe our "passover"? (1 Corinthians 5:8)- With sincerity and truth 8) Towards whom is church discipline to be administered? (1 Corinthians 5:9-11)- Those in the church who do not repent; not those in the world 9) Who has the responsibility of judging whom? (1 Corinthians 5:12-13)- God judges those outside the church; the church is to judge its own 10) What expressions may help explain what it means to "deliver such a one to Satan"? (1 Corinthians 5:11 1 Corinthians 5:13)- "not to keep company" - "not even to each with such a person" - "put away from yourselves that wicked person" Questions by E.M. Zerr For 1st Corinthians Chapter 51. Was the report mentioned only incidentally known? 2. What was the sin reported ? 3. By what comparison does Paul show its baseness ? 4. What woman is the guilty one? 5. Do you take this to mean his mother? 6. What was their attitude toward the situation ? 7. How should the brethren have felt? 8. If they had what should they have done? 9. In what sense was Paul present with them? 10. What had he already done in the case? 11. Would his judgment have been different if present? 12. In what name was their work to be done ? 13. Could the work be done in a private meeting? 14. When they gathered whose spirit would be there ? 15. Whose power is behind this arrangement? 16. Does this verse require a special meeting? 17. State what word indicates their action. 18. To whom was the man to be given? 19. Where is such territory to be found? 20. Tell what was to be destroyed. 21. Was it to be physical action on the body? 22. What further effect was sought by the discipline? 23. To what does “ day of the Lord” refer? 24. What did Paul think of their glorying? 25. Tell what article he used for illustration. 26. Is his statement true literally? 27. How is it true spiritually? 28. They were to purge out what? 29. That they might be what ? 30. To what 0. T. ordinance does this language allude? 31. What constitutes the leaven in this case? 32. In what character is Christ here represented? 33. Must he be slain repeatedly? 34. How can we keep the feast? 35. With what must we NOT keep the feast? 36. Are malice and wickedness identical? 37. State difference between sincerity and truth. 38. With whom are we not to company? 39. Does this refer to people of the world? 40. Give reason for your yes or no. 41. What 3 classes of sinners does Paul here mention? 42. Tell your impression of “ to keep company.” 43. With what class are we not to keep thi3 company? 44. Are these ehuTch members? 45. To whom does “ not to eat” apply? 46. Can we rightly apply it to men of the world ? 47. Does “ eat” refer to the Lord’ s table? 48. What jurisdiction does Paul have over “ outsiders” ? 49. Does this apply to other disciples also ? 50. How or by whom will the “ outsiders” be judged? 51. State the final order Paul gives them. 1 Corinthians 5:1. Commonly is from HOLOS, and Robinson defines it in this passage, "everywhere, commonly," and Thayer's definition is virtually the same. The meaning is that the condition was so well known that the fact was not questioned by anyone. Fornication is from PORNEIA, and Thayer gives the one word in our verse as his definition. But he adds the following information historically: "Properly of unlawful intimacy in general. That this meaning must be adopted will surprise no one who has learned from 1 Corinthians 6 how leniently converts from among the heathen regarded this vice and how lightly they indulged in it; accordingly, all other interpretations of the term, such as of marriages within the prohibited degrees and the like, are to be rejected." While on this phase of the subject, it will be well to read the "general remarks" at the beginning of chapter one. Since the ordinary evil of fornication was so prevalent and tolerated so liberally, it makes the attitude which Paul describes all the more significant. A popular phrase, "living in adultery," is of human coinage, and has no scripture foundation; therefore, we shall examine the word have in this verse. It is from the Greek word ECHO, and two full pages are used in the lexicon of Thayer in his definitions and explanations. The definitions (the parts in italics) include, "to have; to hold in the hand; to have possession of; to hold fast, keep; to regard, consider, hold as; to own, possess." Thus the word can be seen to refer to the attitude of a man toward something, without necessarily considering what legal or moral principles are involved. In the present passage, Thayer explains the word to mean, "to have (use) a woman (unlawfully) as a wife." The Lord requires his people to recognize the laws of the land, and they do not regard the fleshly union as constituting the marriage relation as does God (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5-6; 1 Corinthians 6:16), and that is why Thayer inserts the word "unlawfully" into his explanation. The Gentiles (or heathen), with all their leniency toward immoral conduct, did not endorse such a practice as was being done by this man, and that is the sense in which they would not so much as name it among themselves. Father's wife means the man's stepmother. The necessary inference is that his father had remarried, to a younger woman than his son's mother. and the difference in age had induced this woman to become intimate with her husband's son. 1 Corinthians 5:2. Puffed up means their pride over the superiority they imagined they had as we saw in the preceding chapter. Even this shameful case of fornication had not moderated their self-esteem. They should have mourned or lamented over the wicked character, and resolved that he would be put from among them. 1 Corinthians 5:3. Paul was an inspired man and could speak with authority. This enabled him to form the correct judgment on the present case even though absent 'and before any hearing had been conducted. 1 Corinthians 5:4. The sentence which Paul is going to pronounce will be in the name of Christ, which means by his authority. The first specification is that the action is to be done when ye are gathered together. This teaches that no final act of discipline can be scripturally done except at a meeting of the church. It does not even authorize that a "special meeting" be called for the purpose. The rulers of a congregation may designate the particular meeting at which it will be done, according to their judgment in the case. But when the appointment is made, it must be set at one of the times "when ye are gathered together." Paul informs them that his spirit will be with them in this great and solemn action, which will be true of all congregational actions that are according to apostolic teaching. Moreover, this action would be backed up by the power of the Lord Jesus Christ, so that it cannot be considered as an act of personal revenge on the part of the brethren. 1 Corinthians 5:5. Now comes the verdict of the apostle which must be made that of the congregation also, in order that it may be the action of "the many" (2 Corinthians 2:6). To deliver is defined by Thayer, "to give over into one's power or use." He explains it at this place as follows: "The phrase seems to have originated from the Jewish formulas of excommunication, because a person banished from the theocratic [church and state] assembly was regarded as deprived of the protection of God and delivered up to the power of the devil." Destruction of the flesh is explained by Thayer as follows: "Said of the external ills and troubles by which the lusts of the flesh are subdued and destroyed." The idea is that by expelling him from the congregation, it may cause him to realize the terrible condition he is in on account of having lived for the gratification of his fleshly desires, and the result will be his "crucifying the flesh with the affections and lusts" (Galatians 5:24). That will put him in condition to be restored to the fellowship of the saints, where he can so live that his spirit (his immortal being) may be saved when the Lord comes again. Another serious truth taught in this passage, is that when a person is excluded from the fellowship of the church, he is then in Satan's territory whose inhabitants have no promise of salvation in the world to come. 1 Corinthians 5:6. The Corinthians were so full of pride over their supposed strength, that they seemed to think a single case of wickedness would not hurt them. The illustration of leaven is according to what everyone knows about that product. A woman would not use as much leaven by bulk as the amount of bread she wished to produce, for the small lump deposited in the mass would work until "the whole was leavened" (Matthew 13:33). Likewise, one bad character who is permitted to remain in a congregation will finally defile the whole body. (See 1 Corinthians 15:33.) 1 Corinthians 5:7. Paul has introduced the subject of leaven for the purpose of illustration. There were enough Jews in the congregation to know about the regulations under the law of Moses regarding leaven, and even the Gentiles had seen enough of the Jewish practices to understand something on the subject. At the time of the feast of the Passover and the seven days following, the Jews were required to "put away leaven out of your houses" (Exodus 12:15), in order that they might keep their feast acceptably. Paul uses the language of that occasion for his instructions to the Corinthians. Purge out therefore the old leaven corresponds to "put away leaven out of your houses" with the Jews. The leaven to be purged out of the Corinthian church was the wicked fornicator. That ye may be a new lump means the church will be free from the leaven of this wicked man, and in so doing they would become a body fit for the service of Christ, having become unleavened. The Jews were to bring about this condition that was free from leaven, because a creature had been slain and prepared to be used in the Passover feast, and it could be eaten only "with unleavened bread" (Exodus 12:8). Likewise, Christ has been slain and made a passover for us, and we should be prepared to partake thereof with a condition that has been purged from the leaven of sin. 1 Corinthians 5:8. The old leaven refers to the case of fornication that had been working in the lump or congregation. All other leaven likewise was to be kept out of the body. In naming the various kinds of leaven, Paul includes malice which was not present in the case of the fornicator as far as there is any indication. This denotes that the apostle is extending the illustration so as to apply to the entire service of Christ. The feast may be said to include all of the activities of the life that Christians are to live under Christ; it is all a rich feast. The passover of Christ's body and blood was consummated but once, it is true, as far as the physical ceremony was concerned, but the spiritual partaking thereof is to be continuous. It will be well at this place to corroborate the idea just set forth by quoting from 1 John 1:7 : "But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." This walking in the light is equivalent to maintaining a condition described in our present verse as unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. 1 Corinthians 5:9. I wrote refers to an epistle Paul wrote previously, for up to this verse there has been nothing said on the subject at hand. Colossians 4:16 speaks of an epistle sent to the Laodiceans, so we know that he wrote some letters that were not intended to become a part of the New Testament compilation. In the epistle referred to here, Paul gave instructions not to company with fornicators. We do not know what occasioned that letter nor why that particular instruction was given. The three words come from the Greek word , and Thayer defines it, "to mix up together; to keep company with, be intimate with, one." Further comments will be made when we come to verse 11. 1 Corinthians 5:10. This verse is given to clarify a statement in the former epistle as to whom they were to avoid in their associations. The world is so full of such characters as are named, that if Christians were required to avoid all of them, they would have to go out of the world; that is, cease to live in any populated country. 1 Corinthians 5:11. The preceding verse designated who were not meant by the restrictions, this one will specify who is to be so treated. Now I have written denotes that the apostle is giving his latest instruction on the subject. Man that is called a brother means one who had been a member of the congregation, but on account of the evils named had become unworthy of the term "brother," and hence one with whom they should not keep company. (See the notes on this phrase at verse 9.) The refusal to associate with this man is to be carried to the extent that they were not even to eat with him. Some teach this means eating the Lord's Supper, but the apostle has just explained that his instructions do not apply to men of the world; they apply only to those who had been members of the church. This theory mentioned would mean that people of the world were permitted to partake of the Lord's Supper, but the apostle has just explained that his instructions do not apply to men of the world; they apply only to those who had been members of the church. This theory mentioned would mean that people of the world were permitted to partake of the Lord's Supper, which we know is not true. To eat is from which Thayer defines, "to eat with, take food together with," so the word refers to the physical act of partaking of material food. But such an act itself meant more in old times than it does today; read the following passages. Genesis 26:30 Genesis 31:46; 1 Kings 13:15; Proverbs 23:6; Matthew 24:49; Mark 2:16; Acts 11:3; Galatians 2:12' From these we may see that the act of eating with others had a social significance formerly that it does not have today. However, the same principle holds good now, and the restriction not to company with means any act or association that would indicate a social recognition. If a man has been excluded on such charges as are named in the present passage, others are forbidden to be intimate with him, for such an association would encourage him to continue in his sinful life, thinking himself to be as good as those who associate with him. 1 Corinthians 5:12-13. What have I to do means "l have nothing to do with, judging them outside the church." Hence the church was not expected to be further responsible officially for those who were already of the world, or who would become inhabitants of it by being excluded from the church. The Lord would then be the sole judge of them. But those in the fellowship of the church are subject to the discipline of the congregation. The whole discussion of the case is closed with the direct command to put the wicked person from among them. Nothing is said about the woman, hence we must infer she was not a member of the church and so it would not be responsible. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1 Corinthians 6 BEFORE CIVIL COURTS 1 Corinthians 6:1-11 1 Dare any of you,— [The word “ dare” implies that the re¬sort to civil courts to settle differences between Christians is wholly inconsistent with the will of Christ, and that even one case would be outrageous.] having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the unrighteous,—To neglect or reject the authority of God at one point prepares the way and leads to the setting aside his authority at all points. The Corinthians turned from adherence to the law of God, and became followers of men. They gave up the high regard for morality and palliated the grossest forms of licentiousness. They set aside the leaders of the congregation as the divinely appointed tribunal for deciding dif¬ferences that might arise among them, and resorted to the tribunals of the heathen, or the government of the unbelievers; and Paul now comes to remonstrate with them for setting aside the divine authority. and not before the saints?—It was anticipated that Chris¬tians would have troubles or differences in their affairs, and Jesus gave (Matthew 18:15-20) rules by which to settle them. The judgment of the saints was obtained when the directions given were followed. Paul regarded it as a daring sin in Christians to neglect the law of Christ and seek the tribunals of the State. This did not conflict with Paul’ s own course of appealing to Caesar’ s court for protection, when the servants of Caesar were used to persecute him. He appealed to the protection Caesar’ s laws guaranteed when those were perverted and abused to punish him by the laws of Caesar. Caesar’ s courts are recognized as the courts of unbelievers; the decisions of the church as courts of the believers. Since the days of the union of “ Church and State,” and while believers participate in State affairs, this distinction is lost sight of, and the admonition is disregarded. The decisions of the church are brought into disrepute, because they are so often mere efforts at compromise instead of decisions of justice. Compromise of right, truth, and justice can never command the respect of God or man. 2 Or know ye not—[A form of expression often used by Paul when he wished to bring to mind important truth, which his readers knew, but disregarded. The knowledge of the great future which was in store for the children of God was the strongest argument against the humiliating degradation to which their appeal to the civil courts to settle their differ-ences had subjected them.] that the saints—All Christians are called saints whether they live lives of consecration to God or not. They have separated themselves to the service of God and that sanctifies them. shall judge the world?—What this verse and the next means is a matter of doubt. When, how, and where the saints are to judge the world and angels, is difficult to determine. Macknight holds that the saints are now judging the world through presenting the gospel to it, because by it the world is justified or condemned, as it receives or rejects its teachings. But the judgment here seems to be a deciding, according to that word, who is guilty and who is innocent. Matthew says : “ And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, that ye who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” (Matthew 19:28.) Another position occupied by many commentators is that the saints will be associated with Christ when they reign with him and when he judges the wicked. The doctrine, they claim, glimmered faintly to Daniel and came as a message of consolation and hope in the time of national suffering and shame, “ and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High, and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.” (Daniel 7:18-22.) Christ’ s people will share his royalty (Romans 8:18; 2 Timothy 2:12) ; and therefore they will share the government (Matthew 19:28; Luke 22:30), which the Father has committed to the Son (John 5:22). In the great day the saints will intelligently and cordially approve and endorse the sentence pronounced by Christ on the millions on earth. Possibly this approval may be divinely appointed an essential condition, without which sentence would not be pronounced by man upon men, but by men themselves redeemed from their own sins, upon those who have chosen death rather than life. They further claim that it may be that final sentence cannot, according to the principles of the divine government of the universe, be pronounced upon the lost without the concurrence of the saved, that is, without a revelation of the sen¬tence so clear as to secure the full approbation of the saved. If so, the concurrence of the saved is an essential element in the final judgment; and they may truly be said to judge both men and angels. That the sentence which the saints will pronounce is put into their lips by Christ does not make their part in the judgment any less real; for even the Son says, “ I can of myself do nothing: as I hear, I judge.” (John 5:30.) As summoned by Christ to sit with him, the saints will approve and endorse the measures of reward to be given to themselves. To appeal to human courts of law was to appeal to men upon whom, as upon all men, they themselves, amid the splendor of the great assize, will pronounce an eternal sen¬tence. How and when the saints will judge the world seems difficult to determine, but as a truth it is accepted, and the apostle argues that they are competent to judge the differences arising among themselves. and if the world is judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?—[This appeal is quite intelligible. It may be asked: “ What has all this to do with the matter in hand? The rule of the saints is not yet.” The answer is that this judgment of the world is no private privilege arbitrarily bestowed. The saints are to share our Lord’ s activity, be¬cause they share his mind (2: 15, 16), and this mind is in part already formed in them. Thus of necessity their disputes ought to be referred to them, rather than to courts, since they are competent to judge and adjust their differences.] 3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more, things that pertain to this life?—Some think “ we” in this verse refers to the apostles, and not to the saints generally ; but the latter clause seems to show that it was written to vindicate the right of the saints to judge the temporal questions that come up between Christians. If so, it must refer to them. Angels are generally understood to mean the fallen angels, demons, as the angels ministering for God' hardly need to be judged. Some think the saints are to judge these by preaching the gospel, as the power of Christ through it “ should spoil demons of their oracles and idols; should deprive these of their seats and strip them of their domain.” The power of the demon is supposed to have been curtailed, and the demons ceased to dominate persons on earth. These views seem strained and farfetched, hence are unsatisfactory, yet I have nothing better to offer. 4 If then ye have to judge things pertaining to this life, do ye set them to judge who are of no account in the church?— The meaning of this verse has also been involved in doubt. Does it mean that the least experienced and efficient members of the church shall be set to judge these temporal affairs? This cannot be true as the following verse shows. Some think the question was asked to reproach them for setting heathen tribunals over them. 5 I say this to move you to shame.—He shames them for leaving the Christian tribunals and going before those notori¬ous for their mercenary character as were the civil. What, cannot there be found among you one wise man who shall be able to decide between his brethren,— By their course they said this, and it was a slander and a reproach in the church. They boasted of their knowledge and spiritual gifts and acted as if there was not a prudent and intelligent person among them competent to settle their differences. 6 but brother goeth to law with brother, and that before un-believers?—[This question was most humiliating. It is the climax. That there should be disputes about property is bad; that they should go to law is worse; that they should do this before unbelievers is extremely humiliating and sinful.] This is the sinful end they had reached. 7 Nay, already it is altogether a defect in you, that ye have lawsuits one with another.—He insisted that going to law was wholly wrong— a reproach and a shame to the church. Why not rather take wrong? why not rather be defrauded?—A part of the religion of the church of Christ is to suffer and endure wrong for his sake. [The law of Christ contains principles according to which all such may be set at rest. And the difference between the laws governing worldly courts of justice and that of Christ is the difference of diametrical opposition. Law says, “ You shall have your rights” ; the law of Christ says, “ Defraud not your neighbor of his rights.” The law says, “ You must not be wronged” ; Christ says, “ It is better to suffer wrong than to do wrong.” ] 8 Nay, but ye yourselves do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.—Unless there were efforts to wrong and de¬fraud one another there would be but slight cause for differences among brethren. If each would look to his brother’ s interest instead of his own, the occasions of difference would be greatly lessened. The same sin exists today for the same causes. Men are covetous and selfish. They are anxious for more than belongs to them. They look every man to his own things, not to the things of others. (Philippians 2:4.) This leads them to differ and to appeal to the tribunals of Caesar in order to obtain them. Some think there is less wrong in going to law now than in the apostolic days, because the tribunals are somewhat more liable to do justice than then, and because Christians sometimes take part in political affairs. But the latter is only a step further in the wrong prohibited. If Christians cannot appeal to the tribunals of the State to settle differences that arise between them, much less can they manage, control, and participate in the operation of these tribunals. 9 Or know ye not—[Some of them acted as if the gospel gave license to live in sin, instead of being intended to deliver from its power. All such persons are warned of their fatal mistake. He assures them that one who allows himself the indulgence of any sin cannot be saved.] that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? —Paul here, as did Jesus when he was appealed to to settle differences between two brothers (Luke 12:14), lays down principles that will remove the causes that produce the contentions about property. Those who act unrighteously in doing his brother wrong, or in going before the tribunals of unbelievers, cannot inherit the kingdom of God, that is, the heavenly kingdom. It is the heritage of these who are faithful as the sons of God in the world. Be not deceived:—[There was great danger of their being led to think lightly of sins which were daily committed by those amongst whom they were living, hence these words of warning] lest they should think one could inherit the kingdom while practicing the sins mentioned. neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers.—Much of the idol worship consisted in most degrading forms of debauchery and licentiousness. These sins were encouraged both as acts of worship and by the examples of their idols. [Notice how he distinguishes between fornication and adultery. Though both will exclude from the inheritance, the latter is in many respects the worst crime, because through it the family is broken up, and a third person is irretrievably injured.] nor effeminate,—[This word occurs in Matthew 11:8; Luke 7:25, where it is applied to clothing, and rendered “ soft raiment”— luxurious livers, who pamper their body. Applied to morals, it denotes those who give themselves up to a soft, and indolent way of living; who make self-indulgence the grand object of life. In the classics the word is applied to those who are given up to wantonness and sensual pleasures, or who are kept to be prostituted to others.] nor abusers of themselves with men,— Those who lie with a male as with a female. 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.- -Christians should heed this warning and be sure that they are guilty of none of these crimes, “ for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the sons of disobedience.” (Ephesians 5:6.) It is difficult for people to realize to what extent these most degrading practices of licentiousness prevailed among the more enlightened classes of the heathens. 11 And such were some of you:—The Corinthians were noted for their indulgence in all these crimes. Their idols were of the licentious order, and Corinth was noted for its profligacy and crimes. Many of these Christians had been guilty of them before they obeyed the gospel. [The threefold “ but” in the clause which follows emphasizes strongly the contrast between their present state and their past, and the consequent demand which their changed condition makes upon them.] but ye were washed,—They had through faith in Jesus Christ died to sin, had been buried with him in baptism, wherein they were also raised with him to walk in newness of life. [They had washed away their sin exactly as Paul was commanded to do. (Acts 22:16.) Their seeking baptism was their own act, and they entered the water as voluntary agents just as Paul did (cf. 2 Timothy 2:21), seeking the forgiveness promised in the gospel, fulfilling the divinely ordained condition, and they actually received the remission of their sins (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:38).] but ye were sanctified,—They were set apart to a life of holiness. [The crisis, of which their baptism was the concrete embodiment, had marked their transition from the rule of self to the service of God.] but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, — As servants of Jesus Christ they were justified [having passed from the condition of guilty sinners to that of pardoned children of God.] and in the Spirit of our God.—They were led by the Spirit of God which they had received. AGAINST GENTILE WITH LIBERTY1 Corinthians 6:12-20 12 All things are lawful for me;—All things have a lawful use. [It is probable that Paul used these words of himself. Starting from the doctrine taught by Jesus Christ (John 8:32 John 8:36), and proclaimed by the mouth of the apostles (Acts 15:10; James 2:12; 1 Peter 2:16), he declared that the Christian was bound to a service of perfect freedom (Romans 8:2). But this principle needed very careful statement, if the Greeks were not to abuse it. No actions in themselves were unlawful provided (1) that they were in accordance with God’ s design in creation; (2) that they were calculated to promote the general welfare of all; and (3) that we were the masters of our own actions, not they of us.] but not all things are expedient.—It is not always expedient to use them. [The word “ expedient” signifies originally the condition of “ one who has his feet free” ; and hence that which frees from entanglements, helps on, and expedites. Its opposite, that which entangles, is similarly called an impediment. The sense, “ serving to promote a desired end of interest, for the sake of personal advantage, as opposed to what is based on principle,” in the modern sense of the word. Hence the meaning here is profitable for others as well as for ourselves. The derivative of the word here used is translated “ profit” in the following passages : 1 Corinthians 7:35 ; Hebrews 12:10; and “ profitable” in Matthew 5:29 Matthew 18:6; Acts 20:20. All things are lawful for me; but I will not be brought under the power of any.—There is a lawful use of all appetites, desires, and lusts; but none of them must obtain the mastery over us. All appetites, passions and lusts are for our good, if properly used and restrained. If they enslave us, they degrade and destroy us. An improper use or direction of the appetites and desires brings evil, not good. [If we sacrifice the power of choice which is implied in the thought of liberty, we cease to be free; we are brought under the power of that which should be in our power.] 13 Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats:—Food is for the stomach. [Paul now proceeds to explicitly apply these principles to the matter in hand. The language indicates that some argued that if meats were morally indifferent, a man being morally neither the better nor the worse for eating the food which had been offered in an idol’ s temple, so also a man was neither better nor worse for fornication. To expose the monstrous error of this reasoning, he draws a distinction between the digestive, nutritive organs of the body and the body as a whole. The body is an essential part of human nature, and in the future the natural body will give place to the spiritual body. The spiritual body is connected with, and has its birthplace in, the natural body, so that the body that we now wear is to be represented by that finer and more spiritual organism in which the righteous are hereafter to be clothed. (15: 44.) The connection of the future body with the physical world and its dependence on material things we do not understand; but in some way it is to carry on the identity of our present body, and thereby it reflects a sacredness and significance of this body. The body of the aged is very different from that of the newborn babe, but there is a continuity that links them together and gives them identity. So the future body may be very different from and yet the same as the present. At the same time, the organs which serve for the maintenance of the natural body will be unnecessary and out of place in the future body, which is spiritual in its origin and in its maintenance. There is therefore a difference between the organs of nutrition and that body which is part of our permanent individuality, and which by the power of God is to be made into an everlasting body. The digestive organs have their use and their destiny, and the body as a whole has its use and destiny. The two differ from one another; and if we argue from one to the other we must keep in view this distinction. By eating we are not perverting the digestive organs of the body to a use not intended for them; but we are putting them to the use God meant them to serve.] but God shall bring to nought both it and them.—Both the food and the stomach— the appetite for food— are to perish. They end with our earthly being. [They serve a temporary purpose, like the house in which we live, or the clothes we wear.] But the body is not for fornication,—This is not its lawful use. [There is a vital difference between the satisfaction of hunger and the gratification of the sexual appetite. The latter is only possible in the bonds of matrimony. Fornication is an abuse of the body, a defilement of Christ’ s member, an insult to the Lord himself, whose property is not only taken by theft from him, but handed over to a harlot. This is very plain speaking on the part of the apostle. But it is just; and if it was necessary in those days, it is equally necessary now.] but for the Lord;—[Here lies the true purpose of the body.] It is for the service of the Lord, who has an appropriate use and sphere for it. [It is destined to be the vehicle of spiritual faculties and the efficient agent of the Lord’ s purposes. It was through the body of the Lord that the great facts of our redemption were accomplished. It was the instrument of the incarnation, and of the manifestation of God among men, of the death and resurrection by which we are saved. And as in his body Christ was incarnate among men, so now it is by means of the bodily existence and energies of his people on earth that he extends his kingdom among men.] And to this great end it should be used instead of abused, and destroyed by fornication. and the Lord for the body:—[The Lord dwells in and acts and provides for the body. He thus sustains and keeps it from vanity and sin and corruption. It would be a wicked thing to tear away our body from that sacred connection and give it over to licentiousness.] 14 and God both raised the Lord, and will raise up us through his power.—The body, unlike the belly, has an eternity before it, and as evidence of this Paul says: “ And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, he that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead shall give life also to your mortal bodies through his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” (Romans 8:10-11.) If the appetites, passions, and lusts are held in proper restraint and used as is good, then the Spirit of God will dwell in and be with us, and God, who raised Jesus, will by his Spirit raise us up to reign with him. [“ Will raise up us” here stands in contrast with “ shall bring to nought” in verse 13. 15 Know ye not that your bodies are members of Christ?— Their bodies, with the Spirit of God dwelling in them, are the members of the body of Christ. (12: 27.) [This solemn truth, that there is a real community of spiritual life between Christ and the true believer, is employed here to remind them of the restrictions placed upon their liberty. The body of the Christian is Christ’ s, nay in a sense, it is a part of himself (Ephesians 5:30), so that the same Spirit which possessed Christ is the same which possesses the Christian. It is in Christ that he seeks to live, and it is the consuming desire of his heart that Christ would use his body to the accomplishment of his pur¬poses even as he used his own body while on earth.] shall I then take away the members of Christ, and make them members of a harlot?—Sexual intercourse is the act that the Bible recognizes as making man and woman one. When a man who is a member of the body of Christ is guilty of fornication he [forms this union in an unlawful way and] makes the member of Christ one with a harlot. God forbid.—[If the Christian, is as truly a member of Christ’ s body as were the hands and feet and eyes he wore on earth, the mind shrinks, as from blasphemy, from the very thought of being joined to a harlot as is done by one guilty of fornication.] 16 Or know ye not that he that is joined to a harlot is one body?—When a man takes a woman unto himself they be¬come one flesh. for, The twain, saith he, shall become one flesh.—“ Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24.) [That these words refer originally to marriage does not lessen their appropriateness here. For they teach that the union of the sexes in the marriage relation was divinely ordained at the creation of the race, in order to unite husband and wife so closely that in them even personal distinction should in some respects cease. Intercourse with harlots desecrates this divine relation to a means of sin. Therefore in a Christian, it robs Christ of a member of his own body in order to place it in union with one utterly opposed to him, a union so close that they are one flesh.] 17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.— [To be united in one spirit to Christ and at the same time to be united to impurity is impossible.] To be one with Christ in spirit and at the same time in body with a harlot would make the Lord one with the harlot. This is the outrage of such a course of sin. A man marries a good woman; they are one flesh; he afterwards commits adultery and thus becomes one with a harlot; does not that make the wife one with the harlot? Has a Christian woman the right to become one with a harlot by living with a husband that is guilty of adultery? Fornication or adultery justifies a husband or wife in putting away the guilty party. Does it not go further and demand it? Has a Christian husband or wife the right to live with one guilty of adultery? 18 Flee fornication.—In view of the great sin, flee from it, keep out of the way of temptation to commit it. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body;—Other sins are without or apart from the body. [That is, all other sinful acts which affect the body approach it from without and affect particular members. They require some motive or weapon other than the body. The body is the subject.] but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.—[Fornication takes the body as a whole and makes it the instrument of sin. It joins the body of sinful union to a body of death, so that it becomes one flesh with the con¬demned harlot, thereby severing itself from the life in Christ, and thus it strikes directly at the body’ s future state. When a man and woman are united in marriage according to God’ s law, there is no such alienation from the Lord’ s body, and consequently no sin. This view is confirmed by the fact that the word here translated “ sinneth” means to “ go astray,” to “ miss the mark” ; so the words “ sinneth against his own body” imply the running counter to the object for which the body was created.] The oneness of the body of two persons that cohabit is more than a formal union. How much of the real nature and being of a man does a woman partake of in intercourse with him and especially in carrying children begotten by him in her womb with a circulation of blood through her whole body, and how much he is affected by her will likely never be definitely determined, yet there is more in becoming- one than we usually think. So a man guilty of fornication sins against his own body. 19 Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God?—The body of a Christian is a temple or a dwelling place of the Holy Spirit, it is therefore a terrible thing to make a temple of God one with a harlot. [What has before been asserted of the church as a whole (3: 16) is now asserted of every member of it, and the Christian’ s body is the most sacred thing on earth, and every dishonor to it is an insult to him who has chosen it for his dwelling place.] Three epochs are marked by the word temple. In the Old Testament it means the material temple, the sign of localized worship and a separate people (Exodus 20:24; Deuteronomy 12:5 Deuteronomy 12:11 Deuteronomy 12:13-14) ; in the Gospels Jesus uses it of his own body (John 2:19-21) ; here it is used of every baptized believer, sanctified by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. and ye are not your own:—[Christians do not belong to themselves, even if they could commit fornication without personal contamination or self-violation. Christianity makes unchastity dishonor both sexes. There is no double standard of morality. The plea here is to Christians to be clean as members of Christ’ s body.] 20 for ye were bought with a price:—Man had sinned and was under the sentence of death. Jesus interposed and gave his life to secure a respite from the sentence and to open the way by which he might return to the favor of God and enjoy eternal life. The only way man can come to appropriate the cleansing efficacy of the blood of the Son of God is to come by faith and take the laws given by Jesus Christ into the heart and let them control and govern his life. Those who accept this offer of mercy are bought, redeemed, purchased. glorify God therefore in your body.—Inasmuch as they had been redeemed by Jesus Christ, he exhorts them that they should with their bodies glorify him. Live so as to honor him, and not through fornication defile the temple of God by making it one with a harlot. [We should so use the body as to please and do the service of God. To glorify God is to exalt and honor him as worthy of the highest praise and most faithful service. Our only and supreme desire should be to know the will of God that we may do it. For we show forth his praise by obedience to his law. “ The heavens declare the glory of God’’ in obedience to the law of creation, and much more do men glorify him by willing obedience to “ the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus.” This being so, what a profanation it is when we take this body, which is built to be his temple, and put it to uses which it were blasphemous to associate with God! Let us rather find our joy in realizing the ideal set before us, in keeping ourselves pure as a temple of God and in glorifying him in our body.] Verse 1 1 Corinthians 6Just as 1 Corinthians 5 was devoted to the subject of the incestuous man and related thoughts, so this is devoted to another serious problem at Corinth, that of Christians going to law with one another before the pagan judges (1 Corinthians 6:1-11), and a special paragraph on sexual vice (1 Corinthians 6:12-20), the entire subject matter in both chapters being discussed in the light of the conceited glorying which characterized the Christian community in Corinth. ON GOING TO LAWDare any of you having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? (1 Corinthians 6:1) Against his neighbor ... means "against a Christian neighbor," because it would be impossible to force a pagan into a Christian tribunal unrecognized by the law of the land. Before the unrighteous ... This is not a charge that all the pagan judges were unrighteous, but distinguishes between those within the church and those without, all of the latter being unrighteous in the sense of not being Christians. Not before the saints ... Christ himself had laid down the rules for any follower of the Lord having a matter against his brother; and this rule involved: (1) a personal confrontation between wronged and wrongdoer, (2) another attempt at reconciliation if the first failed, with witnesses present, and (3) a general examination before the whole church. See Matthew 18:15-17. Also for extended discussion of this subject, see my Commentary on Matthew, pp. 279-281. McGarvey stated that "By going to law before the pagan tribunals, they were not only disobeying the Lord but committing treason against their own brotherhood."[1] As DeHoff noted, however, "It is sometimes necessary for Christians to appear in courts for justice; Paul himself appealed to Caesar."[2] "The Rabbis taught the Jews never to take a case before the Gentiles";[3] and there were reasons excellent enough why the Christians should have likewise stayed out of pagan courts, except through the utmost necessity. Not only were the Christians more competent in an ethical sense, but the use of pagan courts would involve oath-taking in the names of pagan deities and other practices abhorrent to Christians. [1] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on First Corinthians (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 74. [2] George W. DeHoff, Sermons on First Corinthians (Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1947), p. 56. [3] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. T. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1058. Verse 2 Or know ye not that the saints shall judge the world and if the world is judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?Or know ye not ... These words are the key to understanding this difficult passage. Macknight said: Because this question is repeated six times in this chapter, Locke thinks it was intended as a reproof to the Corinthians, who boasted of the knowledge they received from the false teacher, (but) were extremely ignorant in religious matters.[4]Dummelow unhesitatingly interpreted this and the two following verses as sarcasm on Paul's part: They appeal to the "knowledge" of the Corinthians, who were puffed up with spiritual pride; and in their conceit had spoken of their hope to judge men and angels. If this be their expectation surely they can judge in matters of daily life.[5]This interpretation makes sense and is supported by many circumstances. First, the matter of human beings judging men and angels is just such a thing as would have been advocated by the conceited false teachers in Corinth; but there are many other reasons: (1) The greatest importance attaches to the words "know ye not," which occur ten times in the letters of Paul to the Corinthians, and only twice in all the rest.[6] Farrar says that "(these words) are a fitting rebuke for those who took for knowledge their obvious ignorance."[7] Furthermore, this expression occurs six times in this chapter in 1 Corinthians 6:2-3 1 Corinthians 6:9 1 Corinthians 6:15-16 1 Corinthians 6:19; therefore some very special significance attaches to it. This student believes that the words are a sarcastic reference by Paul to conceited arrogance of the Corinthians who professed to "know" so much. (2) All other interpretations involve vast difficulties. Jesus never promised that even apostles would judge angels. The passage in Matthew 19:28 speaks of their "judging the twelve tribes of Israel"; and, as Morris noted, "There is no record of Christ having said that all believers would share in that."[8](3) The notion that people will judge angels, except in the most poetic sense, as in the thought of their doing so through preaching the gospel, or through their godly living, etc.; such a notion raises impossible questions. What angels shall people judge? Does it mean the devil's angels? They have already been judged and cast down and reserved in chains of darkness, etc. (2 Peter 2:4). True, Peter said, "reserved unto judgment," but this means "until the judgment day," their sentence only being reserved and their judgment already determined. (4) Without going into all the fanciful interpretations heaped upon these words, this writer confesses full agreement with Adam Clarke who said: This place is generally understood to imply that the redeemed of the Lord shall be, on the great day, assessors with him in judgment; and shall give their award in the determinations of his justice. On reviewing this subject, I am fully of the opinion that this cannot be the meaning of these words; and that the interpretation is clogged with a multitude of absurdities.[9]Thus, it is believed that the matter of Christians judging men and angels is no valid Christian doctrine at all, but the speculative nonsense of the vainglorious experts in Greek philosophy at Corinth. (5) Christians themselves will be judged at the last day; and in 1 Corinthians 4:4, Paul had just declared that the one who judges "is the Lord." Although it is said of saints that they shall "reign" with Christ, it is nowhere said that they shall judge with him. Despite many learned opinions to the contrary, therefore, this writer strongly inclines to the views expressed above. [4] James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles and Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1969), p. 84. [5] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 901. [6] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 192. [7] Ibid. [8] Leon Morris, Tyndale Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), p. 94. [9] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and Porter, 1831), Vol. VI, p. 216. Verse 3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have to judge things pertaining to this life, do ye set them to judge who are of no account in the church?Paraphrase: You who know all about judging angels in the last day, how about judging some of these petty disputes you are disgracefully airing in the courts, of the pagans? And in your practice of resolving these little earthly matters, how is it that you set the pagan judges over such trivialities, such judges being of no account at all in the church, as they are not members of it. If the sarcastic vein is denied here, the rendering of the words "do ye set" would be imperative, that is, a command that they should choose some humble member of the congregation to be a judge of disputes. In such an interpretation, which is by no means unreasonable, the admonition would stress the rejection of value judgments of the world, letting the humble decide, instead of the mighty. Taking the words "do ye not know" as meaning "of course, it is a fact, requires some kind of thesis on just "how" the saints are going to judge the earth. Thus, Johnson explained such judging metaphorically: "The saints shall judge the world, because of their union with the Messiah, to whom all judgment is committed."[10]Shore likewise took the judging to be figurative, "arising out of the apostle's intense realization of the unity of Christ and his Church Triumphant."[11] McGarvey wrote, "The saints will only participate as mystically united with Christ the judge."[12]Before leaving this subject, a word with regard to Daniel 7:22 is appropriate: The passage reads: Until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. The judge in this place is mentioned in the first clause, being the Ancient of Days; and it was his judgment which was given to the saints, the same being a judgment upon their behalf, and not a judgment made by them. The great passage in Matthew 25:31-46 is in complete harmony with this interpretation of Dan 7:22. In all probability, the false teachers at Corinth had indulged in some very wild speculations. [10] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 604. [11] T. Teignmouth Shore, Ellicott's Commentary on the Holy Bible (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), p. 303. [12] J. W. McGarvey, op cit., p. 75. Verse 5 I say this to move you to shame. What, cannot there be found among you one wise man who shall be able to decide between his brethren?To move you to shame ... The sharpness of Paul's biting sarcasm in the previous three verses was no doubt keenly felt in Corinth; and by this expression Paul means, "I meant for it to hurt." However unusual the explanation offered here with regard to those Corinthian saints "judging angels" may seem to Christians today, there was probably no one in Corinth who could have failed to know what Paul meant. Wise man ... to decide ... In this clause, Paul dropped the sarcasm for a moment, asking, "Why don't you appoint one of the wiser members to settle such disputes?" Thus it appears that Paul could not have meant in 1 Corinthians 6:4 that church members who were of "no account" should be entrusted with such an assignment. The apostles themselves when appointing brethren for such a purpose demanded that the ones appointed should be men "full of the Spirit and wisdom" (Acts 6:3). Thus, here is another strong reason for accepting the thesis that Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 6:2-4 were spoken in irony. Verse 6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before unbelievers.Ellicott's paraphrase of this is: "Your dragging these disputes before the tribunals of the heathen would imply that it is not possible to find a Christian friend to settle these trivial disputes."[13]ENDNOTE: [13] Ellicott, as quoted in One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1972), in loco. Verse 7 Nay, already it is altogether a fault with you, that ye have lawsuits one with another. Why not rather take wrong? why not rather be defrauded?Passing beyond the question of "where" their lawsuits should be settled, Paul in this rebuked them for having any "lawsuits with one another." The Christian is of a different temperament from the man who is always screaming about his "rights," it being a far better way of life to "go the second mile ... give the cloak also ... and turn the other cheek" (Matthew 5:38-42). Verse 8 Nay, but ye yourselves do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.There were some in the Corinthian congregation who made a habit of defrauding their brethren, using sinful devices, procuring advantage by the instrumentality of the pagan system of justice. Such persons would have been those who were skilled in such lawsuits, or those who through some circumstance might have enjoyed preferment in such courts. In any case, some of the Christians were being defrauded by other members of the church. Verse 9 Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.A vast proportion of the whole Corinthian population participated in such sins as are catalogued here; and the prevalence of such wickedness throughout the ancient empire resulted in its total destruction, after these debaucheries had run their course; but it was not the destruction of an empire that Paul had in view here; it was the loss of souls. The various actions mentioned in this paragraph are designated as unrighteousness. The people who continue in such wickedness "shall not inherit the kingdom of God." Fornicators ... is a general term for several kinds of sexual vice. It is here made the head of a shameful list of sins; and, in 1 Corinthians 6:12, Paul returned to a fuller discussion of it. Idolators ... In context, this referred to the patrons of the temple of Aphrodite atop the Acro Corinthus which dominated the Corinthian scene. As Halley said, "A thousand public prostitutes, kept at public expense, were always ready (in the temple) for immoral indulgence as worship to their goddess!"[14] In such an atmosphere, some of the Corinthians were finding it difficult to adjust to the strict code of Christian morality. Adulterers ... has special reference to persons not faithful to the marriage vows. Effeminate ... Macknight wrote that this word is translated from a Greek word meaning "catamite,"[15] the technical word for "a boy used in pederasty."[16] "Those wretches who suffered this abuse were likewise called pathics, and affected the dress and behavior of women."[17] Catamites were the passive partners in sodomy. Abusers of themselves with men ... were the sodomites. Regarding the passive and active homosexuals referred to in these words, it should be remembered that an apostle of Jesus Christ condemned such persons in the judgment that they shall not inherit the kingdom of God. What is to be thought of churches which not only condone this sin, but in widely publicized cases have actually ordained homosexuals to the ministry? It is the judgment of this writer that churches exhibiting such a total disregard of the New Testament have, in so doing, forfeited all identity with Christianity. William Barclay's masterful discussion of homosexuality should be read by every Christian. This was the cancer in Greek life that invaded Rome, and brought the vaunted empire to destruction. Fourteen of the first fifteen Roman emperors practiced this vice; others guilty of it were Socrates and Plato. Nero castrated and married a boy called Sporus, which he held as his wife, and at the same time married Pythagoras and called him his husband! Barclay's conclusion may not be denied that: In this particular vice in the time of the early church, the world was lost to shame; and there can be little doubt that that was one of the main causes of its degeneracy and the final collapse of its civilization.[18]Thieves ... covetous ... drunkards ... revilers ... extortioners ... Significantly, Paul classed thieves and extortioners as equally criminal, the latter referring to organized, "white-collar" crime, and thievery to common pilferage. Covetousness... is the inordinate desire, or love, of money, the same being a ruling passion, not only with the unregenerated, but also with many Christians themselves, who despite their prosperity give little or nothing to the church or philanthropy. This vice is rated with idolatry, sodomy, extortion, etc., being essentially a denial of God in human life. Drunkards ... Who is a drunkard? The "wisdom" of this age recognizes no such character, the same having been elevated in the popular mind to the status of "an alcoholic"! As such he is not blameworthy in any degree, but merely suffering from "a disease," the same required to be treated, tolerated, and even appreciated by the community. This is merely a part of the blindness of worldly wisdom. No man can become an alcoholic except by his own repeated violations of the Christian law of sobriety. While it may be true, of course, but only in a sense, that drink No. 5,689 is a disease, drink No. 1 is a moral problem. The burning liquors on sale today are not fit for human consumption; and the use of any of them, even socially, is reprehensible. This writer does not expect social drinkers to approve of this viewpoint; but there is actually no intelligent denial of it. If one is really concerned with living the Christian life, far the best thing for him to do is to deny beverage alcohol any place whatever in his life. The whole Moslem world has known for centuries the true nature of the curse of alcohol, making abstinence from it a cardinal rule of their faith. [14] Henry H. Halley, Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1927), p. 546. [15] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 88. [16] Britannica World Language Dictionary (New York: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1959). [17] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 88. [18] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1954), p. 60. Verse 11 And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.Such were some of you ... This was intended by Paul to call attention to the conditions from which they had been rescued by Christ. But ye are washed ... sanctified ... justified ... This refers to the conversion of the Corinthians. "By `sanctified' is meant, not the progressive course of sanctification, but the consecration to God by baptism."[19] As always, however, the scholars who deny baptism's necessity in any true conversion strive to soften the impact of these words, as in: "Nothing in the context identifies this with baptism."[20] "(They) submitted to baptism as THE SIGN OF THE WASHING away of sin."[21] Etc. Two considerations require the understanding of this place as a reference to Christian baptism, along with the sanctification and justification accomplished in the ceremony itself, when performed Scripturally upon a believing penitent: (1) There is the use of "the middle voice for WASHED, as in Acts 22:16, carrying the meaning of `you had yourselves washed.'"[22] (2) There is the appearance in the verse itself of the trinitarian formula for the administration of baptism. As Guthrie noted: "In the name of ... Christ ... Spirit ... God ..." Note the unconscious Trinitarianism. The words may recall the actual formula used in baptism and the complementary baptism of the Spirit ... There is a reference here to the external and internal essential of baptism.[23]Justification has reference to the status of the believer "in Christ" who by virtue of his identity with the Saviour does not deserve any punishment whatever; it is a total and complete justification bestowed upon the believer when he is baptized "into Christ." [19] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 193. [20] Paul W. Marsh, A New Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 386. [21] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 901. [22] Paul W. Marsh, op. cit., p. 386. [23] Donald Guthrie, op. cit., p. 1059. Verse 12 All things are lawful for me; but not all things are expedient. All things are lawful for me; but I will not be brought under the power of any. Paul here used a catch phrase which evidently had wide acceptance among the Corinthians. The liberty in Christ which made "all things lawful" was a relative, not an absolute principle; and any notion that the existence of appetites justified their gratification was not true then, or ever. "Some of them were evidently quoting this to justify their promiscuous sexual behavior; but Paul positively stated that it did not so apply."[24]ENDNOTE: [24] Henry H. Halley, op. cit., p. 546. Verse 13 Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall bring to naught both it and them. But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.Meats for the belly ... This was probably another current proverb among the Corinthians with the meaning suggested by Marsh. As one indulges an appetite for food, that being the function of the stomach, so should the physical urge for sexual indulgence be gratified. Paul refutes the argument, stomach and food being temporal; but not so the body.[25]But for the Lord ... The purpose of the body is not the gratification of its appetites; but it is for the Lord, a reference to the indwelling of the Spirit mentioned in 1 Corinthians 6:19. Sensuality is neither the highest nor the most satisfying use of the body. "Body" as used here has reference to the whole person including the physical body; and the highest happiness of the person is impossible of attainment through gratification, such happiness deriving only from the proper union between man and his Creator. ENDNOTE: [25] Paul W. Marsh, op. cit., p. 386. Verse 14 And God both raised the Lord, and will raise up us through his power.The resurrection of Christians is promised here, the proof of it already having been demonstrated in the resurrection of Christ. As the resurrection of Christ was bodily, so shall be that of Christians; and, in this light, an eternal purpose with reference to the body itself is indicated, the same being a telling argument against wasting the physical body through lust and sensuality. Verse 15 Know ye not that your bodies are members of Christ? and shall I then take away the members of Christ, and make them members of a harlot? God forbid.Know ye not ... is still being used sarcastically in this passage, not in the sense of denying that Christians' bodies are members of Christ, but as protesting the incongruity of debasing such members in immorality. Paul's use of "body" in this passage makes it certain that the physical body is meant. Verse 16 Or know ye not that he that is joined to a harlot is one body? for, The twain, saith he, shall become one flesh.Or know ye not ... carries the thought of "With all of your conceited knowledge, has it never occurred to you that participation with a harlot makes the participant and the harlot one flesh?" Paul proved it by the reference to Genesis 2:24. As Dummelow said, however, The words spoken by God (in the reference cited) were first spoken of marriage, and are here applied to an unholy union. Paul does not place the two on the same plane but only points out that in this one respect they are similar.[26]ENDNOTE: [26] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 901. Verse 17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.One spirit ... The true Christian, having been joined to the Lord through his conversion from sin, is one in spirit with the Lord, seeking in all things to conform his thoughts, words and deeds to such actions as are approved by the Lord and in harmony with the Holy Spirit. Verse 18 Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.Flee fornication ... For further remarks on this, see my Commentary on Hebrews, p. 325. The sin of fornication is against: (a) God (Genesis 39:9), (b) one's body (as here), (c) the church, (d) the marriage institution, (e) the life of the nation, and (f) the very soul itself (Proverbs 6:32). Against his own body ... Although Paul doubtless had specifically in mind the impact of sin against the physical body, his words are true in the widest possible application. No matter how "body" is understood, whether the physical body, the body of the family, the body of the Lord, the body of the social order, or even any corporate body - fornication is "against" any and all of these, many a corporation having been wrecked through fornication. Verse 19 Or know ye not that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which ye have from God? and ye are not your own.What Paul had affirmed earlier with reference to the church's being the temple of the Holy Spirit is here declared to be true of individual members of the church. God's temple belongs to God, and therefore the individual who partakes of the nature of God's temple belongs not to himself but to God; and thus he is not free to indulge his lusts and appetites but is obligated to conform his activities to those things which will honor and glorify the Lord whose property the Christian is. For extended comments on "The Indwelling Spirit," see my Commentary on Romans, p. 291, and on "The Witness of the Spirit," see my Commentary on Romans, p. 298. Verse 20 For ye were bought with a price: glorify God therefore in your body.Ye were bought with a price ... has reference to the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ which is the purchase price of the church (Acts 20:28). Glorify God in your body ... identifies the body as an instrument to be used by the Christian in the service of God and for his glory. The honor of the physical body is also implicit in such a view. In true Christianity, there is no hatred of the body, no torturing of the flesh, and no asceticism. Guthrie pointed out that Paul's language here "reflects a contemporary custom"[27] prevalent in Corinth. Resort to a temple prostitute meant resort to a strange god; and the participants in temple immorality became the property of the god of that temple, the pagan society holding such persons to be free or "liberated"! "Our redemption by Christ from the enslavement of sin was no such fiction."[28][27] Donald Guthrie, op. cit., p. 1059. [28] Ibid. "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE " Chapter Six IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To see how brethren in Christ should settle their differences 2) To be impressed with the power of the gospel to transform the lives of people 3) To appreciate the proper use of our bodies in service to God SUMMARY Having seen that the brethren at Corinth were often filled with strife, envy and divisions (1 Corinthians 3:3), and that Paul frequently describes them as being "puffed up" (1 Corinthians 4:6 1 Corinthians 4:18), it is not surprising that they were also guilty of the fault Paul deals with in this chapter: taking brethren to court before unbelievers. With an expression of shock and disbelief, he instructs them through a series of questions designed to help them see how absurd and wrong such a thing was (1 Corinthians 6:1-11). The latter half of the chapter deals with what must have been a major problem in a city like Corinth: immorality. What might have been acceptable behavior with their bodies prior to becoming Christians is no longer acceptable, for even their bodies belong to the Lord, whose Spirit indwells them, and who will one day raise them from the dead by His own power. Therefore they should glorify God with their bodies (1 Corinthians 6:12-20). OUTLINE I. TAKING TO COURT (1 Corinthians 6:1-11) A. PAUL'S REBUKE OF THIS (1 Corinthians 6:1-6)1. Dare they take their personal problems to be decided upon by the unrighteous? (1 Corinthians 6:1) a. When the saints will one day judge the world? (1 Corinthians 6:2) b. When the saints will one day judge angels? (1 Corinthians 6:3 a) c. How much more should they be able to judge matters of this life! (1 Corinthians 6:3 b) 2. More rebuke in the form of questions (1 Corinthians 6:4-5) a. Do they seek the advice of those least esteemed by the church to judge? (1 Corinthians 6:4) b. Don't they have even one wise man among them who could serve as judge? (1 Corinthians 6:5) 3. The shame of it all: brethren suing each other before unbelievers! (1 Corinthians 6:6) B. FURTHER BETWEEN (1 Corinthians 6:7-11)1. It is bad enough that they had lawsuits to begin with! (1 Corinthians 6:7-8) a. It would be better to accept wrong and be defrauded (1 Corinthians 6:7) b. But no, they found themselves doing wrong and defrauding their own brethren! (1 Corinthians 6:8) 2. A warning and a reminder (1 Corinthians 6:9-11) a. The unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9-10) b. They had been such, but had been washed, sanctified, and justified in the name of Jesus and by the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 6:11) II. GOD WITH YOUR BODY (1 Corinthians 6:12-20) A. THE BODY IS FOR THE LORD (1 Corinthians 6:12-14)1. What may be lawful may not be helpful, and should not overpower us (1 Corinthians 6:12) 2. The stomach may need food, but that need is only temporary (1 Corinthians 6:13 a) 3. The body, which is not for sexual immorality but for the Lord, will be raised up by the power of God (1 Corinthians 6:13 b-14) B. OUR BODIES ARE TO BE MEMBERS OF CHRIST, NOT A HARLOT! (1 Corinthians 6:15-18)1. Shall we take the members of Christ and make them one with a harlot? (1 Corinthians 6:15-16) 2. No, for we are to be one in spirit with the Lord (1 Corinthians 6:17) 3. Therefore flee immorality which is a sin against your own bodies (1 Corinthians 6:18) C. THE BODY IS THE TEMPLE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT (1 Corinthians 6:19-20)1. The body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is from God, and is in it (1 Corinthians 6:19 a) 2. You are not your own, you were bought at a price (1 Corinthians 6:19-20 a) 3. Therefore glory God in your body (1 Corinthians 6:20 b) REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER 1) List the main points of this chapter- Taking Brethren To Court (1 Corinthians 6:1-11) - Glorifying God With Your Body (1 Corinthians 6:12-20) 2) What was the nature of the problem being discussed in the first part of this chapter? (1 Corinthians 6:6)- Brethren taking each other to court, before unbelievers 3) What is Paul's solution to such a problem? (1 Corinthians 6:5)- Find a wise man among brethren to decide the issues 4) What would have been better than displaying their differences before the eyes of the world? (1 Corinthians 6:7)- For the one in the right to accept wrong, to be defrauded 5) What were some of the Corinthians before they became Christians? (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)- Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, homosexuals, sodomites, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, extortioners 6) Though something may be lawful, what two other criteria does Paul mention which should govern our use of it? (1 Corinthians 6:12)- Is it helpful? - Does it overpower us? 7) To whom does our bodies belong? (1 Corinthians 6:15)- Christ 8) What is the body of one who is a Christian? (1 Corinthians 6:19)- A temple of the Holy Spirit who is in them 9) What then should we do with our bodies? Why? (1 Corinthians 6:20)- Glorify God - We were bought at a price Questions by E.M. Zerr On 1st Corinthians Chapter 61. What is general subject of this chapter? 2. Are human laws condemned? 3. Did Paul ever endorse such law? 4. What is it he condemns here? 5. Does he forbid trying of cases altogether? 6. Where should these cases be taken? 7. Give his proof of their right to judge. 8. Were the Corinthians among these ? 9. What is said about angels? 10. Tell what matters are under consideration. 11. What words are the basis for your answer? 12. Is verse 4 a command? 13. What caused Paul to speak to their shame? 14. Point out the irony in verse 4. 15. Who are the unbelievers in 6th verse ? 16. Instead of going to law what should they suffer? 17. Instead of so doing what was their conduct? 18. Who will fail of the Kingdom of God ? 19. Tell the precaution Paul here gives. 20. What words in verse 9 refer to sodomites ? 21. How serious is the sin of covetousness? 22. What is an extortioner? 23. Among whom had such things been practiced? 24. What event had changed them ? 25. In what authority had it been accomplished ? 26. Was Paul at liberty to do as he pleased? 27. When should some lawful things not be practiced ? 28. Give a meaning of “ expedient.” 29. What did Paul determine about his body? 30. Does this apply to things legislated on by the Lord 31. What will God finally do with these things? 32. Does this mean they are necessarily wrong? 33. State the relation of the body and fornication. 34. Of the body and the Lord. 35. State the promise about being raised. 36. What fact is given as evidence? 37. Of whom are our bodies as members? 38. In abusing our bodies who else is concerned? 39. Can a Christian be one flesh with a harlot ? 40. Cite the scripture for your answer. 41. How many spirits with the Lord? 42. State our proper attitude toward fornication. 43. How does this sin differ from others? 44. What service do our bodies render the Holy Spirit ? 45. From whom does this Spirit come ? 46. What does Paul say about our personal ownership? 47. Give his reasons for the statement. 48. Was anything given in exchange for possession? 49. What use should we make of our bodies? 50. To what other part of our being does this apply? 1 Corinthians 6:4. The original Greek manuscript did not have punctuations, hence the question mark does not show here, but the inflection of the words in the composition does indicate the form of the sentence. It will help in seeing the idea of this verse to quote the version in Living Oracles which is as follows: "If, then, you have the cognizance [decision] of such matters, why do you set those to judge who are of no account in the congregation?" The congregation had very little esteem for the judges in .those secular courts, yet these brethren who had some personal dispute over a temporal matter, were going to these courts for settlement instead of letting the church decide it (according to Matthew 18:17). 1 Corinthians 6:2. Jude is from IMMO. The outstanding definitions of Thayer are, "To approve, esteem; to be of opinion, deem, think; to determine, resolve, decree; to pronounce an opinion concerning right and wrong." These definitions set forth the idea that the saints (Christians) are to declare the laws by which the world at present is to be ruled religiously, and is to be judged at last. But they could not do this correctly without an inspired law for their guidance which was given by the apostles. That is why Jesus told them (Matthew 19:28) that they were to "sit upon twelve thrones, judging [Immo] the twelve tribes of [spiritual] Israel." And after the apostles produced this law by inspiration, the church was to perpetuate the rule under the apostolic teaching. That is why Paul taught in Ephesians 3:10 that it was "by the church the manifold wisdom of God" was to be made known. The reasoning of Paul is that if the Lord thought his disciples were wise enough to apply His law on the great matters pertaining to the righteous life now and the judgment to come, they should be able to decide such small matters as disputes over temporal transactions. 1 Corinthians 6:3. On the same basis as the preceding paragraph, Christians are teaching and applying the divine law that sets forth the judgment of angels. A part of that law is shown in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6, that tells of the judgment to be pronounced against those angels that sinned. It is in this sense that we shall judge angels, not that any man will literally participate in the procedure at the last day. But the same point is made as that made in the preceding verse, namely, if Christians are entrusted with teaching and applying the law that is to be imposed upon the former inhabitants of Heaven, they certainly should be able to decide matters pertaining to the inhabitants of this life or which concern only temporal life. 1 Corinthians 6:5-6. This paragraph, following immediately upon the statement of the preceding one, shows that it was not an instruction as to what they should do, but was a criticism in question form of what they were doing, which Paul says was shameful. 1 Corinthians 6:7. Instead of disgracing the church before the secular courts, a brother would better take the loss he thinks the other is trying to impose on him. 1 Corinthians 6:8. It would be wrong to go to law even when a brother was being defrauded, but it is worse when he takes the case to court in order to despoil another of his rights, as some of these Corinthians were doing. 1 Corinthians 6:9. Having dealt with the specific evil concerning going to law, the apostle broadens his teaching to consider various forms of evil. Chief among the corruptions that existed among the people of Corinth was the different forms of immorality that were practiced by many with very little concern as to right or wrong. In fact, much of that was a part of the heathen religious ceremonies of that country, which accounts for the indifferent attitude that even the professed disciples of Christ showed on the subject. The present verse, also some others in the chapter, will show us how much concern the apostle felt over it. The word effeminate and the phrase abusers of themselves with mankind both refer to sodomites. The second means a male who uses another male in the place of a female, and the first means a male who permits his body to be so used. (See the notes at Romans 1:27, volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary, on the subject in the italicized phrase.) 1 Corinthians 6:10. Most of the characters named are so well known as not to need detailed comment. Revilers are those who use false degrading speech against others, and extortioners are men who acquire unjust gain from others on one pretense or another. 1 Corinthians 6:11. Some of the Corinthians had been guilty .of these evils, but the Gospel had shown them the way to be redeemed from such practices. Yet they were in constant danger of going back to them if they were not vigilant, hence the apostle is sending them this teaching contained in several of the verses. Washed, sanctified and justified all refer to the work of becoming a Christian, which was completed by having their bodies washed with pure water (Hebrews 10:22). 1 Corinthians 6:12. The original word for expedient is defined "profitable" in Thayer's lexicon. A thing could not be profitable that was not lawful, but it might be lawful and not profitable. This verse has special reference to foods of all kinds. (See next verse.) There is no direct legislation against any kind of food (Romans 14:1-3; 1 Timothy 4:4), but it would not be profitable for a Christian to become a slave to his appetite, and Paul says he will not be brought under it. 1 Corinthians 6:13. A more convenient wording of the first clause would be, "foods for the body, and the body for foods." These two are perfectly adapted to each other, but they are both to be done away with, which is the meaning of destroy, and that is why Paul declared in the preceding verse that he would not allow himself to become enslaved by his appetite. This teaching is true independent of any other subject, but Paul is using it to introduce another point about the right use of the body. The same physical use is made of the body in the act of fornication as in lawful intimacy, but the Lord did not intend for man to abuse his body in that way, any more than He intended for him to abuse the use of food for the body. It is easy to see why the apostle is again dealing with the subject of immorality, in view of the prevalence of that evil in Corinth. 1 Corinthians 6:14. The destruction of the body mentioned in the preceding verse, did not mean its annihilation, but that its temporal form requiring food would be discontinued. The human body is made in the image of God, and its importance in His estimation is great, so much so that it will be raised from the dead at the last day. 1 Corinthians 6:15. The value of a man's body is still in the apostle's mind, and he declares it is a member of Christ; not literally, of course, but a part of that great body of which Christ is a member. In view of such a sacred relation, Paul deplores the sin of using the body to unite with an immoral woman, again referring to the loose morals being practiced by so many in Corinth. 1 Corinthians 6:16. We know the apostle was not using that statement in some special or strained sense, for he supports it by quoting the words of God and Christ where we know the language applies to the intimate relation of the sexes, the only "ceremony" the Lord ever gave as a basis of marriage. (See Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5-6.) 1 Corinthians 6:17. The intimate relations of a male and female make them one body, and the faithful joining of a disciple to the person of Christ makes them one spirit. 1 Corinthians 6:18. Flee fornication. The prevalence of immorality in Corinth, and its effects on the disciples of Christ, continues to be one of the apostle's chief concerns. To fee from a thing means more than merely not partaking; it means to run away as from a poisonous adder. Every sin refers to sins of a material or physical nature, not that immorality is the only sin that a man can commit within his own personality, for when he harbors filthy thoughts, that is a sin within his own person. However, they are not bodily sins, while fornication is: it constitutes a sin against his body that was made in the image of God. 1 Corinthians 6:19. In chapter 3:16 Paul tells the Corinthians that "ye are the temple of God," and it means they as a congregation. In our present verse he tells the same brethren that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost. There is no discrepancy, for the church is made up of individuals, whose bodies must be kept pure in order that the church as a whole may be pure. This is why God claims possession of the bodies of the saints; it is in order that His spiritual body may be right. 1 Corinthians 6:20. If a person wishes to own something he will pay a price for it, and the value of the price will depend on the estimation he has of the thing to be bought. God rated the persons (both fleshly and spiritual) of the disciples so highly, that He paid the price of the blood of Christ for them (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 1:18-19). It is hence the duty of Christians to use their bodies and spirits (minds) in such a way as to glorify God. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1 Corinthians 7 1 Corinthians 7:1-40 RIGHTS AND OF MARRIED LIFE 1 Corinthians 7:1-7 1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote:—The Corinthians had written to the apostle inquiring in reference to certain matters of duty. Among others, the relation of husband and wife, when they could separate, when they were guilty of fornication, and other questions connected with the marriage relation. It is good for a man not to touch a woman.—Not to be connected with woman in marriage. This he teaches not as a general truth, for he does not contradict God, who said: “ It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him.” (Genesis 2:18.) In verse 26, he explains, “ that this is good by reason of the distress that is upon us, namely, that it is good for a man to be as he is.” The “ dis¬tress” means the persecution then raging against the Christians. On account of these it was best if a man could restrain his lusts not to be married. There are some special cases, as of Paul himself, in which a man can devote himself without the care and distractions of a family to the service of God. But more evil than good comes of attempting it by those who cannot be continent. It is true now, as in the beginning, that “ it is not good that the man should be alone.” And the universality of marriage is a mark of the morality and virtue of a community. 2 But, because of fornications, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.—Recognizing that but few men can be continent and that the lusts with men and women are strong and liable to lead to sin, he tells them the best way to avoid sin is for every man to have his own wife and every woman to have her own husband. He rec-ognizes that both men and women are liable to be led into sin by the strength of lusts. They are both restricted to one companion. 3 Let the husband render unto the wife her due:—After their marriage, the husband must satisfy the wife in her de¬sires, lest she be tempted to do wrong with other men. and likewise also the wife unto the husband.—The wife must please the husband in his desires lest he be tempted to seek unlawful gratification of his passions with other women. 4 The wife hath not power over her own body, but the husband:—The wife has not power over her own body to refuse the marriage privileges to the husband. and likewise also the husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife.—The husband has not the power over his body to refuse the marriage privileges to the wife, neither has he the right to bestow them upon others. In the marriage obligations they surrender the power over their bodies to the other. [Marriage is not a capricious union, but a holy bond, in which separate ownership of person ceases, and neither without the other realizes the perfect ideal of man. This equality of the sexes is clearly presented as the way to keep marriage undefiled.] 5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be by consent for a season,—They are not to deprive each other of these marriage rights to which each is entitled except by mutual consent. that ye may give yourselves unto prayer,—It is proper by agreement to refrain from indulgence in this fleshly enjoyment or gratification while engaged in special seasons of prayer. After the period of self-denial has passed they must come together, lest through inability to restrain their lusts, Satan should tempt one or both to sin with others. 6 But this I say by way of concession, not of commandment.—[He leaves the details 'of their lives, whether married or unmarried, to their individual circumstances, for what is suitable in one case may be the reverse in another.] 7 Yet I would that all men were even as I myself.—He again expresses the wish that all were as he was, able to live without marriage. Howbeit each man hath his own gift from God, one after this manner, and another after that.—One has ability or strength to control one appetite or lust, another is gifted with abilities to do some kind of work, another after a different kind. So each must act as he is able. He who can live and control himself without marriage should do so. One who is not able to control himself had better marry. 8 But I say to the unmarried and to widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.—It is good for them to remain single even as he did. [Paul had vividly before his mind the trials and persecutions to which the Christians were sub¬jected. What was expedient “ by reason of the distress” might not be desirable under other conditions. And similarly “ good” might cease to be so under changed conditions. Elsewhere Paul says, “ Let marriage be had in honor among all.” (Hebrews 13:4.) And he speaks of marriage with the greatest respect when he elevates it to the loftiest position by employing it as a type of the union between Christ and the church. (Ephesians 5:23-32.) He also pronounces the prohibition of marriage to be one of the signs of the great apostasy. (1 Timothy 4:3.) We are, therefore, driven to the conclusion that the statement here in no way conflicts with “ it is not good that the man should be alone.” (Genesis 2:18.) A single life is good in the sense of being in itself honorable, and under cer¬tain circumstances expedient.] 9 But if they have not continency, let them marry:—If they have not power over themselves to restrain their sexual passions, let them marry. for it is better to marry than to bum.— It was better to marry even under the distress in which they were living than to burn with lusts [raging, consuming, and exciting] which they were not able to subdue. [The one, though disadvanta¬geous, is innocent, the other is sinful.] 10 But unto the married I give charge, yea not I, but the Lord,—He now gives command from the Lord to those already married. Under the law of Moses they had been permitted to be separated when displeased. But Jesus told the Pharisees that Moses permitted this because of the hardness of their hearts, but it was not God’ s law of marriage as ordained in the beginning. The man must leave all others and cleave unto his wife, “ and the two shall become one flesh.” (Matthew 19:3-9.) That the wife depart not from her husband—Paul, follow¬ing the teaching of Jesus, commands the wife not to depart from her husband. 11 (but should she depart, let her remain unmarried,—If she and her husband cannot live harmoniously together let her re¬main unmarried. She is not permitted to marry again. That would be adulterous. or else be reconciled to her husband) ;—If the wife who has separated from her husband finds that, after all, she cannot live a single life in purity the only course open to her is to be reconciled to the husband whom she has injured. The same thing applies to the husband under similar circumstances. and that the husband leave not his wife.—This passage un¬doubtedly teaches that the believer is to take no steps to hinder the restoration of the marriage relations, but to be ready to seek to restore them. Divorce is intended to make the separa¬tion permanent and to make unlawful marriage possible. No Christian can do this. Nothing severs the marriage relationship between Christians save the sin of adultery. No man or woman with a living wife or husband not guilty of adultery can marry another without adultery, and no lapse of time will purge the cohabitation of its sinfulness. The one who separates from the other tempts the other to commit adultery. One in a state of sin cannot become a Christian or live a Christian life without making an earnest endeavor to correct that wrong. Repentance involves the confession of all our sins as occasion may demand, and of our undoing our wrongs, as far as in our power. A failure to do so shows a lack of faith from the heart and of genuine repentance towards God. Neither the woman nor the man with w’ hom she cohabits can live the Christian life without ceasing their adulterous relationship. No service is acceptable to God unless done because God requires it, and done to obey him. The great trouble on this question is not a failure to understand the teaching of the Bible, but a lack of faith and courage to do what it requires. 12 But to the rest say I, not the Lord:—[The contrast here and in verse 10 is not between commands given by Paul as an inspired apostle and as a private individual. He expressly claims that all “ the things which I write unto you, that they are the commandment of the Lord” (14 : 37), and he speaks of that knowledge into which he was guided as given by the Holy Spirit, as “ by the word of the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 4:15). He must therefore not be regarded as here claiming apostolic authority for some things he writes and not for others. The real point of the contrast is between a subject on which the Lord while on earth gave direct instruction, and another subject on which he now gives his commands through an inspired apostle, as was promised by Jesus on the night of his be¬trayal : “ Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth.” (John 16 John 13.) The Lord had given instructions regarding divorce (Matthew 5:31-32 Matthew 19:3-9; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18), and Paul here has only reiterated what he had already commanded.] If any brother hath an unbelieving wife, and she is content to dwell with him, let him not leave her.—Hitherto his direction has been to them when both husband and wife were Christians. He now introduces another class. Sometimes in the preaching of the gospel, a husband would believe and the wife would not. The fact that the provision is here made by Paul for them to separate when the unbeliever is unwilling to live with the believer, with the direction that a widow may marry “ only in the Lord” (verse 39), and that Christians are forbidden to be “ unequally yoked with unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 6:14)— to be so tied to them as to be controlled by them— clearly suggests that it is not well for believers to marry un-believers, nor to enter into any relation by which they would be controlled by unbelievers. But he gives directions to those who found themselves so married to them. If the unbelieving wife is content to dwell with the believing husband, let him not depart. 13 And the woman that hath an unbelieving husband, and he is content to dwell with her, let her not leave her husband.—The same law applies to husband and wife alike; but it seems to me if it had been anticipated that believers would marry unbelievers such provisions would not have been made for separation when one becomes a believer after marriage. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.—What is meant by the unbelieving being sanctified by the believing companion has been much discussed. Macknight says: “ When infidels are married to Christians, if they have a strong affection for their Christian spouses, they are thereby sanctified to them, they are fitted to continue married to them; because their affection to the Christian party will in¬sure to that party the faithful performance of every duty; and that if the marriages of infidels and Christians were to be dis¬solved, they would cast away their children as unclean; that is, losing their affection for them, they would expose them after the barbarous custom of the Greeks, or at least neglect their education. But that by continuing their marriages, their children are holy; they are preserved as sacred pledges of their mutual love, and educated with care.” That is, if an unbelieving husband or wife is regarded so unclean that you cannot live with him or her, you must for the same reason regard your unbelieving children as unclean, but now under the rule he lays down, they are holy. The unbeliever is held as so sanctified by being one flesh with the believer, the relation is to be borne by the believer. Both husband and wife in the marriage relationship are sanctified or made sacred to each other. So when the unbeliever is willing, the marriage is to be held sacred. [It means that the marriage relation is sanctified so that there is no need of divorce. If either husband or wife is a believer and the other agrees to remain, the marriage is holy and need not be set asunder. If it is otherwise, their children are illegitimate. If the relations of the parents be holy, the child’ s birth must be holy also (not illegitimate.)] 15 Yet if the unbelieving departeth, let him depart:—[If the desire for separation is pressed by the unbeliever, making it intolerable for the Christian, he or she must be passive; and, if the unbeliever withdraws from such a union, let him not be hindered in so doing. The unbeliever is not constrained to keep up the union.] the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases: —There has been doubt as to the meaning of this expression. Does it mean that bond is not binding in such cases? The Roman Catholic Church and most of the Protestant churches allow remarriage in the case of willful desertion. The meaning most likely is that the believer can regard the unbeliever’ s act as final, and need not seek to live with him, while yet in such cases remarriage is not approved. The Christian should be prepared to restore the marriage relation when possible, and this certainly is safe ground. If, however, the unbeliever should marry another person, he would by the act commit adultery and in that case the wife or husband would be at lib¬erty to marry. Just here I wish to emphasize the thought that there is so much looseness in the churches on the marriage relation, so little regard for Scripture teaching, it is well to guard the point that the violation of the marriage vow not only must exist, but it must be the cause and ground of separation— or the adultery of the unbeliever as in the case before us— to justify remarriage of the separated party. Frequently the guilt of a husband is known, the crime is condoned by the wife, she lives with him knowing his guilt. Finally other causes lead to a separation; and then, when she wishes to marry again, the infidelity of the husband, which did not cause the separation, is made the excuse to justify the new marriage. Unless the separation took place on account of the lewdness of the companion, it cannot be ground for remarriage. Frequently a woman lives with a lewd husband who is one with a harlot. She becomes one with him who is one with a harlot— lives this life of doubtful virtue, and some other trouble grows up. She separates from him for this, and makes his lewdness merely the excuse for marrying again. This is not allowable. She is in adultery all the time. Not only must she have separated from the former husband because of his adultery, to jus¬tify her, but the present husband must have been satisfied that was the cause of it when he married her, else his marriage was in intent and at heart adultery. The intention has everything to do with obedience to the command of God. It must not be an incidental happening to obey God when we go and do as we please, but a clear and distinct purpose to be governed by the law, to justify it. For a man and woman to reck¬lessly rush ahead in marriage, determined to do it, law or no law, and after it is done to look around and see if they can find any ground to justify, does not relieve them from intentional guilt of marrying whether there be law or no law. but God hath called us in peace.— The believer must make all the efforts in his power to live in peace with the unbeliever, sacrifice everything save obedience to God. Jesus said: “ If any man cometh unto me, and hateth not his own father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26.) 16 For how knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband?—If the unbelieving husband so will, the Christian wife must live with him because it is possible that she may be able to save him. “ In like manner, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, even if any obey not the word, they may without the word be gained by the behavior of their wives; beholding your chaste behavior coupled with fear.” (1 Peter 3:1-2.) or how knowest thou, O husband, whether thou shalt save thy wife?—The unbelieving wife may often be won by the godly behavior of the husband. When a believer finds him or herself with an unbeliever, instead of seeking a separation, the believer should live in peace and seek by a godly behavior to win the unbelieving companion to Christ. THE GENERAL JUST SET FORTH APPLIED TO OTHER CIVIL 1 Corinthians 7:17-24 17 Only, as the Lord hath distributed to each man, as God hath called each, so let him walk.—Whatever relation or surrounding one is in when he is called to the belief of the gospel, in that let him abide and seek to do the will of God, striving by his godly walk to win those to salvation with whom he comes in contact. [The mighty effect of the gospel when first proclaimed is only slightly appreciated. The equality of men which it announced; the precious and exceeding great promises which it contained; the short-lived character it ascribed to all earthly things; and the certainty of the coming of the Lord to judge the world in righteousness, which is predicted, produced a commotion in the minds of the people which was never expe¬rienced either before or since. It is no surprise, therefore, that many were disposed to break away from their old relaionships. This was an evil that called for repression. Paul endeavored to convince his readers that their relation to Christ was comparable with any social relation or position not sinful in itself. Their conversion to Christ involved, therefore, no necessity of breaking asunder their social ties. The gospel is not a revolutionary, disorganized element; but one which is designed to eliminate all evil, and exalt and purify that which is good.] And so ordain I in all the churches.— [This principle was of universal application, and so he lays it down authoritatively for all the churches. He now proceeds to give specific instances to which this rule applies.] 18 Was any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised.—[Reference is here made to certain efforts which were attempted by those who were ashamed of having been circumcised.] If any man has been circumcised, let him not seek to become uncircumcised or to be regarded as a Gentile. Hath any been called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.—If a Gentile is called, let him remain one, let him serve God in the relation in which he finds himself, and seek to reach and save whom he can in the relation. 19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing;—[They have no influence either favorable or unfavorable on our relation to God. No man is either the better or worse for being either circumcised or uncircumcised. This, of course, was said with reference to the standing before God in Christ Jesus. Before his coming it could not have been said without contravening the express command of God. (Genesis 17:9-14; Leviticus 12:3.)] Being a Jew does- not commend a man to God neither does it condemn him. The same is true of the Gentile. Circumcision as a family mark is not condemned; but as an act of service to God, it has no weight. The dispensation of which circumcision was the seal was contrary to the people of Israel, “ and he [Christ] hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross.” (Colossians 2:13-15.) but the keeping of the commandments of God.—[The great question concerning which the Christian should be solicitous above everything else is as to whether he brings his heart and life into conformity to the will of God as revealed through Jesus Christ. “ For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith working- through love.” (Galatians 5:6.) “ Faith working through love” and “ keeping the commandments of God” are the same thing. They express the idea of devotion of heart and life under different aspects.] 20 Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called.—He enlarges the thought by commanding every one to remain in the calling or in the relationship in which he was when he was called. Coming to Christ makes him faithful in the calling. [This is not intended to prohibit a man’ s endeavor to better his condition; but that there are certain conditions of life that to the Christian call there is a special form. Such as the great distinctions— national, social, and natural— - on the maintenance of which in any particular age or country the preservation of the principles of liberty and order and their legitimate development in human history mainly depend. Paul says: “ There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female; for ye all are one man in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28.) This enumeration sets before us the three great fundamental conceptions that at once divide and unite the race— that of Jew and Greek, or the national distinction; that of slave and free, or the social distinction; and that of male and female, or the physical distinction. No one should desire to change the status of life on becoming a Christian. Paul was endeavoring to convince his readers that their relation to Christ was compatible with any of the conditions of life enumerated. The gospel is just as well suited to people in one condition as another, and its blessings can be enjoyed in all their fullness equally in any condition of life. They were to continue to be Christians of the kind which God’ s call made them. If they were circumcised— and so God’ s call into Christ made them circumcised Christians— continue so. They were to do nothing which would seem to imply that some other change in addition to their becoming obedient to the gospel was necessary to complete their admission into the fullness of the blessings in Christ.] 21 Wast thou called being a bondservant? care not for it: —Bond servants that are called owe their service to their earthly masters. In serving them they cannot devote their whole time and means to the service of God that they would were they free. [But the fact of their being in slavery did not affect the reality or completeness of their relation to Christ, and their anxiety to escape from bondage was needless.] nay, even if thou canst become free, use it rather.—Some expositors claim that this teaches that if a slave could obtain his liberty he was to avail himself of the opportunity to do so. But such an interpretation is at variance with the whole drift of the argument, which is, that he is not to seek such a change. What Paul does say is that if the Christian slave could be free, he should prefer his condition as a converted slave. Slavery, as well as other positions of life, can be used to the glory of God. This interpretation is in perfect harmony, not only with the rest of the passage, but with all Paul’ s teaching and his universal practice on the subject. [One point which should certainly be well pondered in considering this question is, if one word from Christian teaching could have been quoted at Rome as tending to excite the slaves to revolt, it would have set the Roman Government in direct and active hostility to the faith in Christ. Nor would the danger of preaching the abolition of slavery be confined to that arising from external violence on the part of the Roman Government; but it would have been pregnant with danger to the purity of the church itself. For it is altogether probable that many would have been led to join a communion which would have aided them in securing their social freedom. In these considerations we find ample reasons for the position of non-interference which Paul maintains in regard to slavery. Under a particular and exceptional round of circumstances, the Holy Spirit directed Paul not to interfere with it, but to teach fearlessly those imperishable principles which led in after ages to its extinction. He left slavery, therefore, unassailed, as he did civil relations in general, not asking, in his letter to Philemon, that Onesimus should be set free; but introduced the idea of love, unity, and equality. (1 Corinthians 13:13; Galatians 3:28; Ephesians 6:8; Colossians 4:1; Philemon 1:16.)] 22 For he that was called in the Lord being a bondservant, is the Lord’ s freedman:—God does not require so much from him, so he is the Lord’ s freedman. [The Lord’ s freedman was one set free from service to sin (Romans 6:22) by Christ. These words simply mean that the slave who hears and becomes obedient to “ the faith,” and is thus brought into union with Christ as his Master, is thereby made free (John 8:32 John 8:36) from every kind of bondage; and made free by Christ. So complete is this freedom that it cannot be destroyed or weakened even in civil bondage. He is even free while serving his earthly master to earn the highest possible reward; for the apostle teaches that if slaves do their duty to their earthly masters as to Christ they will receive the reward of the inheritance, for they “ serve the Lord Christ.” (Colossians 3:24.)] likewise he that was called being free, is Christ’ s bondservant.—He is under obligations to devote more of his time and means to the service of God, so is God’ s slave. [The distinction between master and slave is obliterated. To be the Lord’ s freedman and the Lord’ s bond servant are the same thing. The Lord’ s freedman is the one whom the Lord has redeemed from Satan and made his own; and the Lord’ s bond servant is also one whom “ he purchased with his own blood.” (Acts 20:28.) So that master and slave stand on the same level before Christ.] 23 Ye were bought with a price; become not bondservants of men.—Inasmuch as Christ had bought them with his blood, they were his bond servants. Now they were to serve Christ in continuing in submission to their earthly masters with the fidelity with which they served God and as service rendered to God. Paul gives the principle on which the slave was to serve: “ Servants, be obedient unto them that according to the flesh are your masters, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ; not in the way of eye-service, as men-pleasers; but as servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; with good will doing service, as unto the Lord, and not unto men: knowing that whatsoever good things each one doeth, the same shall he receive again from the Lord, whether he be bond or free.” (Ephesians 6:5-8.) The servant is to do service to the earthly master as to the Lord, and God will recompense him for the service done, as though rendered unto him. 24 Brethren, let each man, wherein he was called, therein abide with God.—Here is a summary and reiteration of the principles underlying the instruction contained in this paragraph. Let the bond servant who has become obedient to the faith abide, as regards his social state, as he was. His being a slave came to him without his choice and is powerless to destroy or lessen his Christian liberty or hinder his service to Christ, and his principle only justifies the exhortation here given. ADVICE TO THE IN VIEW OF THEN IN 1 Corinthians 7:25-35 25 Now concerning virgins—Paul here introduces a different, but kindred, subject to that which he has been discussing. He had been discussing the relation of husband and wife. He now turns to that of those not yet given in marriage. I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be trustworthy.—[Paul had no specific word from Jesus on the subject of virgins. They call for special treatment, but he had the command of Jesus concerning divorce to guide him. So he gives no command, but only a judgment, a deliberately formed decision from knowledge (2 Corinthians 8:10), not a mere passing fancy. The language, so far from being a disclaimer of inspiration, is an express claim to help from the Lord in forming this duly considered judgment.] From his familiarity with the teaching of the Lord he gives his judgment as one who has obtained mercy of the Lord to be trustworthy. 26 I think therefore that this is good by reason of the distress that is upon us, namely, that it is good for a man to be as he is.—He says again, on account of the present distress, that it is good for every man to remain as he is, whether married or unmarried. (See note on verse 1.) 27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.—Neither the married nor the unmarried are to seek for a change. [This is an explanation and reassertion of “ to be as he is” in the preced¬ing verse. He dissuades from the spirit of change in consideration of the distress that was pending.] 28 But shouldest thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned.—But if he cannot restrain himself and he marries, he does not sin. And if a virgin marries, she does not sin. But under persecutions, such will have trouble in the flesh. Childbearing, family duties, and obligations will increase the troubles that will come upon them. Yet such shall have tribulation in the flesh: and I would spare you.— He would save them from these added troubles and afflictions, so he gives this advice as prudential, not as a command from God. The following or not following the advice does not involve disobedience to God, or sin; but he would spare them added troubles brought on by marriage. 29-30 But this I say, brethren, the time is shortened, that henceforth both those that have wives may be as though they had none; and those that weep, as though they wept not; and those that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not; and those that buy, as though they possessed not;—In this Paul breaks off into one of his characteristic digressions, in which he shows that time here on earth was so short to them when they would leave the world, that what they are while here matters but little. [Paul here means that the present epoch will embrace a greater or less number of years, and its character is its being contained between precise limits— drawn together into brief compass which does not admit of its being extended indefinitely. These limits are, on the one side, Christ’ s coming at the end of the Jewish dispensation (Acts 2:17; Hebrews 9:26) and, on the other, his coming again, which may be expected at any hour— the time is limited as to what remains (Matthew 24:42-44 Matthew 25:13; 1 Thessalonians 5:1-3; 2 Peter 3:8-13).] 31 and those that use the world, as not using it to the full: —All things mentioned in this series are right things; and the warning is against eagerly using up all opportunities of gain or pleasure as if they were the end of life. We are not to try to get all we can out of externals. The man who remembers that he is only a sojourner in the world is likely to remember also that worldly possessions are not everything, and that worldly surroundings cannot be made permanent. for the fashion of this world passeth away.— [John says: “ And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof.” (1 John 2:17.) The fact that their present condition was not to last long, and their participation in its joys and sorrows was to be so short-lived, is the reason which the apostle urges why they should not be wedded to earthly things.] It is probable that raging persecution threatened to burst upon them with such fury as to add force to this exhortation. 32 But I would have you to be free from cares.—When persecutions came upon them, he would like to have them without the additional cares which marriage would impose upon them. [It must be borne in mind that this advice was given solely to guide those under the distress that was then upon them (verse 26), and not to be applied in normal times.] He that is unmarried is careful for the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord:—[The unmarried man, having no family to provide for and to protect in times of distress and persecution, is less encumbered with worldly cares than the married man who was compelled to take care of his wife and dependent children; and might be thus kept back from that unswerving courage which in those dark days full loyalty to Christ demanded.] 33-34 but he that is married is careful for the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and is divided. So also the woman that is unmarried and the virgin is careful for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married is careful for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.—Paul here states a truth that is applicable in a general way only to those who live continently and contentedly without marriage, free from the cares that grow with a family both of men and women. Generally unmarried men, and women too, with the sexual desires active, give less care, place their affections less on the Lord, than the married. Paul himself states this truth: “ But younger widows refuse: for when they have waxed wanton against Christ, they desire to marry.” (1 Timothy 5:11.) That his language here was only for the time of the distress that was then upon them is seen in this statement: “ I desire therefore that the younger widows marry, bear children, rule the household, give no occasion to the adversary for reviling: for already some are turned aside after Satan.” (1 Timothy 5:14-15.) As a rule among men and women the married state is more promotive of virtue and devotion than that of the unmarried. 35 And this I say for your own profit;—[The advice was given that they might avail themselves of all their advantages and privileges, and pursue such a course as would tend to ad¬vance their personal piety and spiritual growth. Nothing here was ever designed to be of general application; it con¬cerned the church at Corinth alone; or churches in similar cir¬cumstances.] not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is seemly, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction.—He did not wish to lead them into temptation which they could not withstand, so become ensnared to sin; but he spoke it that they might do that which was for their well-being and what would leave them time to serve the Lord without the care and distractions which a family would im¬pose upon them. FOR FATHERS AS TO THE OF THEIR UNDER THE IN VIEW 1 Corinthians 7:36-38 36 But if any man—In that age and country the father disposed of his daughters in marriage without consulting them, and his will was the law in the matter. thinketh that he behaveth himself unseemly toward his virgin daughter,—If he thinks he treats her wrong in withholding her from marriage, exposing her to a temptation to sin with her lover, or at least, bringing on her the imputation of it. if she be past the flower of her age,—Past the usual age of marriage. and if need so requireth, let him do what he will; he sinneth not; let them marry.—If, then, a man thinks he treats his virgin daughter wrong in witholding her from marriage, he must act according to her requirements. That is, if she cannot live satisfied in the unmarried state, let him give her in marriage, and he need not fear that in doing so he does wrong. 37 But he that standeth stedfast in his heart,—Whose judgment is settled and firm, being fully persuaded of the inexpeiency of his daughter’ s marrying. having no necessity,—Being controlled by no external necessity ; nothing, in other words, rendering it necessary for him to act contrary to his own judgment. but hath power as touching his own will,—Is able to act as he deems best. and hath determined this in his own heart, to keep his own virgin daughter,—Has fully made up his mind to keep his daughter in those perilous times from marriage and under his own control. shall do well.—In either of these cases he does right. 38 So then both he that giveth his own virgin daughter in marriage doeth well;—He violates no law in so doing, and is not to be censured for it. and he that giveth her not in marriage shall do better.—He more certainly under the trying circumstances considered her happiness by holding her from entering into the married state than he would by allowing her to enter into it. [And yet, when all is said, Paul leaves the whole problem of getting married an open question to be settled by each individual case.] AS TO THE OF WIDOWS1 Corinthians 7:39-40 39 A wife is bound for so long time as her husband liveth;-—He adds advice concerning widows marrying, probably in answer to a question that had been propounded to him. but if the husband be dead, she is free to be married to whom she will;—[It is the teaching of the New Testament that marriage is a contract for life, between one man and one woman, indissoluble by the will of the parties or by human law; but that the death of either party leaves the survivor free to contract another marriage. (Romans 7:1-3.) Such being the teaching of the Holy Spirit, no civil or ecclesiastical body can rightfully enact a different law. All efforts to change God’ s law only render men and women worse.] only in the Lord.—This prohibits the widow marrying one not a Christian. I know no reason why a widow should be more restricted as to whom she marry than a virgin. This restriction however, together with the general principles laid down regulating the association of Christians with unbeliev¬ers, indicates that it was not contemplated that Christians should marry those not in the Lord. Under the law of Moses the man was prohibited marrying out of the family of Israel, save when the woman would identify herself with the chosen people. The reason given was, lest they should draw them into idolatry. Solomon violated the law, and, despite his wisdom and power, his wives drew him into idolatry. Influence is frequently more potent for evil than authority or power. The law of Moses is an earthly type of the law of Christ. The inference would be that the children of God could not marry out of the family of God. “ Be not unequally yoked with unbelievers: for what fellowship have righteousness and iniquity? or what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial ? or what portion hath a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement hath a tem¬ple of God with idols ? for we are a temple of the living God; even as God said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come ye out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be to you a Father, and ye shall be to me sons and daugh-ters, saith the Lord Almighty.” (2 Corinthians 6:14-18.) To be unequally yoked would be to be so connected with the unbeliever that the Christian would be controlled by the unbeliever. I know of no relation in which this would be more so than in the marriage relation. The whole drift and tenor of the Scriptures, both of the Old Testament and the New, is that in the close and intimate relations of life the people of God should seek the companionship of servants of God, that they might help and encourage each other in the Christian life. When both are w'orking together, man in his weakness often becomes discouraged; it is greatly worse when the nearest and dearest one pulls away from Christ and duty. Then, too, w'hen people marry, they ought to consider the probability of rearing children. It is the duty of Christian parents to rear their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. How can one do this when the other sets the example of unbelief and disobedience to God? I conclude, therefore, that the spirit and teaching of the Bible is against Christians marrying those not members of the body of Christ, and yet there is no direct and specific prohibition of it, other than for widows. 40 But she is happier if she abide as she is, after my judgment:—While Paul gives this permission to the widow, she will be happier according to his judgment, if she remains unmarried. [This was said because she would have the same cares and troubles as those referred to in the preceding verses.] and I think that I also have the Spirit of God.—[Not that there was any doubt in Paul’ s mind on this point. The word implies full persuasion that in the advice he had given he was speaking under the direction of the Holy Spirit.] This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ 1 Corinthians 7:2. Nevertheless. See the paragraph at the beginning of the chapter, about when the advice against marriage was to be discarded. 1 Corinthians 7:3. Since the primary object of marriage (aside from reproduction) is to give lawful gratification of sexual desires, the husband and wife should cooperate with each other to that end. 1 Corinthians 7:4. Power is from EXOUSlA, which means authority or control. This verse teaches that neither husband nor wife has exclusive right about the use of his body, regarding whether it should be used for the gratification of the other. This idea, especially as it pertains to the woman, is taught in Genesis 3:16. 1 Corinthians 7:5. The context shows that defraud means to withhold from each other the intimate relation. They are permitted to do so only on condition that both consent, so as to be free for exclusive religious devotions. Even then, they should not stay apart too long, lest they be tempted to seek gratification unlawfully; incontinency means lack of control of the fleshly desires. 1 Corinthians 7:6. I speak this by permission. Whether the pronoun this refers to what Paul has just said, or to what he is about to say, is relatively unimportant. The point to learn is the meaning of permission. It is taught by some that Paul was only permitted to write on some things and not commanded to do so, and therefore what he said by permission would have no binding force. I believe the distinction is unimportant, for the Lord would certainly not permit Paul to write any instruction that was not right for the benefit of all concerned. 1 Corinthians 7:7. Paul's general teaching on the marriage institution, as well as what he says in this chapter, would show us he does not mean to wish that every man would abstain from marriage as a permanent way of life. But if all men had the self-control over their nature that the apostle had, they would have no difficulty in following the advice during the "present distress." The gift means the natural ability to maintain control over the passions. 1 Corinthians 7:8. See the advice explained in the first paragraph. 1 Corinthians 7:9. Cannot contain denotes they cannot have complete control over the desires. Burn is from PUROO which Thayer explains at this place to mean, "to be inflamed with sexual desire." 1 Corinthians 7:10. Yet not I, but the Lord. This teaching was not given to them merely by the permission of the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:6), but He commanded him to give it. Let not the wife depart. Some might think that if it was better not to marry, it would likewise be proper for a wife to relieve her husband of these "added obligations," and Paul is teaching against such an action. 1 Corinthians 7:11. Regardless of what might cause a wife to depart, she would have no right to remarry some other man. The husband had no right to put away his wife on the ground of Paul's advice about the "present distress." 1 Corinthians 7:12. 1, not the Lord means by Paul's permission and not by command of the Lord. (See the notes on 1 Corinthians 7:6.) A man might have been tired of married life and thought he could be relieved of the burden by putting his wife away, using as a special excuse that she was an unbeliever. Paul means that he should not do so if the wife is willing to remain with him. 1 Corinthians 7:13. This takes the same comments as the preceding verse. 1 Corinthians 7:14. The unbelieving partner is not sanctified by the other in the sense of religious holiness before God, for in that sense no person can sanctify another. It means that the marriage of one person to another makes their cohabitation moral, since the marriage relation is a fleshly one, primarily for fleshly purposes (see the comments at 1 Corinthians 7:3). Were this not true, then children born of parents one of whom is an unbeliever would be unclean, which means ceremonially improper, whereas, all children of parents who are married to each other are holy as far as their orgin is concerned. 1 Corinthians 7:15. It should be noted in this verse that it is the unbeliever that is determined to desert the marriage, in spite of the willingness of the other to continue even under the "present distress." The believer is told to let him depart, which denotes that he is not obligated (is not under bondage) to hold the unbeliever with him if it would have to be done under continual strife or "family quarrels," for God is wanting his creatures to live in peace if possible, in which they were called. But that has nothing to do with the question of remarriage for either of them. In truth, 1 Corinthians 7:11 orders that if the departing wife should change her mind and desire the marriage relation again, she must go back to her husband. And that would mean also that the husband would be required to remain single, else the wife could not obey 1 Corinthians 7:11 even if she wanted to. All of this is in keeping with Matthew 19:9 which clearly teaches that no married person may be remarried to another, except upon the immorality of the present marriage companion. 1 Corinthians 7:16. The preceding verse was rather a break into the line of thought being set forth in 1 Corinthians 7:14. In that Paul was showing that a believing husband or wife need not break up their marriage on account of the unbelief of the other; that the morality of the marriage was not affected by the unbelief of one of them. The present verse continues the thought, and gives another reason why he should remain in the marriage, namely, he might be able to convert his partner. This idea is taught in 1 Peter 3:1-2. 1 Corinthians 7:17. Whatever condition may be the lot of a man who has accepted the call of the Lord, let him be faithful to his profession. This command is announced as being applicable to all the churches. (See notes at John 15:16 on ordain.) 1 Corinthians 7:18. Become uncircumcised. This refers to a surgical trick whereby It could not be known from appearances whether a man was circumcised or not. The verse :means for a Jew not to resort to that if he decides to become a Christian. This surgery is mentioned in Josephus, Antiquities, Book 12, Chapter 5, Section 1. 1 Corinthians 7:19. The teaching of the preceding verse is based on the truth of this. Under Christ it makes no difference whether a man is circumcised or not, just so he keeps the commandments of God. (See Galatians 5:6 Galatians 6:15.) 1 Corinthians 7:20. This verse is a general application of the preceding several verses. 1 Corinthians 7:21. A great part of the people were slaves in the Roman Empire. The fact that a man was in that "calling" or station in life, need not hold him back from accepting the Gospel call, for salvation is for all classes. However, if his master sees fit to release him, he should accept it for the advantages it would give. 1 Corinthians 7:22. Two kinds of service and freedom are meant here, the temporal under a human master, and the spiritual under Christ. Hence a man can be a servant under the former and yet be free from sin while being a servant of Christ. 1 Corinthians 7:23. This does not contradict 1 Corinthians 7:21. It means not to serve men as to any religious directions. The temporal masters often bought their slaves, and likewise Christ has purchased his with his own blood. (See chapter 6:19, 20.) 1 Corinthians 7:24. This is the same as 1 Corinthians 7:20. 1 Corinthians 7:25. No commandment in the same sense as 1 Corinthians 7:6. Give my judgment under the permission of the verse just cited. Paul had shown himself faithful to the Lord, and hence he was given the permission to use his judgment in the case. 1 Corinthians 7:26. So to be means for him to remain just as he is, on account of the present distress. (See the paragraph at the beginning of the chapter. 1 Corinthians 7:27. This repeats the teaching running through much of the chapter. 1 Corinthians 7:28. If thou marry, thou host not sinned. Paul had never forbidden marriage as being wrong, but only advised against it on account of the present distress. While not a sin, yet the marriage will bring them trouble in the flesh which means the hardships caused by the condition of the country. I spare you is a brief way of saying "I wish to spare you these troubles by advising you not to marry while the present conditions prevail." 1 Corinthians 7:29-30. The original Greek word for short is defined by Thayer at this place, "is shortened," and Robinson defines it, "the time is contracted, shortened." The time referred to in this passage is the period of the distress caused by the oppression under Rome. Naturally the passing days made that period shorter, and the teaching of this verse :is that disciples should not be so concerned about these various conditions in their earthly life. Give chief attention to their obligations as Christians until the conflict was over, which was not to be very long in comparison. 1 Corinthians 7:31. The good things of this world are necessary to man's existence as a temporal being, therefore he must make some use of them. Abusing is from a word similar to the one for use, with a prefix in the Greek composition that makes it mean "to overdo" the use of them. The logical reason the apostle gives for the exhortation is that all these things are temporary; they will pass away. 1 Corinthians 7:32-33. Carefulness means anxiety over the handicaps of the present distress. A married man would have to give his attention to the things of the world, such as those necessary to care for his wife. That would really be his duty if he had a wife, but he could avoid such anxiety for the time being if he took Paul's advice and remained single. 1 Corinthians 7:34. The same things apply to women in that a married woman would be obligated to give some attention to the rightful requirements of her husband. If she remained single she would be free to give her sole attention to religious devotions. Be holy both in body and in spirit does not mean that her relations with her husband would be wrong, but they would be temporal and would thus require some of the time she otherwise could devote to these spiritual matters. 1 Corinthians 7:36. This verse (as here translated) is entirely out of line with the general teaching of the chapter. Note the pronoun her is in italics which is because the King James translators did not understand the verse. Some later commentators even insert the word "daughter" after virgin, for which there is not the slightest ground in the original. They make this verse refer to a father's willingness for his daughter to marry. What would a man's control over his own passions have to do with his consent to his daughter's marriage? The confusion is caused by a common but erroneous notion that virgin always means a woman. A look at Revelation 14:4 would show that to be wrong, even if one could not consult the original. That passage says the persons were "not defiled by women; for they are virgins." When the word in question is used as a state or condition in life, it means virginity. The Englishman's Greek New Testament renders this verse as follows: "But if anyone thinks he behaves unseemly [improperly] to his virginity, if he be beyond his prime, and so it ought to be, let him do what he wills, he does not sin; let them marry." It is easy to see this verse means the same as Paul's teaching in the rest of the chapter, namely, that it is best to remain single if one has control of his desires. But if he begins to doubt his ability to remain chaste in an unmarried state, then he should marry, and in so doing he would not commit any sin. It is true it says let them marry, which is because any marriage requires two persons. The word virgin is from , and Thayer gives the following definition as it applies to men: "One who has never had commerce [intimacy] with women." Pass the flower of her [his] age means a male who has reached the age when his sexual na ture has become fully developed and more insistent on gratification. By changing the pronouns from the feminine to the masculine, as the inflection of composition in the Greek text requires, the verse will be easily understood. It will then give the same advice that the apostle has given throughout the chapter, namely, that moral chastity is more important than freedom from the burdens of family life. If a man cannot have sure control over his desires, he should avail himself of marriage which is the Lord's plan for lawful gratification of them. This is directly taught in 1 Corinthians 7:28, where Paul explains that his purpose in giving the advice was to have them avoid the trouble in the flesh that would come to married people in the present distress. 1 Corinthians 7:37. This is the same in meaning as the preceding verse. 1 Corinthians 7:38. The pronoun her is in italics in both sentences and is not justified by the original. The phrase giveth in marriage means to give himself in marriage to another. He that becomes married doeth well because he avoids the guilt of immorality, but he that is able to remain unmarried doeth better because he not only maintains his moral chastity, but avoids the burdens of married life. 1 Corinthians 7:39. It is sometimes asked if the requirements of this verse would not be on the same proviso of present distress, as the advice of Paul about the marriage of those single at the time he was writing. The cases are not the same, for it is expressly stated that if a man married in the first place he would not do any sin (1 Corinthians 7:28), since that instruction was given as advice only to avoid the burdens of married life. The present verse plainly says the wife is bound by the law (not a temporary condition caused by the present distress) as long as her husband lived; not as long as the "distress" continued. Hence the verse involves a matter of right and wrong (not one of expediency as is the other). At liberty to be married means she has the right to be married, with the stipulation that it must be in the Lord. All marriages are in the Lord in the sense that the Lord is the author of the basis of the physical relation (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:5), hence the phrase here has a special sense since it is applied only to second marriages. To be in the Lord, therefore, can mean nothing else than being in His body which is the church. A Christian widow has no right to marry a man outside of the church. The same principle would logically apply to a Christian man. The woman is mentioned only because the greater part of the other verses have been dealing with the wives. 1 Corinthians 7:40. Happier if she so abide, but not more righteous, which again brings in the advisability of any single person entering marriage at that time. I think does not mean that Paul was uncertain, for it is from the same Greek word as Jesus used in Matthew 22:42, where he asked the Pharisees, "What think ye of Christ?" We know Jesus did not wish them to give him any answer on which they were doubtful. It simply means to state some idea or conclusion that a person has. Paul had no doubt as to the source of his idea at this place, for it came from the same One who had given him the "permission" to speak in 1 Corinthians 7:6. Acting under that privilege, he gave it as his judgment that the woman would be happier were she to remain unmarried. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1 Corinthians 8 OF LIBERTY TO SELF-DENIAL1 Corinthians 8:1 to 1 Corinthians 11:1 LIBERTY AS RELATED TO THE EATING OF MEATS OFFERED TO IDOLS1 Corinthians 8:1-13 1 Now concerning things sacrificed to idols:—Here Paul introduces eating meats offered to idols, and the treatment of idolaters. The style of introducing the subject indicates that the Corinthians had asked him questions concerning what was right in regard to these matters. The Christians at Corinth and throughout the Gentile countries had been reared in idolatry, and revered and worshiped idols. Idols were worshiped by sacrificing animals to them. [When an animal was offered in sacrifice to an idol, or to a false god represented by an idol, only a small part, such as the legs wrapped in fat, or the intestines, was consumed by the fire on the altar. The remainder was eaten by the sacrificer and his friends, or those who were invited to the sacrificial feast, which took place either in the temple or in the adjoining grove, and to these feasts Chris¬tians were invited (verse 10) ; or the remainder of the flesh, after what was burnt in honor of the idol, as their perquisite by the priests, would he sold by them in the markets, and the heathen would partake of it as meat of peculiar sanctity.] It became a question at once: How shall Christians regard and treat these idols and meats offered to them? In the consultation, held by the apostles at Jerusalem, in reference to the circumcising of the Gentiles, they wrote to the Gentile Christians to “ abstain from things sacrificed to idols.” (Acts 15:29.) When they were first converted to Christ, it seems that they were commanded to abstain from meats offered to them, because while they were yet fresh from the worship of idols, and their consciences were tender in regard to them, the eating of meats offered would tend to revive their reverence for them, and lead them back into idolatry. So they were commanded to abstain from it. As they grew stronger in Christ, and came to know that an idol was nothing, they might eat without their conscience being defiled by eating. The question arose: Shall those who can eat without defiling their consciences be prohibited in its use ? [At this day we can scarcely realize how closely this question affected the whole life of the early Christians. For not only was the worship of the Gentiles sacrificial, but this worship was not confined to the temple precincts, but extended it¬self to their social gatherings, and even domestic meals.] We know that we all have knowledge.—All Christians had knowledge that there is but one God, and that idols are nothing. Knowledge puffeth up,— Knowledge, without the love of God, puffeth up with pride, makes one conceited, self-sufficient, and disregardful of the rights of others. [As a matter of fact, too well known to be denied, men of keen insight into moral and spiritual truths are sometimes prone to despise the less enlightened that stumble among scruples that constantly come before them. The knowledge that is not guarded by humility and love does harm both to its possessor and to other Christians. It puffs up its possessor with scorn, and it alien¬ates and embitters the less enlightened. Knowledge which does not take into consideration the difficulties and scruples of brethren in Christ cannot be admired or commended, for though in itself a good thing and capable of being used for the advancement of the cause of Christ, divorced from love can do good neither to him who possesses it nor to the cause of Christ. It is too often the case that possessors of such knowledge glory in themselves as the men of deep spiritual insight and valiant soldiers of the cross. It is not by knowledge alone that the church can solidly grow. Such knowledge does sometimes produce an appearance of growth, a puffed up, and unhealthy, mushroom growth.] but love edifieth.—Love to God makes one strong in faith and Christian character, helpful to others, and leads him to look to the good of others, even at the sacrifice of his own rights. This shows that learning without religion, the only basis of love, is not helpful to the world. 2 If any man thinketh that he knoweth anything, he knoweth not yet as he ought to know;—One confident in his own wisdom or knowledge to guide him knows nothing in a loving, helpful way. He does not know anything in its relation to other truths, to man, and to God. The Holy Spirit says: “ For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom knew not God, it was God’ s good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save them that believe.” (1: 21.) This knowledge helps a man and leads him to look to the good of others, as well as his own good. Knowledge that stops short of this is selfish, and selfishness brings leanness and poverty of spirit. 3 but if any man loveth God, the same is known by him.— To love God is to so honor and serve him as to seek his will that we may do it. If one properly esteems God as the great source and center of all things, honors him, and acts from a sense of duty to him, he is known and approved by God, for “ the Lord knoweth them that are his.” (2 Timothy 2:19.) Jesus said: “ If any man willeth to do his will, he shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or whether I speak from my¬self.” (John 7:17.) The man who loves God is the one who rightly solves the question about meat offered to idols, for nothing is viewed by him that does not take into considera-tion the will of God and the good of his fellow men. 4 Concerning therefore the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that no idol is anything in the world,—All Christians know that an idol is nothing, and that there are no such gods. Hence the things sacrificed to idols are as though they had never been sacrificed. and that there is no God but one.—This is the foundation truth of the Christian life. Without it no one can live the Christian life or form a godlike character that suffers to help others. 5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth;—The heathen made the distinction of the superior gods who ruled in the heavens, and the inferior ones that dwelt upon earth, presiding over seas, rivers, fountains, forests, and local places. as there are gods many, and lords many;—In the minds of the heathen there were many of each of these classes. [The heathen mythology, especially in its Greek development, may be regarded as the religious expression of national ideals and civilization. The Greek conception of every conception of the independence of every unit in nature and society was embodied in the mythology. Every city had its guardian deity; every spring was haunted; every crop of corn was under the protection of a goddess; every movement of the elements and every human action might assume a sacred character and be¬come, the one a prayer, the other the answer.] 6 yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things,—In contrast with these false gods, to the Christian, there is one true and living God, the Originator, Creator, and Founder of the universe; hence possessed of all the wisdom, power, and authority that dwell in the universe. and we unto him;—This is given as an evidence of his nearness to man, “ for in him we live, and move, and have our being.” (Acts 17:28.) From him all blessings come; by his strength and power we live and are upheld by him daily. and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things,— The “ all things” in this clause must be co-extensive with the “ all things” in the preceding one— that is, the universe. The universe was created through Jesus Christ. The energy of the one God was exercised through the Word, who “ became flesh, and dwelt among us.” (John 1:14.) Of him it is said: “ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him; and without him was not anything- made that hath been made.” (John 1:1-3.) The following passages teach the same thing: “ Through whom also he made the worlds.” (Hebrews 1:2.) “ For in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, ... all things have been created through him, and unto him.” (Colossians 1:16.) and we through him.—Jesus Christ performs the same act of creating in the spiritual world that he did in the material. In this God, the Father, originated and provided the great scheme of redemption. Jesus Christ came into the world. Through his mission; his teaching in precept and example; his suffering, death, burial, his struggle in the grave with the powers of death, and hell (in the grave the battle for man’ s redemption was fought and the victory won) ; his resurrection and his ascent to his Father, he created the material for the new spiritual kingdom. The apostles and their fellow disciples constituted this nucleus for the new creation. Christ completed his work and left them with the command: “ Tarry ye in the city [Jerusalem], until ye be clothed with power from on high.” (Luke 24:49.) No step could be taken in the procreation of disciples or in the establishment and development of the kingdom of which they constituted the beginning until the Spirit should come to guide them into all the truth. [The divinity of Christ can no more be denied because the Father is here called the one God, than the dominion of the Father can be denied because the Son is called the one Lord. By this mode of expression it is intimated that Father and Son are one God and one Lord in the unity of the godhead. (Acts 17:29; Colossians 2:9.)] [It is consideration of these great truths that makes idola¬try ridiculous, and the eating of food sacrificed to idols a mat¬ter of indifference. Such was the conclusion of the Corinthians, and such, but for the weaker brethren, would have been Paul’ s conclusion.] 7 Howbeit there is not in all men that knowledge:—While all men should know that there is but one true and living God, even all Christians did not possess the knowledge that enabled them to be independent of these idols. but some, being used until now to the idol, eat as of a thing sacrificed to an idol;—Some who had been converted to Christ had a lingering reverence for the idols they had long worshiped, [and therefore they regarded the meat as offered to some kind of reality.] and their conscience being weak is defiled.—While one com¬pletely free from reverence for an idol might eat of things sac¬rificed to it without any feeling of reverence for it, others could not eat of them without having their reverence aroused for the idol, and, their conscience being so weak as to rever¬ence the idol, would be defiled. 8 But food will not commend us to God: neither, if we eat not, are we the worse;—The flesh offered in sacrifice to idols was eaten as food by the people. .Some ate it as worship to idols; others, having knowledge of these things, ate it as food. God was willing for them to eat it if they could do so without leading others to sin. The danger was that those not fully taught, seeing others eat it as food, would be encouraged to eat it as worship, and so be defiled. nor, if we eat, are we the better.—Eating meat is not service to God, and eating or failing to eat would not commend them to God. So far as their relation to God was concerned, eating would not affect their spiritual interests. [By showing that the eating is a matter of indifference, Paul introduces his rea¬son for yielding to the weakness of another. If the weakness involved a matter of our vital relation to God, then to yield would be wrong.] 9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to the weak,—While the eating and the not eating did not affect the one having knowledge, there was danger that, in exercising the liberty to eat, the example might lead a weak brother to eat the flesh as worship to an idol. So the liberty to eat would become the cause of his being led into idolatry and ruin. No Christian can put a stumbling block in his brother’ s way and be guiltless. 10 For if a man see thee who hast knowledge sitting at meat in an idol’ s temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be emboldened to eat things sacrificed to idols?—Those who have not freed themselves from conscience of the idol, who cannot eat of the meat sacrificed to it, without worshiping it, seeing one who has knowledge sitting at meat in the idol’ s temple, would suppose that the strong brother was worship¬ing the idol, and be led by the example to eat in worship to the idol. [The fact of his example being avowedly advanced in the knowledge of the faith would make his example the more dangerous, because more effective.] 11 For through thy knowledge he that is weak perisheth, the brother for whose sake Christ died.—Through their knowledge that they might eat the flesh offered to an idol the weak brother perisheth. This shows that a thing not a sin in itself becomes sin when so done as to lead the weak ones into sin. We are held accountable for leading others into that which, in their ignorance and weakness, will prove their ruin. Speaking more fully on this same subject, Paul says: “ If one of them that believe not biddeth you to a feast, and ye are disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience’ sake. But if any man say unto you, This hath been offered in sacrifice, eat not, for his sake that showed it, and for conscience’ sake: conscience, I say, not thine own, but the other’ s; for why is my liberty judged by another conscience ? If I partake with thankfulness, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks? Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. Give no occasion of stumbling, either to Jews, or to Greeks, or to the church of God: even as I also please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of the many, that they may be saved.” (1 Corinthians 10:27-33.) We are to do nothing that will lead others into sin; we are to do nothing that will defile the conscience of others; we are not to assert our rights when to do so will injure others; and we must deny ourselves things that would please us, to profit and save others. This is an important principle, far-reaching in its re¬sults, and embodies the essential principle of the Christian religion. 12 And thus, sinning against the brethren, and wounding their conscience when it is weak, ye sin against Christ.—To sin against the weakest of the brethren in Christ, and wound the weakest conscience by drawing it into sin, is to sin against Christ, for he said: “ Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me.” (Matthew 25:40.) Jesus here personifies himself in the poorest of his brethren in want, so that what is done to them is done to him. Here Paul tells us that he who causes that brother to stumble sins against Christ. 13 Wherefore, if meat causeth my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh for evermore,—Paul’ s own welfare for the good of his brethren was such that he would forego many privileges and lay aside many liberties to save them from temptation to do wrong. that I cause not my brother to stumble.— -To cause a brother to sin is a fearful wrong to the brother and a sin against Christ. So in this our conscience is ruled by the conscience of the weak brother. In all the relations of life we should act on this principle and seek the good of others as we seek our own good. This is to love others as we do ourselves. This should be our aim in all that we do and say. Paul says: “ It is good not to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor to do anything whereby thy brother stumbleth.” (Romans 14:21.) “ Now we that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves.” (Romans 15:1.) This is the true spirit of Christ, ruling the life of a Christian. When we sin against a weak brother, we sin against Christ who died for him. Christ denied himself all the honors and all the enjoyments of the Father’ s throne and his glories in order to help and bless man. If we are God’ s children, we are to drink into the same spirit, so as to make us forego pleasures, honors, privileges, and enjoyments in order to help and benefit the weak brethren. The weaker they are, the more they are entitled to consideration and help at our hands. Jesus Christ is our perfect example. Verse 1 1 Corinthians 8Beginning here and through 1 Corinthians 11:1, this epistle discusses food (especially meat) sacrificed to idols; and in the culture and society of the people who first received it the problems here dealt with were paramount and practically universal. The total meat supply, in any practical sense, came from the sacrifices to the idol gods of the Gentiles, a portion of each sacrifice being the perquisite of the pagan priest, and the rest of it consumed in the temple area itself, carried to the homes of the worshipers, or sold, either by them or the priests, in the common meat markets. It might be inquired, what relevance is the apostolic teaching, with regard to Christians partaking of such meats, to the peoples of this present age; to which it must be replied that they are of the most commanding relevance and importance. This is true because the apostle Paul established four timeless principles of Christian behavior in the course of his writing on this subject, these being: (1) that what is permissible behavior for one man may, in certain circumstances, be dangerous and sinful in another; (2) that no Christian conduct should be evaluated solely from the standpoint of knowledge, but in the light of the love of brethren, with regard to its possible influence upon others, and in the light of what others may think of it; (3) that no Christian has a right to practice anything, however innocent it may be to him, if in so doing he shall damage the faith of another; and (4) that whatever is done, even to the weakest member of the body of Christ, is also done to Christ himself, and that weakening or destroying the faith of even the least and weakest of Christ's members is a sin of the greatest magnitude against Christ himself. "A pleasure or an indulgence which may be the ruin of someone else is not a pleasure but a sin."[1]ENDNOTE: [1] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 85. Now concerning things sacrificed to idols: We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth. (1 Corinthians 8:1) Now concerning ... These words indicate that "the Corinthians had asked Paul questions in regard to these matters,"[2] a fact also indicated by the use of quotation marks to set off portions of this verse and in 1 Corinthians 8:4,1 Corinthians 8:5 in the RSV. We all have knowledge ... This was the conceited declaration of the questioners from Corinth who evidently indulged themselves in the pagan temples without regard to weak brethren; and the first thing Paul did was to nail down the fact that "knowledge" without love was the grossest ignorance. Knowledge puffeth up, but love buildeth up ... is the way this stands in the Greek (English Revised Version margin); and it is a shame that our translators changed it. Knowledge without love only puffs up the one who fancies he is wise and does nothing for others, whereas love builds up both its possessor and others. The evident concern of Paul's questioners did not refer to themselves (they already knew everything), but "they wanted to know how to deal with the people who refused to eat meat sacrificed to idols."[3] Despite this conceit, some of them were actually "sitting at meat in an idol's temple"! (1 Corinthians 8:10). As some would say today, they were bringing their "culture" into the church! The problem regarded several possibilities: (1) Should a Christian partake of the feasts in the idol temples? (2) Was it permissible for him to buy food in the public markets, where most if not all of it had been procured from the sacrifices? (3) Might he, when invited to a friend's house, eat flesh which had been sacrificed to idols? [2] David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 117. [3] F. W. Grosheide, The New International Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 189. Verse 2 If any man thinketh that he knoweth anything, he knoweth not yet as he ought to know.Thinketh that he knoweth ... All earthly knowledge is partial and fragmentary. "Knowledge is proud that it has learned so much. Wisdom is humble that it knows no more."[4] In thinking that they knew everything and at the same time despising the brethren they denominated as ignorant, the Corinthians indeed knew nothing as they should have known. ENDNOTE: [4] Attributed to Kay by Leon Morris, Tyndale Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), p. 125. Verse 3 But if any man loveth God, the same is known by him.This verse ends surprisingly with "the same is known by him," instead of "the same knows him," as might have been expected; and Farrar was probably correct in the observation that: Paul did not wish to use any terms which would foster the already overgrown conceit of knowledge which was inflating the minds of his Corinthian converts. Furthermore he felt that "God knoweth them that are his" (2 Timothy 3:19).[5]Also, as Morris said, "The really important thing is not that we know God, but that he knows us!"[6][5] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), p. 264. [6] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 125. Verse 4 Concerning therefore the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that no idol is anything in the world, and that there is no God but one.The sophisticated arguments of the "knowledge" party in Corinth are apparent in this. Since idols had no existence in fact, they felt safe in ignoring the popular superstitions regarding them; and Paul allowed the argument to stand, for the moment, it certainly being true that there is no God but one, and that an idol actually had no existence in reality. However, although Paul did not recognize idols "as having any real existence, even as false deities,"[7] he was "certain that evil spirits and demons exist, and that in reality these were behind the idols and were using them to seduce men from the worship of the true God."[8] (See 10:20.) No idol is anything in the world ... Of course, the world was full of idols; but, as Wesley said: Idol here does not mean a mere image; but, by an inevitable transition of thought, the deity worshipped in the image. By this, Paul says that Zeus, Apollo, etc., have no existence; they are not to be found in the world.[9]Furthermore, Paul does not by such a statement (that they are not in the world) leave room for the thought that they may be anywhere else. The "world" as used here refers to the whole universe. There is no God but one ... He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of the Old Testament and of the Christian scriptures. He only is God in the true sense. He alone may rightfully be worshiped, and that through his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. [7] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 416. [8] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 83. [9] John Wesley, One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1972), in loco. Verse 5 For though there be that are called gods whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many, and lords many; yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him.The multiple names of pagan mythology illustrate the truth Paul mentioned regarding gods many and lords many; but the very fact of their being thought of as operating in heaven or on earth proved that none of them controlled "all things," hence the fragmented nature of deity as misunderstood in paganism. One God, the Father, of whom are all things ... There is no limitation with God, who cannot be localized like the false gods of the pagans. He is the Creator and Sustainer of all things in heaven or upon earth. To us there is one God ... There is a difference in Christianity and false religions. "The Christian is not a syncretist, who attempts to harmonize the teachings of all religions."[10]Gods many and lords many ... Grosheide distinguished between the so-called deities of the pagans and their "heroes or demigods";[11] but the terms are here considered to be synonymous. LORD was the usual way of referring to deity in the various cults of the time, which makes Paul's frequent application of it to Jesus Christ significant. Paul simply made it clear that the heathen world worshipped a multitude of deities, putting no difference between them.[12]One Lord Jesus Christ ... There is affirmed here the oneness of God and Christ. God is honored as the Creator of all things and Christ his Son as the Creator of the New Creation. Jesus Christ is called "God" no less than ten times in the Greek New Testament. See my Commentary on Hebrews, p. 31. We through him ... means "for whom we exist."[13]Through whom are all things ... in this clause "must be co-extensive with the `all things' in the preceding verse, that is, the universe."[14][10] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p. 392. [11] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p. 192. [12] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 126. [13] F. W. Grosheide, op. cit., p 192. [14] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 120. Verse 7 Howbeit there is not in all men that knowledge: but some, being used until now to the idol, eat as of a thing sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.There is not in all men that knowledge ... Some facts are of a different quality from the ordinary; and, whereas the existence of an idol is no fact at all, there is the psychological fact of its existence in the MINDS OF MEN; and Paul here drew attention to that fact, so totally passed over by the "knowledge" crowd at Corinth. The great mass of the heathen world did regard the dumb idols as the proper objects of worship, and supposed that they were inhabited by invisible spirits.[15]Barnes declared that "Although the more intelligent heathen put no confidence in them, yet the effect of the great masses was the same as if they had had a real existence."[16]Regarding the rationalization by which intelligent people may worship images, and the specious logic by which the historical church itself consecrated and adored them, see full discussion in my Commentary on Romans, pp. 44-45. Their conscience being weak is defiled ... For fuller comment on the subject of "conscience," see in my Commentary on Romans, p. 469, and in my Commentary on Hebrews, pp. 198-200. When a man violates his conscience, he assaults the central monitor of his spiritual life; and regardless of whether or not the conscience is properly instructed, the violation of it is a spiritual disaster. This is why a person who thinks a certain action is a sin may not safely take such action. Defiled ... means polluted, sullied and damaged; and when the conscience is defiled, any true spiritual life becomes impossible. [15] Donald S. Metz, op. cit., p. 391 [16] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1949), p. 141. Verse 8 But food will not commend us to God: neither if we eat not, are we the worse; nor, if we eat, are we the better.In a sense, it was absolutely immaterial where the meat came from, whether sacrificed to idols or not; because salvation is simply not a matter of diet at all. Christ took away all prohibitions, "making all meats clean" (Mark 7:19); and Paul himself wrote that "every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, etc." (1 Timothy 4:4); but for a Christian who had not learned such vital truth, and who considered it sinful to eat certain things, it was definitely a sin for him to do so. In the situation at Corinth, therefore, it was not a question of determining what was right or wrong, merely in the abstract sense. Verse 9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to the weak.Many of the Corinthian Christians, so recently won over from paganism, still had lingering impressions of the reality of idol gods; and, besides those, there were many of Jewish background whose entire lives and training were absolutely incompatible with any kind of indulgence regarding meat offered to idols. For both classes, it was against their conscience to eat such things. This liberty of yours ... If through the example of those who boasted "knowledge" to eat such meat, the weak brethren were induced to follow their example, irreparable damage to their souls would result. Paul here prohibited such heartless indifference toward the weak brethren. He said in effect: "Let your motto be forbearance, not privilege, and your watchword charity, not knowledge."[17]It is considered significant that Paul here made no reference whatever to that so-called Council in Jerusalem which had directed all Christians to "abstain from things sacrificed to idols" (Acts 15:29); and, as more particularly advocated in my Commentary on Acts, pp. 292ff, Paul's own authority was amply sufficient to teach God's will on such a subject, his authority and understanding of God's true will having been, in fact, the means of correcting the Council itself. Dummelow thought that Paul believed "The Corinthians would be more influenced by argument than by an appeal to authority, seeing they prided themselves on their wisdom";[18]but the conviction expressed here is that Paul did not feel that any word from the Council could have added anything whatever to his own authority. However, as Dummelow said, "Paul said nothing inconsistent"[19] with the judgment of the Council. [17] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 265. [18] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 904. [19] Ibid. Verse 10 For if a man see thee who hast knowledge sitting at meat in an idol's temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be emboldened to eat things sacrificed to idols?See thee who hast knowledge ... There positively has to be a vein of sarcasm in this. What kind of "knowledge" did any Corinthian have that could justify sitting down in the degrading festival carried on in an idol's temple? "Many of these functions were often accompanied by shameful licentiousness."[20] Paul did not digress here to point out that spiritual damage was almost certain to be sustained even by those who professed to have "knowledge" in such a participation as sitting down to a banquet in the temple of an idol, especially in a place like Corinth. Paul's great concern was damage to the weak brother and the wound thus inflicted upon the body of Christ which is the church. As Macknight said, "Paul could not have meant that they had a right to eat of the sacrifices in the idol's temple."[21] Although he passed over it here, Paul returned in 1 Corinthians 10:15-21 "to treat the other side of the question, that concerning the danger to which the strong believer exposed himself."[22] "To recline at a banquet in the temple of Poseidon or Aphrodite, especially in such a place as Corinth, was certainly an extravagant assertion of their right to Christian liberty.[23][20] Henry H. Halley, Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1927), p. 517. [21] James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles and Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1969), p. 126. [22] Attributed to Godet by John Wesley, op. cit., in loco. [23] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 265. Verse 11 For through thy knowledge he that is weak perisheth, the brother for whose sake Christ died!This was a hand grenade detonated in the faces of the "knowledge" group in Corinth. The word "knowledge" throughout this chapter belongs in quotations; because certainly it was not knowledge but the most incompetent ignorance that would approve of behavior capable of murdering an immortal soul. That school of interpreters holding to the impossibility of apostasy on the part of believers strive to soften the impact of "perisheth." Thus Barnes saluted this verse with "No one who has been truly converted will apostatize and be destroyed."[24] Johnson declared this refers "to bodily perishing, not eternal perishing";[25] but he did not explain how eating meat against one's conscience could kill him! As Wesley put it, regarding "he that is weak perisheth": He is from that moment in the way of perdition ... if this state continues and becomes aggravated, as is inevitable in such cases, eternal perdition is the end of it.[26]Leon Morris' words regarding the last clause of this verse are beautiful. He wrote: The last clause could hardly be more forcible in its appeal; every word tells; "the brother," not a mere stranger; "for the sake of whom" precisely to rescue him from destruction; "Christ," no less than he; "died," no less than that![27][24] Albert Barnes, op. cit., p. 146. [25] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 613. [26] John Wesley, op. cit., in loco. [27] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 129. Verse 12 And thus, sinning against the brethren, and wounding their conscience when it is weak, ye sin against Christ!Exclamation points have been used in this and the preceding verse to indicate the epic nature of these pronouncements. Sinning against the brethren ... ye sin against Christ ... Whatever is done to the church, even in the person of its weakest and most insignificant members (as men count insignificance), is done to Christ. Paul learned this on the Damascus road, and he never forgot it. Was it right to override the scruples of young and weak Christians by indulgence of the appetite for meat? A million times NO! To do so was an unmitigated sin against the Redeemer himself. Paul did not require the support of any opinions from Jerusalem to add any weight to such a decree. This principle is eternally binding, forever true, and as wide in its application as the world itself. Despite such an apostolic order, however, Paul diligently strove to evoke a feeling of tenderness in the conceited boasters of their "knowledge." The two words repeatedly stressed in the passage are weak (5 times) and BROTHER (4 times). "These should have evoked tenderness and love, but received only the callous disregard of a misguided knowledge."[28]ENDNOTE: [28] Paul W. Marsh, A New Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969). p. 391. Verse 13 Wherefore, if meat causeth my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh forevermore, that I cause not my brother to stumble.Paul did not lay down rules for others which he was unwilling to honor himself, being of a different sort altogether from the wicked Pharisees (Matthew 23:4). Despite his firmness, however, Paul's pledge here is conditional. "If meat causeth my brother to stumble," is the qualifying clause; and this has the meaning of "stumble, so as to fall and be lost." Guthrie noted that: "Paul's decision is conditional, not absolute: He does not say he will henceforth always be a total abstainer, but only IF and WHEN such eating may cause a brother to fall."[29] DeHoff also has a fine paragraph on this. He wrote: On the other hand, there is such a thing as a brother who is not nearly so weak as he thinks, but who has been in the kingdom for years and is a crank and a fanatic. He has a tender conscience, he claims; and he tries to use it to control everybody else. His favorite passage is what Paul said about meats, which he applies to anything he wants to keep other people from doing. Of course, we shall just have to get along with this fellow as best we can![30]This whole chapter exposed the shallowness and conceit of that "knowledge" which had no loving concern for weak and immature Christians, and bound upon all true Christians their responsibility for setting the correct example, regarding the scruples of others and for establishing a pattern of behavior which will build up others in the holy faith of Jesus Christ. [29] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1062. [30] George W. DeHoff, Sermons on First Corinthians (Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 1947), p. 71. "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE " Chapter Eight IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To see the relationship between knowledge and love 2) To understand how we might misuse the liberty we have in Christ 3) To realize the responsibility we have to our brethren who may be weak or lacking in knowledge SUMMARY In this chapter and the two to follow, Paul addresses the matter of Christians eating things that had been sacrificed to idols. Though in the tenth chapter he will conclude with specific warnings concerning this issue (1 Corinthians 10:18-33), he begins by arguing on the basis of the supremacy of love over knowledge (1 Corinthians 8:1-3). While concurring that some might have correct knowledge about God and idols, he points out that all might not, and it would be very easy by an abuse of "liberty" to cause those with weak consciences to stumble (1 Corinthians 8:4-10). Such would be a serious offense, even against Christ, prompting Paul to say how far he would go to avoid causing a brother to stumble (1 Corinthians 8:11-13). OUTLINE I. , LOVE, AND EATING THINGS OFFERED TO IDOLS (1 Corinthians 8:1-6) A. THE OF LOVE OVER (1 Corinthians 8:1-3)1. Knowledge puffs up, while love edifies (1 Corinthians 8:1) 2. Knowledge can lead one to think he knows more than he really does (1 Corinthians 8:2) 3. While he who loves God is known by Him (1 Corinthians 8:3) B. IN TO THINGS OFFERED TO IDOLS (1 Corinthians 8:4-6)1. Knowledge concurs that an idol is nothing, and that there is only one God and one Lord (1 Corinthians 8:4-6 a) 2. For Christians that means the Father, and Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 8:6 b) II. LOVE TOWARD THOSE WHOSE ARE WEAK (1 Corinthians 8:8-13) A. NOT ALL HAVE CORRECT , OR STRONG (1 Corinthians 8:7)1. Some eat things that were offered to idols with consciousness of the idol (1 Corinthians 8:7 a) 2. In so doing, they defile their weak consciences (1 Corinthians 8:7 b) B. DO NOT LET THAT WHICH IS BECOME A (1 Corinthians 8:8-9)1. Food or the lack of it does not effect our relationship with God (1 Corinthians 8:8) 2. But if we are not careful, our liberty concerning food can become a stumblingblock to others (1 Corinthians 8:9) C. ABUSE OF AND LIBERTY CAN LEAD TO SIN AGAINST CHRIST! (1 Corinthians 8:10-12)1. Through improper exercise of knowledge and liberty, our example might encourage others to violate their weak conscience (1 Corinthians 8:10) 2. Through improper exercise of knowledge and liberty, we may cause others to perish, which is a sin against Christ! (1 Corinthians 8:11-12) D. PAUL'S OWN (1 Corinthians 8:13)1. If food makes his brother to stumble, he will never again eat meat (1 Corinthians 8:13 a) 2. Lest he make his brother stumble (1 Corinthians 8:13 b) REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER 1) List the main points of this chapter- Knowledge, Love, And Eating Things Offered To Idols (1 Corinthians 8:1-7) - Applying Love Toward Those Whose Consciences Are Weak (1 Corinthians 8:8-13) 2) What is the danger of knowledge? (1 Corinthians 8:1)- It can lead to being "puffed up" or arrogant 3) What is the power of love? (1 Corinthians 8:1)- It can build another person up 4) What attribute is important in regards to knowledge? (1 Corinthians 8:2)- Humility 5) How can one abuse their liberty in Christ? (1 Corinthians 8:9-11)- By allowing their example to encourage others whose consciences are weak to do that which would violate their consciences (even in matters that are lawful in of themselves) 6) What happens if we sin against our brothers? (1 Corinthians 8:12)- We sin against Christ! 7) How far should we be willing to go out of consideration for our brethren who are weak in faith? (1 Corinthians 8:13)- Even if it means to restrict what liberty we might have in Christ! Questions by E.M. Zerr 1st Corinthians Chapter 81. State the general subject of this chapter. 2. What is an idol ? 3. State the quality here set against knowledge. 4. What does each one accomplish ? 5. What kind of knowledge is meant? 6. What man really lacks knowledge? 7. State the kind he lacks. 8. Tell what man the Lord loves. 9. On what condition does God know man ? 10. What manner of eating is discussed? 11. How could meat be eaten that had been sacrificed? 12. What superior knowledge did Paul and others have ? 13. How may such knowledge be obtained? 14. Was Paul a monotheist? 15. What gods did he oppose ? 16. Where were the idol gods located ? 17. What constituted the former? 18. And who made the latter? 19. What other relation does God sustain to us ? 20. Of him are what? 21. What numeral applies to Christ? 22. By him are what things? 23. Does this include man ? 24. In view of above where should idols be classed ? 25. Was knowledge of these things possessed by all? 26. How does lack of the knowledge affect the conscience 27. With what impression do such eat and drink? 28. Does this mean they are conscientious ? 29. What happens to their conscience here? 30. In reality how does meat affect standing with God ? 31. For whose sake must we abstain from this liberty ? 32. What might it become to such ? 33. In what place was this eating sometimes done ? 34. Was this wrong? 35. Who might see one doing this eating? 36. How would it affect his own conduct? 37. In what does the weakness mentioned consist? 38. Is this condemned elsewhere in the New Testament ? 39. Does this weak brother sin in eating the meat? 40. What fate will this bring him ? 41. If eating this meat is right, how could he sin ? 42. For whom did Christ die ? 43. Do we sin against the weak brethren only? 44. Did Christ ever teach this same doctrine ? 45. If meat makes my brother to offend, then what ? 46. With what meaning is the word "offend” used here? 47. How general did Paul make this abstaining from meat ? 48. Por how long did he feel under this obligation ? 49. What was his motive for thus abstaining? 50. Does this teach that we are "our brother’ s keeper” ? 1 Corinthians 8:1. Corinth was a Greek city and the sacrificing to idols was common. The flesh of the beasts was not burned, but only put through some routine, then sold in the market for meat. The question arose as to whether it was right for Christians to eat that meat. Some of the brethren understood that it did not make any difference, since the idols were dead objects and meant nothing. Those having this knowledge were being puffed up over their supposed superiority and were discouraging the weaker ones. Paul wanted them who were the better informed to show charity (love on behalf of the brethren) and- thus edify or build up the less informed disciples. 1 Corinthians 8:2. These better informed brethren were correct theoretically, yet their boasted knowledge had caused them to be ignorant of what was more important, namely, the proper attitude toward the others. 1 Corinthians 8:3. The greatest knowledge a man can have is shown by his love for God (and his weaker children). Such an attitude shows that the man knows God, which proves that he has the kind of knowledge that is really great. It may well be worded, "If any man loves God, such a man knows the same God." 1 Corinthians 8:4-5. Various objects in nature were worshiped as gods, which is why Paul uses the phrase gods many and lords many. But the apostle agrees with the "knowing ones" that these gods were nothing. 1 Corinthians 8:6. Repeating the idea just set forth, the apostle adds some truths about the God who created all these things which the heathen were ignorantly worshiping. 1 Corinthians 8:7. Not every man (even among the disciples) had been clearly informed on the subject of meats that had been used in the idolatrous service. For the meaning of conscience, see the notes at Acts 24:16 in volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary. When these uninformed brethren were induced to eat this meat, they had a "guilty feeling" because they could not see anything in the act except a form of idolatrous worship. Such an attitude would make them really guilty, because one must have a clear conscience in order to please God. 1 Corinthians 8:8. This is the same as verses 1, 4, 5. 1 Corinthians 8:9. The better informed brethren should not use their privilege in such a manner as to cause the weaker ones to go against their conscience. 1 Corinthians 8:10. See thee is a key to the subject, which will be referred to at verse 13. Idol's temple. After the religious exercises were over, a temporal meal was served and a visitor could sit down and eat in much the same fashion he would today in a restaurant. There was nothing wrong about it in itself; but if one of these weaker brethren should see it, he would be emboldened (encouraged) to eat also. He would reason, "If that brother may eat of that meat, I will also." 1 Corinthians 8:11. But as soon as he had done that, he would have that "guilty feeling" which defiled his conscience. He would perish; be in danger of condemnation for defiling his conscience, and it would be through the example of the stronger brother who had no conscientious objections to the meat. 1 Corinthians 8:12. Anything that is done toward the disciples of Christ, whether good or bad, is counted as being done unto Him. (See Matthew 25:40 Matthew 25:45.) 1 Corinthians 8:13. Make my brother to offend means to cause him to stumble or do wrong. I will eat no flesh; that is, in his presence (1 Corinthians 8:10). If a Christian believes it is right to eat this meat he may do so, but he must exercise that faith or privilege "to himself" (Romans 14:22). David Lipscomb Commentary On 1 Corinthians 9 THE RIGHTS AND WHICH THE APOSTLE HAD WAIVED IN THE OF OTHERS1 Corinthians 9:1-14 1 Am I not free?—He had just said that those who had “ knowledge” should be ready to surrender their rights for the good of the “ weak.” He now shows them that in matters which affected his whole life he had himself been governed by this rule. He was free and could have claimed that those to whom he preached should support him, but he deemed it wise to waive that right, and in so doing he subjected himself to great hardships and privations. (See Acts 20:34; 1 Thessalonians 2:9.) am I not an apostle?—Some one had gained an influence in the church at Corinth, who, in seeking to destroy Paul’ s influ¬ence, denied that he was an apostle. As he had refused to re¬ceive help of the church at Corinth while among them, this question indicates that they had made the facts— that he was not married and would not receive support— reasons for saying he was not an apostle. He had performed works in their midst which none but the apostles did. He says: “ Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, by signs and wonders and mighty works.” (2 Corinthians 12:12.) These signs have been wrought in their midst and he refers to them as evidence of his claims. An idea has prevailed that Apollos was at the head of the opposition to Paul; that some of the parties at Corinth claimed to be “ of Apollos” is made the ground of this conclu¬sion. But this is incorrect, for the relations between Paul and Apollos were cordial. (16: 12.) have I not seen Jesus our Lord?— Paul had not seen and learned of Jesus when in the flesh as the other apostles had. This difference he himself recognized and made mention of it on several occasions. But he had seen Jesus even as he ap¬peared to the twelve after his resurrection. After having re¬counted these appearances, he specifies with solemn emphasis, “ And last of all, as to the child untimely born, he appeared to me also.” (15: 5-8.) [This manifestation of the risen and glorified Lord, which was vouchsafed to him on the way to Damascus (Acts 9:17), placed him on a level, in regard to this important particular, with the twelve.] are not ye my work in the Lord?—He had been instrumental in converting them to Christ. He says: “ For though ye have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I begat vou through the gospel.” (4: 15.)" 2 If to others I am not an apostle, yet at least I am to you; —If others should reject him as an apostle, how could they, since they were the fruit of his labor as an apostle? They were the seal of his apostleship. “ He dwelt there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them” (Acts 18:11), and he built a larger church there than he had built at any other place. His claims to be an apostle had been accompanied by miracles, and they had believed on the evidence given through these of God’ s presence with him. Now to deny that he was an apostle would be to say that God had enabled one to work miracles and wonders who made false claims, or to admit that the miracles and wonders on which their faith rested had not been performed. They above all others could not question his apostleship. for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.— [A seal is that which is affixed to a deed, or other instrument to make it sure and indisputable. The Corinthian church itself is represented as such a seal of his apostleship. After their conver¬sion he had bestowed on many of them gifts of the Holy Spirit in such abundance that they were inferior to no church whatever. (1: 5-7; 2 Corinthians 12:13.) ] 3 My defence to them that examine me is this.—When any of his opponents undertook to question him as to his apostle¬ship, he answered that he had seen the Lord Jesus, and that he had set his seal upon his commission by the success which had crowned his labors. This answer satisfied Peter, James, and John, who gave to him the right hands of fellowship, seeing to him had been committed the apostleship to the Gen-tiles. (Galatians 2:8-9.) 4 Have we no right to eat and to drink?—[Having proved his apostleship, he now proves his right to be maintained by those among whom he labored.] 5 Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer, —[He answered those who called in question his apostleship, on the ground that he had no wife neither did he receive a support from those among whom he labored, by informing them that, while he and Barnabas had the right to do so, they did not avail themselves of these privileges as a matter of choice.] even as the rest of the apostles,—These had wives who accompanied them in their work, and he and Barnabas had the same right. [This passage certainly leads to the conclusion that most of the apostles, if not all, were married men ; that all had the privilege of having themselves and their wives main¬tained by the churches.] and the brethren of the Lord,— [The brethren of the Lord were “ James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Judas.” (Matthew 13:55.) Various and ingenious suppositions have been made as to who these were. Some have endeavored to prove that they were the cousins of Jesus; others that they were the sons of Joseph by a former marriage. These views have been fostered by those who have endeavored to establish the perpetual virginity of Mary. But the natural conclusion from a study of what is said in the Gospels, without preconceived prejudice, would be that Joseph and Mary lived together as husband and wife after the miraculous conception and birth of Jesus, and that these sons were born unto them. This conclusion is sup¬ported by the use of the words: “ She brought forth her first¬born son” (Luke 2:7) ; “ And knew her not till she had brought forth a son” (Matthew 1:25) ; “ before they came together” (Matthew 1:18) ; and the repeated mention of them in connection with his mother Mary (Matthew 12:46 Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3).] and Cephas?—[This statement and the account of Jesus healing Peter’ s mother-in-law (Matthew 8:14; Mark 1:30; Luke 4:38) is conclusive proof that he was a married man.] 6 Or I only and Barnabas, have we not a right to forbear working?—Not only had they the right to marry if they saw fit, but they had a right to forbear laboring with their hands for support and to call on the brethren to support them in the work to which they were called. [The word “ only” here im¬plies that the other apostles and the brethren of the Lord exercised their right to be maintained by the church.] 7 What soldier ever serveth at his own charges?—The soldier had a right to receive support from those whom he served. This was a matter of common equity; and on this principle all acted who enlisted as soldiers. So then any man who goes into the world to fight for Jesus is entitled to his support from those to whom he renders service. who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not the fruit thereof? —Any man that plants a vineyard is entitled to the fruit of the vineyard he planted. or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?—Any man that feeds a flock is entitled to the milk of thac flock. In all this he asserts the right of those who labor for the church of God to live by that labor. He is entitled to a living for the work he does. If he does not labor in his call¬ing, he is not entitled to it, for “ if any will not work, neither let him eat.” (2 Thessalonians 3:10.) 8 Do I speak these things after the manner of men? or saith not the law also the same?—It is not merely in accordance with human judgment of what is fitting that he lays down the principle that the laborer has a right to a living wage. There is a higher authority than that, for God had ordained it in the law. 9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn.—The ox when treading out the grain was allowed to eat what he needed while so doing. Is it for the oxen that God careth,—[Certainly God cares for the ox. He had commanded the Israelites that when the harvest came, the ox, while treading out the corn which it had contributed to produce by the painful labor of plowing, should not be muzzled, and thereby prevented from enjoying, conjointly with man, the fruit of its toil. God’ s object in acting thus was evidently to cultivate in the hearts of his people feelings of justice and equity. This moral object appears not only from the prohibition itself, but also from all the other injunctions which accompany it— pay to the poor laborer his wages on the same evening; not to put the child to death with the guilty father; always to leave, when gathering the harvest, a gleaning for widows and strangers; not to subject the criminal to more than forty stripes. (Deuteronomy 24:10 to Deuteronomy 25:4.) This whole context shows clearly enough what the object of the prohibition was. It was not from solicitude for the ox that God made this prohibition; there were other ways for providing for his nourishment. By calling on the Israelites to exercise gentleness and gratitude, even to a poor animal, it is clear that God desired to impress on them, with stronger reason, the same way of acting toward the human workmen whose help they engaged in their labor. It was the duties of moral beings to one another that God wished to impress by this precept.] 10 or saith he it assuredly for your sake? Yea, for our sake it was written: because he that ploweth ought to plow in hope, and he that thresheth, to thresh in hope of partaking.—This was written to teach that those laboring in the service of the Lord were entitled to a living from those for whom they labored, whatever their labor might he. [So the good which such a provision as the law achieved for the oxen was nothing compared to the good which it accomplished for man. God did not do this simply as a provision for the ox, but to teach us that it is a divine principle that the laborer should have his reward.] 11 If we sowed unto you spiritual things, is it a great mat¬ter if we shall reap your carnal things?—If Paul and Barnabas had preached to them, fed their souls with spiritual food, it was not unreasonable that they should minister to their fleshly necessities. 12 If others partake of this right over you, do not we yet more?—These opponents of Paul had received support from them. Certainly if any one had the right to receive their support, Paul, who had labored to support himself and suffered to plan and build up the church in its weakness, was entitled to it. Nevertheless we did not use this right;—He had not demanded this of them, preferring to hold himself above suspicion as to his motives. It is common even yet that an earnest, faithful worker denies himself, plants the truth through self¬denial, builds up a church, and then the church wishes a popular man to entertain them, and they forget the self-sacrificing father, wound his feelings, and support in abundance a popu-lar young man, who perverts the truth their father in the gospel taught. Paul’ s rebuke here applies to all such churches; but the men who allow themselves to be so used ought to be regarded as unworthy of countenance or support. Many young men ought to drink into Paul’ s spirit— that he would not build on another man’ s foundation— and seek destitute fields in which they can plant vineyards and live of their own planting, drink the milk of the flock they themselves have wa¬tered and cared for. but we bear all things, that we may cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ.—While Paul had the right to this support, he refused to accept it lest he should be suspected of seeking gain. He preferred to suffer and labor with his own hands, lest the gospel should be hindered by such suspicions against his character. [From this we should learn that our right to anything is of itself no sufficient reason for claiming it. We are bound by our relation to Christ to consider whether we shall most advance his cause by claiming or waiving our rights.] 13 Know ye not that they that minister about sacred things eat of the things of the temple,—God ordained in the temple service that those who administered in the temple should live from the offerings in the temple. and they that wait upon the altar have their portion with the altar?— -Of the offerings and sacrifices brought to the tem¬ple, certain portions were set apart for the priests and their helpers around the altar, and for their families. While serv¬ing at the altar they must live of the offerings made. 14 Even so did the Lord ordain that they that proclaim the gospel should live of the gospel.—As the priests who ministered about the holy things lived of the gifts made at the altar, so those who preach the gospel should receive their support out of the offerings made by the church, not of special dona¬tions made to them while other work of the church suffers, as God ordained it. A failure to support the work of the church left the teacher to suffer. THE APOSTLE’ S AS TO HIS SELF-DENIAL IN TO THESE RIGHTS1 Corinthians 9:15-23 15 But I have used none of these things:—Paul chose to use none of these privileges of a support to which he was entitled, lest by it he should hinder the gospel of Christ. and I write not these things that it may be so done in my case;— -Neither did he write this to them that they should do so to him. for it were good for me rather to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.— His glorying was that he might preach the gospel without receiving help from those to whom he preached. 16 For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of; for necessity is laid upon me;—He had been a sinner in persecuting the church. God chooses men to do work because of their fitness to do it. Paul’ s persecution of the church continually reminded him how he should as much as he could compensate for the injury he had done to it. So he felt in preaching- and suffering all he could preach and suffer only what he ought to do to undo the former evil work. As he had made others suf¬fer for it, he felt that he ought to bear and suffer to convert the world. Paul’ s conscience was always tender, quick, alert to lead him to suffer as he had made others suffer. for woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel.— As he had received mercy from God, he must proclaim the terms of mercy to others; hence he felt that woe would be unto him, if, after receiving so great mercy, he did not preach the mercy to others. 17 For if I do this of mine own will, I have a reward:—If he preached cheerfully and willingly without support, a reward would be given him. but if not of mine own will, I have a stewardship intrusted to me.—The stewardship was the responsibility of being an apostle to the Gentiles. And if he should fail to fill it, the responsibility of the Gentiles dying without having the gospel preached to them would be his. And what a woe would have rested upon him had he failed in the discharge of his duty, f Since a steward was a slave, there is a great difference be¬tween what he did in obedience to a command and what a man volunteers to do of his own accord. And this is the dif¬ference to which Paul refers. The slave may feel honored by the command of his master, and obey him gladly, still it is but service. So “ Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ” (Romans 1:1), was commanded to preach the gospel (Acts 26:16-21), and he did it with his whole heart; but he was not commanded to re¬fuse support from those to whom he ministered while so doing. ] 18 What then is my reward? That, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel without charge,—His reward or that which brought the reward was that he should preach the gospel without charge. so as not to use to the full my right in the gospel.—He was sensitive lest he should transcend and abuse his right of support while preaching. So he refused it from those to whom he preached. His own persecution of the church in days past no doubt wrought upon his conscience and demanded that he should suffer for the gospel. 19 For though I was free from all men, I brought myself under bondage to all, that I might gain the more.— -[None had any claim on him because they maintained him; yet he re¬duced himself to the condition of a servant, both by serving all men without requiring even maintenance from them and by complying with their prejudices in all cases where he could without violating God’ s will. How he did this is explained in the following verses.] 20 And to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain Jews;—To the Jews when he circumcised Timothy, for it is expressly said: “ Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and he took and circumcised him because of the Jews that were in those parts.” (Acts 16:3.) Also when he consented to purify himself and to be at charges with the four men who had a vow (Acts 21:20-26) ; and when he said: “ I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees” (Acts 23:6-7). He conformed to their usages, observed the law, avowing at the same time that he did it as a matter of conciliation. But whenever the fair inference from his course would have been that he regarded the Mosaic law and observances as binding on the Christian he strenuously refused compliance. His action in relation to Timothy and Titus shows the principle which governed him. Timothy, whose mother was a Jewess, he circumcised, because it was regarded as a concession. Titus he refused to circumcise, because it was demanded as a matter of obedience to the Mosaic law. (Galatians 2:3-5.) Two things are, therefore, to be considered in all cases in the opinions and practices of others: (1) That the point conceded be a matter of indifference; for Paul never yielded to anything which was in itself wrong. In this respect his conduct was directly opposite to that of those who accommodate themselves to the sins of men or to the religious errors of others. (2) That the concession does not involve any admission other than what is, in fact, indifferent in a matter of moral or spiritual obligation. to them that are under the law, as under the law, not being myself under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;—[Expositors generally take the position that this clause is only explanatory of the expression, “ to the Jews,” that is, to those under the law, I became a Jew, that is, as one under the law.] 21 to them that are without law,—All peoples and things in the universe are under the general government and rule of God. God gives men the privilege of obeying him and being saved, or of rejecting him as ruler and being condemned and punished for rebelling against him. If they were not under the dominion and rule of God, he could not punish them. Satan himself is under the dominion of God. God is the sole ruler of the universe. He permits men to rebel, to refuse to submit, for a time; but if they do not repent, God, as the ruler of all, will punish them. All men now living ought to be under “ the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus.” The reason they are not is because they are unwilling to obey him. God allows them to live a while in the state of rebellion; then if they refuse to repent and obey him, in the execution of the laws of the universe, he will punish them in hell. God forbears with them for a time, giving them time and opportunity to repent. He gives laws only to those willing to obey him. Those unwilling to serve him he leaves without law, not that they are not accountable, but because they reject him as ruler. God gave laws to the Israelites because they were willing at times to obey and serve him. The Gentiles were not willing to serve him, and he left them without law. When any Gentile was willing to obey God, he entered into the Jewish family and came under the Mosaic law. Just so now; any soul that is willing to obey God comes into the church of God and under his law. If a man is not under law it is because he is not willing to obey God. The Gentiles, who were without law in the days of Judaism, became willing to obey God under Christ; hence they were said to be without law, were not under the law of Moses. as without law,— [Paul adapted himself to the habits and modes of thought of the Gentiles; quoted their poets (Acts 17:23) ; ate with them, and rebuked Peter when he ceased to do so (Galatians 2:11-16) ; based an argument on the inscriptions on their altars (Acts 17:23); and did not urge on them the ceremonies and “ works of the law” ; but “ by the hearing of faith” (Galatians 3:9).] not being without law to God, but under law to Christ, that I might gain them that are without law.—This parenthesis explains in what sense only Paul was “ without law.” The death of Jesus on the cross had made him free from the law of Moses (Colossians 2:14), and brought him under the “ law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:2). 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak: I am become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some.—Paul’ s own example is instructive, as showing how far this method of action may be rightly carried.' He ac¬commodated himself to the prejudices and preferences of men so far as he could without sacrificing truth and righteousness, in order to win them to Christ. In other words, he sacrificed personal rights and personal liberty of action rather than to insist upon them when they stood in the way of winning any man, or set of men, to the Lord. As an example he earnestly contended that the law of Moses was no longer binding; yet he observed it as fully as he could, consistently with the law of Christ, for the purpose of conciliating the Jews and obtain¬ing from them a favorable hearing of the gospel. He did this not that he might be personally popular with any man, but that by doing so he might throw no obstacle in the way of their giving the gospel a favorable hearing. 23 And I do all things for the gospel’ s sake, that I may be a joint partaker thereof.— [Hitherto Paul has dwelt on the duty of self-denial for the good of others; now, however, he rises higher— to the absolute necessity of it to eternal salvation even of himself, as an indispensable feature of Christian char¬acter. So we see that in work for the good of others we must not be unmindful of our own good; and there is nothing more conducive to our spiritual benefit than faithful, self-denying service for Christ. “ Continue in these things; for in doing this thou shalt save both thyself and them that hear thee.” (1 Timothy 4:16.) ] OF THE DUTY OF SELF-DENIAL BY TO THE GRECIAN GAMES1 Corinthians 9:24-27 24 Know ye not that they that rim in a race run all,—There is here an allusion to the Isthmian games, which took place every second year, at a place on the seacoast about nine miles from Corinth. These games had been one of the chief means of fostering the feeling of brotherhood in the Hellenic race. They were the greatest of the national gatherings; and even when one State was at war with another, hostilities were suspended during the celebration of the games. All competitors in the games had ten months’ training, under the directions of competent teachers and under various restrictions of diet. For thirty days previous to the contest the candidates had to attend the exercises at the gymnasium. At the beginning of the festival, they were required to prove to the judges that they were of pure Greek blood, and had not forfeited by mis- conduct the right of citizenship, and had undergone the neces¬sary training. Only after the fulfillment of these conditions were they allowed, and when the time arrived, to contend in the sight of assembled Greece. The race was not merely an exhibition of bodily strength, but solemn trials of the excellence of the com¬petitors in the gymnastic art, and was to the Greeks one-half of the human education. Proclamation was made of the name of each competitor by a herald. but one receiveth the prize?—Of the multitude of competitors one only received the prize. They ran with all their might— each exerted himself to the utmost. The desire to succeed was so intense that the contestants suffered great agony. The issue of the contest was watched by his relatives and friends with breathless interest. His success depended on his passing all rivals, so thy cheered him to greater exertion. [The prize was a wreath of pine leaves, conferred on the successful contestant on the last day of the games. “ Every one thronged to see and congratulate him; his relatives, friends, and countrymen shedding tears of tenderness and joy, lifted him on their shoulders to show him to the crowd, and held him up to the applause of the whole assembly, who strewed handfuls of flowers over him.” His family was greatly honored by his victory, and when he returned to his home, he rode in a triumphal chariot through a breach in the wall which enclosed the city, the object of this being to symbolize that for a city which was honored by such a citizen no walls of defense were needful. His name was sung in trium¬phal odes and his likeness was placed in the long line of statues which formed the approach to the adjacent temple. Such was the imagery before Paul’ s mind when he wrote these words.] Even so run; that ye may attain.—That is, run as the victor runs, in order to attain. We have seen that the victor’ s success depended on great self-denial in preparation, and the greatest possible effort in the contest. In the Christian race he who crowns is willing to crown not the first only but the last. Yet all must run in a certain way. What this so running is, we learn from the following. “ Therefore let us also, seeing we are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so eas¬ily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising shame, and hath sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” (Hebrews 12 Hebrews 1, 2.) This gives special prominence to the immense concourse which the Greek spectacle called together, as well as the necessity of being free from every hindrance and of straining to the utmost every nerve, in order to attain the heavenly runner’ s prize. 25 And every man that striveth in the games exerciseth self-control in all things.—Contentedly and without a murmur he submits himself to the rules and restrictions of his ten months’ training, without which he may as well not compete. The indulgences which other men allow themselves he must forego. Not once will he break the trainer’ s rules, for he knows that some competitor will refrain even from that once and gain the strength while he is losing it. He glories in his hardships and fatigues and privation, and counts it a point of honor scrupulously to abstain from anything which might in the slightest degree diminish his chance of success, because his heart is set on the prize, and severe training is indispensable. He knows that his chances are gone if in any point or on any occasion he relaxes the rigor of the discipline. Now they do it to receive a corruptible crown ;— A crown of pine leaves. The victor, it is true, won a crown of glory; but the glory faded almost as fast as the wreath. No permanent satisfaction could result from being victorious in a contest of physical strength, activity, and skill. but we an incorruptible.— -An incorruptible, an unfading, and eternal crown. It is called “ the crown of righteousness” (2 Timothy 4:8); “ the crown of life” (James 1:12; Revelation 2:10); and “ the crown of glory” (1 Peter 5:4).. It is possible for every one who runs the Christian race to receive this crown, which shall forever be unto him a joy as thrilling as at the moment of receiving it. [It is worthy of the determined and sustained effort of a lifetime. As victory in the games was the actual incentive which stimulated the Grecian youth to strive for the physical strength and development, so there is laid before the Christian an incentive which, when fully appre¬hended, is sufficient to carry him to great spiritual attainments. To have righteousness and life in perfection is his true glory, and this is the very crown of his being. And such a crown cannot fade away.] 26 I therefore so run, as not uncertainly;—Here Paul ap¬peals to his own conduct as an illustration of the lesson which he is teaching, and by means of it reminds the reader that the whole of this chapter has been a vindication of his own self¬denial, and that he has a clear and definite object in view. No man can run as Paul did who has no definite object to be gained. [We must be resolved to win and have no thought of defeat, of failure, or of doing something better. It is the ab¬sence of deliberate choice and a strong determination which causes such uncertain running on the part of many who claim to be in the race. Their faces are as often turned from the goals as towards it. They fail to understand that all strength spent in any other direction than towards the goal is lost. They act as though they do not know what they wish to make of life.] so fight I, as not beating the air:—The illustration is changed from running to fighting, both being included in “ striveth.” He had an adversary to contend against, and did not strive with uncertain blows; but all his efforts were di¬rected, with good account, to the great purpose of subjecting his enemy, and bringing every thought into captivity to God. 27 but I buffet my body,—By this he plainly means his whole embodied self, as acting and acting on through the body. So viewed he expressed his determination to beat down relentlessly all those unholy inclinations of which the body is the essential organ. [Every man’ s body is his enemy when, instead of being his servant, it becofhes his master. The proper function of the body is to serve the will, to bring the inner man into contact with the outer world and enable him to influence it. When the body refuses to obey the will, when it usurps the authority and compels the man to do its bidding, it becomes his dangerous enemy.] and bring it into bondage:—He brought all its desires under subjection, that it might serve, not rule, the spirit. “ For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are contrary the one to the other” (Galatians 5:17), “ because the mind of the flesh is enmity against God” (Romans 8:7). God is Spirit; so the flesh opposes God. Paul kept under his body, and brought it, with all its lusts and desires, into subjection to the Spirit. He also says: “ For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh (for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but mighty before God to the casting down of strongholds) ; casting down imaginations, and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.” (2 Corinthians 10:3-5.) [It is difficult to control the thoughts. Evil thoughts will rise in the mind, excited by fleshly lusts. To bring into subjection to the will of God is the triumph of the Spirit, yet by constant prayer and watchfulness it can be done. By devotion to the Lord and persevering effort the thoughts that spring from the heart can be brought into subjection to the will of Christ. The heart can be so trained that the thoughts that arise will be of God, of our duties, and obligations to him, and of the high and exalted privileges and blessings that are bestowed on us as his children. This state is gained only by the constant study of God’ s word, a drinking into the Spirit, a cultivation of the devotional feelings, and a constant effort to conform the life to the will of God. This is the only way to fit the soul for companionship with God and “ the spirits of just men made perfect.” The church is the training school to fit man for the eternal home, and the will of Christ is for disci¬plining and training for the blessed companionship with the redeemed in the heavenly home.] lest by any means, after that I have preached to others,— [The image is carried on, and Paul says that he has a further motive to live a life of self-denial— that having acted as a herald, proclaiming the conditions of the contest, and the requi¬site preliminaries for it, should not be found to have himself fulfilled them. It is the same image kept up still of this race, and of the herald who announced the name of the victor, and the fact that he had fulfilled the necessary conditions. It was not the custom for the herald to join in the contest, but the apostle was himself both a runner in the Christian race and a herald of the conditions of that race to others. Hence, natu¬rally, he speaks of the two characters, which in the actual il-lustration would be distinct, as united in one when applied spiritually to himself.] I myself should be rejected.—[Lest he should fail utterly of the prize. If such earnest, self-denying watchfulness was needed on the part of Paul, with all his labors for others, to make his own calling and election sure, we should learn that not to do our utmost to save, at any personal sacrifice, the souls of others is to imperil our own salvation. For such effort and sacrifice strengthen the spiritual life. And so serious is our conflict and so tremendous are its issues that we dare not leave unused any means of spiritual strength. In seeking to save others, we are working out our own salvation.] Verse 1 1 Corinthians 9This whole chapter is devoted to the discussion of the rights of an apostle, and by extension, the rights of ministers of the gospel to support by their congregations, seven distinct and convincing arguments being given (1 Corinthians 9:1-14), with the remaining part of the chapter being taken up by Paul's explanation of why, in his own case, he did not compel the honoring of such right by the Corinthians. It begins with a pointed proof of his being a genuine apostle (1 Corinthians 9:1-3). Am I not free? am I not an apostle? have I not seen Jesus our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord? If to others I am not an apostle, yet at least I am to you; for the seal of my apostleship are ye in the Lord. My defense to them that examine me is this. (1 Corinthians 9:1-3) By the last sentence here Paul took knowledge of the slander then current in Corinth to the effect that he was not a true apostle, the alleged proof of it being that Paul had supported himself instead of claiming the emoluments of an apostle as the other apostles were doing. As DeHoff noted, "It is a common occurrence for some minister to preach on an evil and have the evil-doer condemn the preacher instead of repenting of the evil."[1]Paul refuted the charge that he was not a genuine apostle with two indubitable proofs: (1) he had seen the Lord Jesus, and (2) God had marvelously blessed his apostleship, the Corinthian church itself being the stark proof of it, "the seal," as Paul called it, of his apostleship. It is important to see in this short paragraph the impossibility of any man's being a true apostle unless he had seen Jesus Christ after our Lord's resurrection, thus being an eyewitness of the resurrection. ENDNOTE: [1] George W. DeHoff, Sermons on First Corinthians (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: The Christian Press, 1947), p. 73. Verse 4 Have we no right to eat and drink? Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? Or I only and Barnabas, have we not a right to forbear working?THE FIRST Have we no right ...? is a Hebrew idiom for "We certainly do have the right." To eat and drink ... means "entitled to be fed by the church."[2] It is incorrect to refer this to eating and drinking in an idol's temple. Wife that is a believer ... In view here, as Morris noted, is not the rights of apostles to marry; nobody in the first century would have raised any such question; rather, the thing in view is "the right to lead about a wife,"[3] maintaining her (along with her husband) at the church's expense. The rest of the apostles, and Cephas ... This means that all of the other apostles, and Cephas (Peter) in particular, carried their wives with them on their missionary journeys; and Paul as a true apostle had the same right to do so. Significantly, Peter appears in this passage not as a celibate, but as a family man. It will be recalled that his mother-in-law was healed by Jesus (Matthew 8:14). Thus, it is certain that Peter did not forsake the married state to discharge his apostolic office. Brethren of the Lord ... These were James, and Joseph, and Simon and Judas (Matthew 13:55); and there is nothing in the New Testament that requires these to be understood in any other way than as the half-brothers of Jesus, the natural children of Joseph and the Virgin Mary, her virginity following the birth of Jesus being nothing but a superstition. For more on Mary's so-called perpetual virginity, see in my Commentary on Matthew, pp. 9-11. Or I only and Barnabas ... It appears that Barnabas also gave up his right to be supported by the churches. While commendable in the highest degree, this renunciation of the right of support on the part of Paul and Barnabas resulted in their being looked down upon by some who were steeped in the culture of the Greeks. "The philosophers regarded the men who performed menial tasks as inferior."[4] Working with one's hands for his own support was detested by them. As Metz considered it, so do we, that the "wife" to be carried about as mentioned here could have any possible reference to some woman who was not the wife of the missionary, but a mere female companion or woman assistant, is "morally preposterous."[5] It is a fact, however, that the historic church did so pervert the meaning of this place; and of such perversion Farrar said: It was the cause of such shameful abuses and misrepresentations that at last the practice of traveling about with unmarried women, who went under the name of "sisters," "beloved," or "companions," was distinctly forbidden by the third canon of the Council of Nice.[6]Paul's argument is simply that he was as fully entitled to be supported by the churches as were any of the other apostles, a right proved by the general acceptance of it throughout the brotherhood of that day. [2] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on First Corinthians (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 89. [3] Leon Morris, Tyndale Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), p. 133. [4] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City, Missouri: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p. 397. [5] Ibid., p. 396. [6] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 287. Verse 7 What soldier ever serveth at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not the fruit therof? or who feedeth a flock and eateth not the milk of the flock?THE SECOND This argument derives from the inherent right of soldiers to be supported by their government, the right of the owner of a vineyard to eat the crop, and the right of a shepherd to drink of the milk of the flock. Such rights have been universally recognized and accepted in all ages. These examples are pointedly appropriate in their application to ministers of the gospel. "The Christian minister fights evil (as a soldier), plants churches (like the planter of a vineyard), and shepherds congregations."[7]ENDNOTE: [7] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1062. Verse 8 Do I speak these things after the manner of men? or saith not the law the same? For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn. Is it for the oxen that God careth, or saith he assuredly for our sake? Yea, for our sake it was written: because he that ploweth ought to plow in hope, and he that thresheth, to thresh in hope of partaking.THE THIRD Paul's argument here is founded on the quotation from Deuteronomy 25:4, which Paul affirmed to be applicable to the support of ministers of the word of God. However, when Paul said that "God does not care for oxen" (the meaning of the interrogative), it is not a denial that God commanded righteous men to regard even their beasts. In the sense that God sought to protect even a beast from abuse, God did indeed care for oxen; Paul's point here is, he would care infinitely more for the proper care and support of his ministers. The scene in view is that of an ancient threshing floor, the like of which may still be seen in some places. The wheat (or other grain) was placed upon a threshing floor; and the oxen were driven, treadmill style, around the floor until their hooves had beaten out the grain. No Jew, in the light of the law of Moses, could muzzle the ox and prevent his eating during his work on the floor. Pagans, of course, muzzled the ox to prevent his eating any of the grain. The prohibition in Deuteronomy occurs in a section where human relations, rather than the treatment of animals, is under consideration; and from this it appears that the human application of the principle was primary, even in Deuteronomy. As Morris said, "It may well have been meant figuratively from the first."[8] In any event, Paul applied it with full force to the question of supporting preachers of the gospel. ENDNOTE: [8] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 134. Verse 11 If we sowed unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things?THE FOURTH As Grosheide noted, "Carnal is not here identical with sinful; the contrast is between the heavenly and the earthly, between the spiritual and the material."[9] "What was earthly support in comparison with the riches of the gospel?"[10][9] F. W. Grosheide, The New International Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 207. [10] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 91. Verse 12 If others partake of this right over you, do not ye yet more? nevertheless we did not use this right; but we bear all things, that we may cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ.THE FIFTH The right pointed out in this verse is the superior right of one who planted and nourished a congregation over the claims of others who came afterward; and, by their admission of the claims of many teachers who succeeded Paul, they were bound to admit the prior rights of the founder of their congregation. This writer has known of ministers of the gospel whose labors had planted churches, but who were neglected and denied adequate support at a later period when those congregations had flourished and become prosperous; and something of this same abuse was taking place in Corinth. Despite this, Paul, even then, was not willing to be supported by any gifts from Corinth. That we may cause no hindrance to the gospel ... In order to disarm any evil thought to the effect that Paul was preaching the word of God for money, the grand apostle chose rather to suffer privation and hardship. Verse 13 Know ye not that they which minister about sacred things eat of the things of the temple, and they that wait upon the altar have their portion with the altar?THE SIXTH Paul doubtless had in mind the sacred things of the temple in Jerusalem, but his words have even a wider application, including the universal practice of all the world in such matters, the same things being true of the pagan temples as well as of the temple of the Jews. It may well be that Paul's mention, only a moment previously, of not being a "hindrance" to the gospel, was precisely what prompted the thought of the rich emoluments and perquisites of all priests, pagan and Jewish, and of the "hindrance" which the conduct of such priests certainly causes. Barclay gave a detailed account of all the profitable benefits which Jewish priests claimed under the temple system, pointing out that, at a time when the average family had meat only once a week, many of the priests were suffering "from an occupational disease caused by eating too much meat."[11] They had grown indolent, wealthy, and disdainful of the poor. Paul would not be LIKE THEM. Nevertheless, Paul did not deny, but rather affirmed, the propriety of the servants of temples living from the temple revenues, the application being that ministers of the gospel should live from the revenues of the churches. ENDNOTE: [11] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 89. Verse 14 Even so did the Lord ordain that they that proclaim the gospel should live of the gospel.THE SEVENTH Most commentators believe that Paul here had reference to the Lord's statement that "The laborer is worthy of his hire" (Luke 10:7); but it might be true that "They that proclaim the gospel should live by the gospel" is a verbatim statement of the Lord himself, being another quotation from the Lord found exclusively in Paul's writings, another example of the same thing being in Acts 20:35 : "It is more blessed to give than to receive." There is no logical reason why this may not be another such statement of the Lord himself. In any case, here was the climax of Paul's argument that ministers of the gospel should be supported by the churches. He summed it all up as having been "ordained," that is, "commanded" by the Lord Jesus Christ himself; and it makes no difference if the reference is to such a passage as Luke 10:7, or to a specific order of the Lord; it is true either way, or both ways. The balance of the chapter deals with a further explanation on Paul's part of why he had renounced on his own behalf a right of so much consequence to the growth of the church in all ages. The nobility, self-denial, altruistic motivation and benevolent love of others are set forth in the following verses. Verse 15 But I have used none of these things: and I write not these things that it may be done in my case; for it were good for me rather to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.Why did Paul take such a viewpoint? He clearly foresaw that, in so doing, he would rob Satan of any excuse to allege that the eternal gospel of Christ had first been advocated by people seeking their own gain. He would simply rather die than to give the devil any such opportunity to slander the truth. Glorying ... has reference to glorying in a gospel freely proclaimed without cost to those who heard it. The genius of the holy apostle was profoundly correct in such a discernment; and, through his own self-denial and sacrifice, he placed all subsequent generations of people under a debt of appreciation and gratitude. Verse 16 For if I preach the gospel I have nothing to glory of; for necessity is laid upon me; for woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel.Woe unto me ... if I preach not ... It is to be feared that many ministers of the present day are lacking the essential compulsion which moved the apostle. As Barnes said: Men who leave the ministry and voluntarily devote themselves to some other calling when they might preach, never had the right spirit. A man whose heart is not in the ministry, and who would be as happy in any other calling, is not fit to be an ambassador of Christ.[12]What an indictment of one's life must it be for him to turn away from preaching the truth of God to a perishing world in order to avoid inconvenience, poverty, deprivation and hardship, and with a view to possessing a greater share of the earth's wealth, honor and privilege! It is to be feared that the spirit of the apostle Paul is as rare upon earth now as it was then. ENDNOTE: [12] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1949), p. 164. Verse 17 For if I do this of mine own will, I have a reward: but if not of mine own will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me.If I do this of mine own will ... This probably refers to "preaching the gospel without financial support," as indicated by the consequence, "I have a reward." Above, it was pointed out that this reward consisted of thwarting Satan in a most important particular, the same being stated in the verse immediately following. I have a stewardship entrusted to me ... Shore's discernment of the meaning here appears to be correct. He said that if Paul's preaching the gospel (without charge) was not a thing voluntarily done, then, in that case, "he would be merely a steward, a slave doing his duty."[13] Throughout this passage, it is clear that Paul aimed at going beyond all duty and obligation. The phrase "over and beyond the call of duty" finds its noblest application in the person of Paul the apostle. ENDNOTE: [13] T. Teignmouth Shore, Ellicott's Commentary on the Holy Bible (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), p. 320. Verse 18 What then is my reward? That, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel without charge, so as not to use to the full my right in the gospel.The gospel without charge ... This was Paul's reward, to be able to preach the gospel without charge to dying people. It is not to be denied that a commendable pride existed in his heart. As Wesley said: There is perhaps no passage in the apostle's letters where there are more admirably revealed at once the nobility, delicacy, profound humility, dignity, and legitimate pride of this Christian character. Serving Christ cannot give him matter of joy except insofar as he has the consciousness of doing so in a condition of freedom.[14]ENDNOTE: [14] Godet as quoted by John Wesley, One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1972), in loco. Verse 19 For though I was free from all men, I brought myself under bondage to all, that I might gain the more.From this it is clear that it was not merely a matter of justifiable pride that Paul should have insisted on making the gospel free; but it was related to thwarting Satan, as noted under 1 Corinthians 9:15 and for the purpose of procuring a more abundant harvest in the gospel. Moreover, there can be little doubt that Paul's selfless actions actually did result in a mighty increase in the numbers of those accepting the truth. In all ages, there are people of little minds who suppose that every servant of the gospel is more interested in the pecuniary rewards of his work than in the salvation of souls; and, alas, it must be confessed that many times the conduct of preachers themselves supports such allegations. Under bondage to all ... This has the same ring as Paul's "debtor both to Greeks and barbarians" (Romans 1:14). He accepted for himself the obligation of preaching the gospel "to the whole creation." Verse 20 And to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, not being myself under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law.I became as a Jew ... has the meaning that Paul did not then any longer consider himself as a Jew, except in an accommodative sense. At a time when it is being alleged that Jews do not have to give up their Jewry to become Christians, it is significant here that Paul did, in some very real sense, consider that he was no longer a Jew. If not, he could not have declared that "to the Jews he became as a Jew." Not being myself under the law ... This is "a remarkable statement which emphasizes how completely Paul had broken with the law of Moses."[15] This is one of the strongest statements in his writings. On all matters of innocence or indifference, Paul accommodated himself to the life-style of those whom he hoped to win for the gospel. In keeping with such conduct, he ate with Gentiles without raising any question of where they had purchased the meat; and when in the homes of Jews, Paul avoided flaunting any of the liberty which he enjoyed in Christ. This accommodation to the viewpoint of others was the master strategy of Paul, reminding us of the notable instance from the life of the Saviour, who, at the well of Samaria, sought the common ground with the woman who had come to draw water. Jesus approached her in the common circumstance that both were thirsty. See my Commentary on John, p. 114. This conformity to the views of others on Paul's part, however, was limited to incidental or indifferent things; for Paul made it clear in the next verse that he was always under the law of Christ. ENDNOTE: [15] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 616. Verse 21 To them that are without law, as without law, not being without law to God, but under law to Christ, that I might gain them that are without law.This was the limitation which was never waived or relaxed. Whatever adaptation marked Paul's conduct, it never involved disobeying the word of the Lord, or violating his allegiance to the law of Christ. Verse 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak: I am become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some.David Lipscomb's comment on this is: Paul accommodated himself to the prejudices and preferences of men so far as he could without sacrificing truth and righteousness, in order to win them to Christ ... He did this not that he might be personally popular with any man, but that by doing so he might throw no obstacle in the way of their giving the gospel a fair hearing.[16]For example, Paul felt no obligation whatever to keep the forms and ceremonies of the law of Moses; yet he observed and kept such things in circumstances where his failure to do it would have antagonized the Jews, and in cases where their observance did not violate the spirit of the new law in Christ Jesus. Thus, Paul shaved his head; but there is no record that he ever ate the Jewish Passover. As he said, "Christ is our Passover." That I may save some ... As Johnson said, "This does not remove salvation from the hands of God";[17]and, when it is declared in the word of the Lord that people should "save themselves" (Acts 2:40), it is likewise true that their doing so cannot remove salvation from God's hands. When a man is baptized unto the remission of his sins, it does not make him his own saviour; because, when one obeys the gospel, he saves himself in the sense that he does that without which not even God can save him. In that same sense, not even God could save sinners without the preaching of the word; and by preaching the word, Paul, in that sense, saved people. [16] David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 137. [17] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., op. cit., p. 616. Verse 23 And I do all things for the gospel's sake, that I may be a joint partaker thereof.Adam Clarke translated this, "I do all this for the sake of the prize, that I may partake of it with you."[18] Paul's use of the word "prize" in the verse immediately following also seems to indicate that it was the prize of eternal life which he had in view here. At any rate, he at once elaborated an illustration taken from the Isthmian games, in which the attainment of the prize was the goal of all participants. ENDNOTE: [18] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and Porter, 1831), Vol. VI, p. 239. Verse 24 Know ye not that they that run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? Even so, run that ye may attain.There are important differences, as well as similarities, in such a contest as Paul referred to here. Analogies are: (1) to win; a man must contend legally, being properly enrolled in the contest, suggesting that a Christian must contend along with others in the church, and not as some kind of free-lance operator; (2) discipline is required (Hebrews 12:1); (3) some win; others do not win; (4) a host of spectators views the contest (Hebrews 12:1); (5) patience is necessary; (6) the winner receives the prize. The contrasts are: (1) only one may win an earthly race; all may win the heavenly; (2) the earthly reward is but a trifle; the heavenly reward is eternal life. The prize ... Johnson objected to interpreting this as eternal life, declaring that "The apostle had in mind service and rewards, and not salvation and eternal life."[19] However, it is probable that such comments are derived from the necessity some scholars feel to soften the implications of "castaway" or "rejected" in 1 Corinthians 9:27. The "prize" in which Paul hoped to participate with all Christians could hardly be anything else, other than eternal life. THE GAMESBarnes gives an excellent summary of the Greek contests which prompted Paul's comparison in this and following verses. There were four great celebrations: (1) the Pythian at Delphi, (2) the Isthmian at Corinth, (3) the Nemean in Argolis, and (4) the Olympian at Elis, on the southern bank of the Alphias river. Some of these were celebrated every four years (hence the word Olympiad), but others, such as the Isthmian, were celebrated every two years; and the Pythian were celebrated every three years, or as some say, every five years. In any case, there was hardly any year in which one or more of these celebrated contests did not occur. The prizes given in these various games were usually garlands bestowed upon the victors, being constructed of the leaves of olive, pine, apple, laurel, or even parsley, their worth being totally symbolical.[20] It was for such worthless prizes that men endured all kinds of rigorous training and hardship; but it is a far different kind of prize that may be won by the Christian. [19] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., op. cit., p. 617. [20] Albert Barnes, op. cit., pp. 169-171. Verse 25 And every man that striveth in the games exerciseth self-control in all things. Now they do it to receive a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.See under preceding verse for note on the nature of the "corruptible" crown bestowed upon the winner in the Greek games. In focus here is the dedication and discipline which men enforced upon themselves in order to win such prizes. But we an incorruptible ... This is the phrase that requires "prize" in preceding verses to be understood as eternal life, that being the ONLY incorruptible crown, all others being sure to perish with time and using. This is the reward which is called "the crown of righteousness," which shall be bestowed upon the faithful by the Lord himself "at that day," that is, the judgment day (2 Timothy 4:8). It is the "crown of glory that fadeth not away," which shall be given to the redeemed "when the chief Shepherd shall be manifested" (1 Peter 5:4). It is the "crown of life" (Revelation 2:10). Throughout this chapter, Paul was showing the Corinthians, and all Christians, that the inconveniences, hardships, disciplines and self-denial which were accepted by men striving to win in such a contest as the games, should far more willingly be endured and accepted by those intent upon the eternal reward. Specifically, they were not to flaunt their liberty in such a manner as to discourage others. Verse 26 I therefore run, as not uncertainly; so fight I as not beating the air.This indicates that "The whole of this chapter has been a vindication of Paul's self-denial,"[21] the object of it being the persuasion of the Corinthian boasters of their "liberty" to follow Paul's example by denying themselves all indulgence at the expense of the faith of their weaker brethren. Beating the air ... is a reference to boxers who missed with their punches and so lost the fight. "Uncertainly ..." has reference to contestants in a race who, through lack of training, wobbled to defeat, not victory. ENDNOTE: [21] T. Teignmouth Shore, op. cit., p. 291. Verse 27 But I buffet my body, and bring it into bondage: lest by any means, after that I have preached to others, I myself should be rejected.Buffet my body ... is metaphorical and does not refer to any type of flagellation such as was practiced by ascetics as a means of religious discipline. It indicates that every Christian, as Paul did, should exercise the sternest self-control over the body, its desires and appetites being a powerful source of temptation in all people. I myself should be rejected ... As Foy E. Wallace, Jr., said: "The translators (in this place) were evidently attempting to circumvent the possibility of apostasy."[22] There is no excuse for rendering the word here [@adokimos] as either "rejected" (English Revised Version (1885)) or "disqualified" (RSV). It means "reprobate" and is so translated elsewhere in the New Testament (Romans 1:28; 2 Corinthians 13:5-7; 2 Timothy 3:8; Titus 1:16). It is thus crystal clear that the apostle Paul, even after the world-shaking ministry of the word of God which characterized his life, considered it possible that he himself could become reprobate and lose the eternal reward. It was for the purpose of avoiding that possibility that he buffeted his body, walked in the strictest discipline, and devoted every possible effort to the service of the Lord. His example should put an end to all thoughts of "having it made" as a Christian and being certain to win eternal life apart from the most faithful continuance in God's service. We must therefore refuse interpretations of this passage such as that of Morris, who said, "Paul's fear was not that he might lose his salvation, but that he might lose his crown through failing to satisfy his Lord."[23]Clearly it was such a view as this that led to the mistranslation of 1 Corinthians 9:27; but the truth is available and clear enough for all who desire to know it. The hope of eternal life is not sealed in a single glorious moment in one's experience of conversion; but it is a lifelong fidelity to the risen Lord, the running of life's race all the way to the finish line. As DeHoff wrote: Not until every thought and imagination of man's heart is brought into subjection is his conversion complete. In this sense, conversion goes on as long as we live; and we are finally free from sin only when the day dawns and the shadows flee away, and we stand justified in the presence of God with the redeemed of all ages.[24]Farrar's analysis of this verse is as follows: The word "reprobate" here rendered "a castaway" (KJV) is a metaphor derived from the testing of metals, and the casting aside of those which are spurious. That Paul should see the necessity for such serious and unceasing effort shows how little he believed in saintly works of "supererogation, over and above what is commanded." "When the cedar of Lebanon trembles, what shall the reed by the brookside do?"[25]It might be added that this passage also shows how little Paul believed any such doctrine as the "final perseverance of the saints," called also "the impossibility of apostasy." [22] Foy E. Wallace, Jr., A Review of the New Versions (Fort Worth, Texas: The Foy E. Wallace Jr., Publications, 1973), p. 435. [23] Leon Morris, op. cit., p. 140. [24] George W. DeHoff, op. cit., p. 78. [25] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 291. "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE " Chapter Nine IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To be impressed with Paul's own example of restricting his liberty in Christ so as to save others 2) To understand the Biblical authority for supporting those who labor in the preaching of the gospel 3) To see the importance of self-control, and the danger of apostasy This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ 1 Corinthians 9:2. Aside from any work Paul might have done elsewhere, the Corinthians had the evidence in their own experience that Paul was an apostle. Seal is from , which Thayer defines at this place, "that by which anything is confirmed, proved, authenticated, as by a seal." When a legal paper has an official seal stamped on it, that proves the existence of the seal, just as the letters the reader is now looking at prove the existence of the type somewhere. The bestowal of spiritual gifts could be done only by an apostle (Acts 8:18). The church at Corinth possessed those gifts after Paul had worked with them, which proved that he was an apostl 1 Corinthians 9:3. Paul gives an answer to the ones who wanted to examine him, which denotes the examination consisted of questions as to why he did or did not do some things. 1 Corinthians 9:4. Power is from EXOUSIA, which means right or authority. To eat and drink means to do so at the expense of those to whom he preaches. (See verse 14.) 1 Corinthians 9:5. Paul means he has the right to do so at the expense of the church, as well as to obtain his own food from it. He abstained from marriage voluntarily, but insists that had he chosen to do so, he would have the right to marry and have his wife travel with him at the expense of the church. His stipulation that his wife would be a sister (in Christ) is a strong recommendation that even the first marriage of Christians should be with one in the faith. As an approved example of his right in this matter, he cites that of other apostles including Cephas (Peter). 1 Corinthians 9:6. Paul narrows his discussion to himself and Barnabas. Forbear working means not to labor with their hands to obtain the necessities of life. 1 Corinthians 9:7. Nobody expects a soldier to support himself while fighting for his country. On the same principle, a man who produces fruit or stock is granted the right to partake thereof. 1 Corinthians 9:8-9. To show that he was not making these arguments on his personal authority only, Paul quotes from Deuteronomy 25:4 in regard to oxen. Before the days of machinery, small grain was piled down on a floor and the beast was driven round over it to break the husk from the grain. It was natural for the ox to help himself to the feed, and the command was not to muzzle him to keep him from eating the grain. Doth God take care for oxen?' The law against muzzling the ox was in force literally, but the circumstance was used as an example for something more important than the comfort of brute beasts. 1 Corinthians 9:10. For our sakes . . . this is written. The law indeed was intended as a merciful provision for the dumb creature, but it was written as a lesson for men who were to partake of the fruit of their own labors. 1 Corinthians 9:11. Paul is still discussing his right to financial support, not that he is asking for it. Carnal things is another term for the temporal necessities of life. The Corinthians had received spiritual things (the Gospel) from Paul, and it was right if they were asked to contribute to his necessities were he to ask for it. 1 Corinthians 9:12. Having shown his full right to the temporal support of the Corinthians, Paul informs them it is not his intention to require it. 1 Corinthians 9:13. The apostle adds another proof for his position by referring to an arrangement under the Mosaic system, in which the one officiating in the altar service got part of his living from that service. (See Leviticus 6:16 Leviticus 6:26 Leviticus 7:6 Leviticus 7:31-32.) 1 Corinthians 9:14. To live of the Gospel means to obtain a living from those to whom the Gospel is preached. This is taught also in Galatians 6:6. 1 Corinthians 9:15. Again Paul explains that he is not hinting for favors. In truth, he would even refuse to receive them on account of a special circumstance to be commented on soon. But he wishes to correct a wrong attitude some had on the subject 1 Corinthians 9:16. Regardless of all other considerations, it was the duty of Paul to preach the Gospel, else the woe or condemnation of the Lord would be on him. 1 Corinthians 9:17. However, if he preaches independent of his fixed duty, there was a special favor offered to him. If he does not do it under a free motive, then the woe mentioned in the preceding 1 Corinthians 9 :, here called dispensation, would be upon him. 1 Corinthians 9:18. Paul asks and answers the question as to the reward mentioned in the preceding verse. That consisted in the privilege of preaching to the Corinthians and not taking any financial support from them. Verse 14 says the Lord ordained that preachers were to be supported by the ones who heard the preaching. Paul was given a special exemption from that law in order to have some satisfaction from the privilege of which he might glory (verse 15). It did not bring all of the enjoyment he expected, for afterward he apologized for it (2 Corinthians 12:13). 1 Corinthians 9:19. Paul was not legally bound to any man, yet he voluntarily put himself in a position of service to everybody for the good he could do. 1 Corinthians 9:20. The passages from this verse through 22 have been perverted, and made to represent Paul as a timeserver for the sake of peace and friendship, even to the extent of compromising the truth. Nothing could be more unjust toward a man whose integrity was shown in such expressions as, "let God be true, but every man a liar" (Romans 3:4). There are numberless incidentals in the conditions and lives of people that do not involve any principle of right and wrong. Paul means that in all such circumstances, he conformed to the conditions as he found them, in order to show a friendly interest in the happiness of the people. The customs of the Jews under the law included many items that were not especially of a religious obligation. Jews who were Christians had the right to practice them which Paul did while with them. 1 Corinthians 9:21. When Paul was mingling with those who were not Jews, he did not try to press the Jewish customs upon them, but he did advocate the law of Christ which was and is binding upon all mankind. 1 Corinthians 9:22. To the weak. Paul always respected the talents of those with whom he came in contact, and adapted his teaching and practices to their understanding. 1 Corinthians 9:23. By conforming himself to these various conditions, many of which existed in Corinth, the apostle showed a sincere interest in the Gospel. He also placed the whole relation between himself and the Corinthian brethren on a plane that enabled them all to be fellow partakers of the Gospel. 1 Corinthians 9:24. In the foot races that were common in those days, there could be but one successful contestant for the prize. There need be no limitation as to the number of winners in the Christian race. The point is that each man should run as if only one could win, and he was determined to be that one. 1 Corinthians 9:25. Paul is using the various athletic games of the country for his illustrations. The contestants were temperate, which denotes that they prepared themselves by a strict schedule of diet and exercise. Corruptible crown means the prize to be won in those games was material and subject to decay, while that for which the Christians were contending was "a crown of glory that fadeth not away" (1 Peter 5:4). For that reason all Christians should make the greater effort to qualify and perform to the utmost of their ability. 1 Corinthians 9:26. Not as uncertainly. If only one person could win in the race, then the success of another would mean de feat, and the whole contest would be hanging on uncertainty. But since it is an individual affair and based on faithfulness only, each runner may assure himself of victory. Beateth the air is an allusion to a practice of going through the motions of a boxer preparatory to the real fight, in which the performer threw his arms around in the air, similar to the modern practice with dumbbells for the purpose of physical training. 1 Corinthians 9:27. Instead of the actions de scribed in the preceding verse, Paul says he fights with a real person and that is himself. I keep under is from , which Thayer defines, "to beat black and blue, to smite so as to cause bruises and livid [black and blue] spots," and he explains it at this passage to mean, "like a boxer I buffet my body, handle it roughly, discipline it with hardships." The great apostle Paul never considered himself to be out of reach of temptation as long as he lived, but believed it necessary to be always on his guard against the wiles of Satan. Castaway means one who becomes unfaithful before the end of life's contest. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1 Corinthians 10 TO SELF-DENIAL BASED ON JEWISH HISTORY 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 1 For—Paul had just shown them, by his own example, the necessity for watchfulness and untiring effort, lest they should be unapproved, and now he continues this same thought by reference to the history of Israel that the possession of great privileges is no safeguard, and that the seductions of idolatry must not be consciously despised. I would not, brethren, have you ignorant,—By this he does not mean their being ignorant of the bare facts of the narrative, for they were the most striking in the Old Testament, but of their spiritual significance. This practical application is found in the fact that the fleshly kingdom of Israel was the type of the spiritual kingdom, the church of Jesus Christ. The earthly Canaan, the type of the heavenly. The rewards, the conflicts, the weapons of the one were earthly and carnal; in the other, heavenly and spiritual. The conduct of the people under the law of God and his dealings with them were recorded for our instruction and warning. Paul introduces the dealing of God with them here for the instruction and warning of the church at Corinth and for all Christians, as the letter is addressed “ unto the church of God which is at Corinth, even them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place, their Lord and ours.” (1: 2.) So after telling them in the preceding paragraph how he labored to keep under his body lest he should be rejected, he pleads with them to be guarded and careful, and introduces these dealings of God with Israel to warn and help them by these examples. that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;—[The cloud betokened the immediate pres¬ence of the angel of God; “ And the angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of cloud removed from before them, and stood behind them: and it came between the camp of Egypt and the camp of Israel; and there was the cloud and the darkness, yet gave it light by night: and the one came not near the other all the night.” (Exodus 14:19-20.) And immediately after this, trusting themselves to Moses as a medium of God’ s power, they passed through the dried-up bed of the sea so that] the cloud was over them and the sea stood as a wall on each side of them, thus were they covered and overwhelmed with the two. 2 and were all baptized unto Moses—It brought them into a relationship to Moses they had never sustained before. That is, into his undisputed control over their movements. Up to the very moment of that baptism this control was still dis¬puted by Pharaoh. They were saved by that baptism from his hands and passed under the leadership of Moses. True they were baptized figuratively in the cloud and in the sea; yet at the same time, by a like figure, passed out of Pharaoh into Moses. They were committed to his leadership as men now by baptism are consecrated to the leadership of Jesus Christ, and this transition into Moses by an act quite similar to baptism. in the cloud and in the sea;—Those who passed through the sea did not have water sprinkled or poured upon them. The cloud was not a rain cloud, but one of smoke, that presented at night an appearance of fire and by day a cloud to guide them, (see Exodus 13:21-22.) The water from the sea did not wet them, for a strong east wind blew the waters back and congealed them, and they went over on dry land. (Exodus 15:8.) In this passage the whole body of people were hidden, enclosed, covered by the sea and the cloud, [prefiguring the double process of submersion and emersion in baptism]. They were baptized in these. “ The waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left. Thus Jehovah saved Israel that day out of the hand of the Egyptians.” (Exodus 14:29-30.) 3 and did all eat the same spiritual food;—They ate of the food that God gave them— the manna and the quails. [Spiritual is to be taken in contrast with natural, not as regards the nature of the food, but of its source, which was su¬pernatural and miraculous.] The manna given by God is contrasted by Jesus with himself as the true bread that came down from heaven. (See John 6:31-35.) As the Israelites ate of the manna and were preserved alive, so the disciples ate of the true bread, Jesus Christ. The disciples ate of him by making him their Lord and doing his will. Jesus said: “ My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to accomplish his work.” (John 4:34.) So it is the meat of his disciples to do the will of Jesus and to finish the work he has given them to do. To do his will strengthens the soul as bread does the body. 4 and did all drink the same spiritual drink:—When they were in the wilderness they were thirsty; Jehovah told Moses to smite the rock; he did so; the water gushed out; they drank of it, and were refreshed. Jesus compares the life he gives to living water, of which if a man drinks, he shall never die: “ Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall become in him a well of water springing up unto eternal life.” (John 4:14.) for they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them:— [They habitually made use of the source which was always at hand. In drinking from the smitten rock the Israelites were drinking at the same time of a “ spiritual rock”— and not supplying them once alone, but following them throughout their history. So that looking back on the entire journey, it might very naturally be said that the rock had followed them, not meaning that wherever they went they had the same source to draw from, but that throughout their journey they were supplied with water in places and ways as unexpectedly and unlikely.] and the rock was Christ.—The object of the two epithets— “ followed” and “ spiritual”— is certainly to distinguish exactly the invisible and spiritual rock, of which he himself speaks, from the material rock spoken of in Exodus, that of which Jehovah said to Moses the first time: “ Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink” (Exodus 17:6), and the second time in the Wilderness of Sin: “ Take the rod, and assemble the congregation, thou, and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the rock before their eyes, that it give forth its water; and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock” (Numbers 20:8). These two rocks already stood there when Israel arrived in these two localities, and remained there when Israel left them. Paul, therefore, can only mean that, behind these material, immovable rocks, there was one invisible and movable, the true giver of the water, to wit, the Christ himself. [This is plainly the meaning of the passage in the light of the numerous sayings of Moses in which the Lord is called the Rock of Israel: “ The Rock, his work is perfect.” “ And lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation.” “ Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful.” (Deuteronomy 32:4 Deuteronomy 32:15 Deuteronomy 32:18.) And by similar ones in Isaiah: “ For thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation, and hast not been mindful of the rock of thy strength.” (17: 10.) “ Trust ye in Jehovah for ever; for in Jehovah, even Jehovah, is an everlasting rock.” (26: 4.) Only what is special in the passage under consideration is that this title “ Rock” during the journey through the wilderness is ascribed here, not to Jehovah, but to Christ. The passage forms an analogy to the words in John 12:41, where the apostle applies to Jesus the vision in which Isaiah beholds Jehovah in the temple of his glory. (Isaiah 6:1-13.) Christ is represented in the passages by Paul and John as pre-existent before coming to the earth, and presiding over the Israelites in their journey through the wilderness. In chapter 8:6, Paul had spoken of Christ as the one “ through whom are all things.” Here he designates him as the one who accompanied Israel in the cloud through the wilderness, and gave them de¬liverances when they needed.] 5 Howbeit with most of them God was not well pleased:— [In the course of these opening verses the emphatic word all occurs five times, the more emphatically to make the sad contrast between the commencement and the close of the journey. They all without exception stood on the same level of divine favor. In his marvelous dealings with them he was one and the same to them all: to the standing and the falling he was gracious alike, for as “ all were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea,” so in the wilderness the same food was common to them all and the same drink to all, both of divine origin, and had they but remained steadfast in the covenant, the same prospect of reaching Canaan was before them all.] But notwithstanding the deliverance he had given them from bondage, and the many works he did in their behalf, most of them forgot his goodness, turned from following Moses, and with them God was not well pleased. for they were overthrown in the wilderness.—All of the generation that left Egypt, except Joshua and Caleb, were disqualified by their misconduct. They were overthrown by the pestilence, by wars, or by natural and unusual diseases, so that they did not reach the land of Canaan. [So now notwith¬standing Jesus has delivered us from the slavery of sin, he has provided blessings and favors at every step of the way, we murmur and complain at his dealings and rebel against his law and displease him, and as the Israelites were overthrown in the wilderness, so we fall from our steadfastness and are overthrown by the way, fail to reach the promised land.] 6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.—The Israelites and the facts of their history are examples to us. The same Lord directs our affairs that ordered theirs; and if we sin as they did, we also must expect to be punished and ex¬cluded from his favors and from heaven. [In the case of Israel, the punishment was directly and visibly connected with the sin, and it is recorded so that their history might be used to instruct future generations; for in this life punishment is not, as a rule, summarily and immediately meted out to sin¬ners. In fact, if we judge by appearances only, we might sometimes even think that God rewarded crime and set a pre¬mium on sin. The Scripture records show that such appearances are deceptive, and that God’ s punishments are sure, though they may be long delayed. Israel lusted after flesh, and God granted them their desires, and the consequence was a plague, and the destruction of multitudes. (Numbers 11:4 Numbers 11:33-34.) This is a perpetual warning against the indulgence of in¬ordinate desires for forbidden things. It was especially appropriate as a warning to the Corinthians not to desire partici¬pation in the sacrificial feasts of the heathen in which they had been accustomed to indulge.] 7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them;—Some of them had a fondness for idolatry and were drawn into it. When Moses went up into the mountain to receive the law, the people induced Aaron to make them the golden calf, “ and they said, These are thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt.” (Exodus 32:4.) as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.— [To play here refers to those lively dances which occurred at heathen festivals (Exodus 32:3-6 Exodus 32:18-19 Exodus 32:25), in which the Corinthians, who, before they became Christians, had indulged. Here lay their peril. They had been released from the superstitions of idolatry (8: 4), and were still attracted by the feasting and gaiety, which were directly designed to provoke the most licentious passions— dances of which those now practiced are the direct lineal descendants. Hence the close connection between idolatry and fornication, which appears all through this epistle.] 8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed,—They were guilty of fornication with the daughters of Moab, and by them led into idolatry and three and twenty thousand were destroyed. This is held up as a warning to Christians to avoid associations that lead to idolatry. [The danger of fornication was always connected with idolatry. At Corinth, therefore, it might easily follow participation in sacrificial feasts.] fell in one day three and twenty thousand.—In Numbers 25:1-9, it is said that there were four and twenty thousand. Why this discrepancy I am not able to explain. 9 Neither, let us make trial of the Lord, as some of them made trial,—When difficulties presented themselves in the way, the Israelites often tried the Lord by their distrust of him and readiness to turn back and follow him no more. [The word, try, when applied to man, means to present motives or inducements to sin; when used in reference to the Lord, it means to try his patience, to provoke his anger to act in such a way as to see how much he will bear and how long he will endure the wickedness of men. The Israelites tried his patience by rebellion, by murmuring, by impatience, and dissatisfaction with his dealings. The Corinthians tried him when they exposed themselves to temptations in idol temples, and thus needlessly trying the strength of his religion, and making the experiment on the grace of the Lord, as if he were bound to keep them even in the midst of danger into which they needlessly ran. They had the promise of grace to keep them only when they were in the way of duty, and were using all proper precautions against sin. To go beyond this would be to try him, and to provoke him to leave them.] and perished by the serpents.—“ And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way to the Red Sea, to compass the land of Edom: and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way. And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness ? for there is no bread, and there is no water; and our soul loatheth this light bread. And Jehovah sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died. And the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, because we have spoken against Jehovah, and against thee; pray unto Jehovah, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people. And Jehovah said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a standard: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he seeth it, shall live. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and set it upon the standard: and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he looked unto the serpent of brass, he lived.” (Numbers 21:4-9.) 10 Neither murmur ye,—To murmur is to complain in a discontented rebellious spirit. as some of them murmured,—The fact here recited is that of the revolt of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram who murdered because they were not permitted to serve in the priestly office. They envied others who were entrusted with higher trusts than they. [In quoting this example, Paul possibly had in view the irritation felt by a party among the Corinthians against himself and his fellow laborers who disapproved of their taking part in heathen rejoicings. This party chafed at their severity, which gave rise to so painful a situation for Christians in relation to their idolatrous friends.] and perished by the destroyer.—Korah, Dathan, and Abiram were swallowed up by the earth. (Numbers 16:1-35.) [The destroyer means the pestilence which destroyed fourteen thousand and seven hundred persons. (Numbers 16:49.) The pestilence in David’ s day was administered by a destroying angel. (2 Samuel 24:16-17.) The angel in Exodus 12:23 is called the destroyer. It should be noted, (1) that in all the sins specified in the foregoing, Paul says, “ some of them,” showing that it was not true of all the Israelites of that day; (2) that he regards all these sins as connected with and growing out of lusting. (Compare James 1:14-15; 1 John 2:16-17.)] 11 Now these things happened unto them by way of example;—In the days of the patriarchs and of Moses, God gave the law, and then applied the law to the facts and conditions as they arose in the workings of human affairs. and they were written for our admonition,—They were written for examples and instruction to the world for all succeeding' time, to teach how God deals with man and how he applies his own law. No man can have a clear knowledge of how God will apply his law without studying the lessons he has given in the Old Testament Scriptures. All his dealings with men are instructive to us, and help in learning our duty and how God will regard our actions under his law. God’ s dealings with the unfaithful are just as much for our good as his dealings with the righteous. With both it has been impossible to keep man long in the strait and narrow way. So it behooves us in questions of God’ s dealings with men to go to these examples in which God applies his law to learn the con¬ditions required. upon whom the ends of the ages are come.—[The ages are the ages of the world’ s history, and the apostle means that we belong to the last dispensation, or the gospel era. In Hebrews 9:26, Christ’ s manifestation as the Messiah is said to mark the end or completion of the ages. The Christian dispensation is called “ the end of the ages” because it is the last and final dispensation. (1 John 2:18; 1 Peter 4:7.) The church is the heir of all the past— history culminates in it, and the lessons taught by the past are for its admonition.] 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.—When one feels most confidence in himself, then there is the greatest danger that he will be presumptuous and commit the greatest sin. Poor in spirit, contrite and humble in heart are qualities that God loves in man. [Distrust of self leads to trust in God, and God loves not him who thanked God that he was not as other men are, and felt that his good deeds and holy life entitled him to the high privileges of di¬vine favor; but loved him who in humility smote upon his breast and cried, “ Be merciful to me a sinner.” Self¬confidence leads to reliance on self instead of God.] 13 There hath no temptation taken you—[Seized upon you, or assailed you, as when an enemy grasps one and attempts to hold him fast.] but such as man can bear:—Temptations come to all men to test, prove them, and show their fitness to enter the kingdom of heaven, and their worthiness to stand before God in the im¬mortal state. [In verse 10 was a warning; this is an encouragement. Having just heard what efforts even Paul had to make in order to run successfully the Christian race, and how terribly the Israelites in the wilderness had failed, they might be inclined to throw up every effort in despair. Paul, there¬fore, reminds them that these temptations were not superhuman, but such as man had resisted, and such as they could resist.] but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able;—[This was the only source of security, and this was enough. If they looked only to themselves, they would fall. If they depended on the faithfulness of God, they would be secure. Not that God would keep them without any effort of their own; not that he would secure them if they plunged voluntarily into the temptation, but if they used the proper precautions to avoid it, if they resisted temptation, if they sought his aid, and depended upon his promises, then he would certainly perform his part of the covenant. This is everywhere implied in the Scriptures; and to depend on the faithfulness of God otherwise than in the proper use of the means, and avoiding the places of temptation, is to tempt him, and provoke him to wrath.] but will with the temptation make also the way of escape, that ye may be able to endure it.—God permits those whom he loves to be tempted to test, prove them, and show their worthiness to stand before him in the immortal state. If we do not escape, pass through the temptation without sin, we may know that we are not true to God as we should be. God is faithful and never fails to provide the way of escape if we have the fidelity to resist and escape. Men are given to excuse themselves for their wrongs because they are not able to bear temptations. [As temptations vary, so the means of escape also vary. We have in this verse, perhaps, the most practical and therefore the clearest exposition in the scriptures of free will in relation to God’ s overruling power. God makes an open road, but then man must walk in it: God con-trols circumstances, but man must use them. This is where man’ s responsibility lies.] THE EATING OF MEAT AT AN IDOL’ S TABLE OR IN FEASTS 1 Corinthians 10:14-22 14 Wherefore,—[This appeal is made in view of all that has been said of the severe judgments that came upon the idola¬trous Israelites, and the danger that Christians may fall into the same sins and thus incur God’ s displeasure.] my beloved,—While Paul reproves them very sharply, he speaks to them in much love and tenderness. flee from idolatry.—Avoid idolatry by fleeing from it. This is the only safe method of escaping its coils. We are subject to idolatry, not so gross in form, but more insidious and deceptive. We serve what we worship. [We should avoid all that approaches the confines of sin, and keep at a dis¬tance from everything which excites evil passions or which tends to ensnare the soul.] 15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.—[It is a matter requiring judgment and discrimination. They were wise men, and could, out of an abundant personal knowledge, judge as to the wisdom of his counsel when he thus told them to shun all that pertained to idolatry. For idolatry was so in¬terwoven with drunkenness, revelling, and licentiousness that it practically included them, and was not to be dallied with.] 16 The cup of blessing—He now directs their attention to the Lord’ s Supper which they had greatly perverted. The cup of blessing is the cup that was blessed (Matthew 26:26-27) and consecrated as a means of blessings to those who properly observed it. [The word “ blessing” is used interchangeably with “ gave thanks.” That is, the same act is sometimes ex¬pressed by the one form and sometimes by the other. In Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22, what is expressed by “ blessed” and “ had blessed” in Luke 22:17 Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24 is expressed by saying, “ had given thanks.” And in the account of the Lord’ s Supper as given by Matthew and Mark, the one expression is used in reference to the bread, and the other in reference to the cup. They therefore mean the same thing, or rather ex¬press the same act, for that act was both a benediction and thanksgiving; that is, it is addressed to God, acknowledging his mercy and imploring his blessing, and therefore may be expressed either by the words “ had blessed” or “ had given thanks.” ] which we bless,— [This is the explanation of the preceding clause. The cup of blessing is the cup which we bless; which can only mean the cup on which we implore a blessing; that is, which we pray may be a blessing to the end for which it was appointed.] is it not a communion of the blood of Christ?—In partaking of it we become partakers of the benefits of the blood of Christ. The blood is the life, and in partaking of it, w'e de¬clare that we partake of the life of Christ, we live the life of Christ. The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ?—This is but a repetition of the thought contained in the preceding clause. We partake of the benefits of the blood and body of Christ in the observance of this ordinance. 17 Seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one body: for we all partake of the one bread.—[This is in confirmation of the preceding statement that in the Lord’ s Supper there is a fellowship with the body and blood of Christ— with his death.] We who partake are members individually, but we constitute one body of Christ, because we all draw our life from the blood and partake of one bread, the body of Christ. So we are one body in Christ. 18 Behold Israel after the flesh:—This refers to fleshly Israel as distinguished from spiritual Israel, the church. (Romans 2:28-29; Galatians 4:29 Galatians 6:16.) have not they that eat the sacrifices communion with the altar?— They participate with the altar in partaking of the sacrifice offered. A part of the sacrifice was consumed upon the altar; the remainder was divided between the priest and the offerer. (See Leviticus 7:15-19 Leviticus 8:31; Deuteronomy 12:18.) [To eat of the sacrifices in the way prescribed by the law of Moses was to take part in the whole sacrificial service. Therefore Paul says that those who eat the sacrifices are in communion with the altar. They become worshipers of the God to whom the altar is dedicated. This is the import and effect of joining in those sacrificial feasts. The question is not as to the intention of the actor, but as to the import of the act, and as to the interpretation universally put upon it. To partake of a Jewish sacrifice as a sacrifice in a holy place was an act of Jewish worship. Therefore to partake, of a heathen sacrifice as a sacrifice, and in a holy place, was of necessity an act of hea¬then worship.] 19 What say I then? that a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything?—He does not mean to say that the idol is anything or that which is offered to the idol is anything. [This however does not alter the case. For although there are no such beings as those whom the heathen conceive their gods to be, and though their sacrifices. are not what they consider them, still their worship is real idolatry, and has a destructive influence on the soul.] 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God:—The sacrifice made at the altar of the idol is sacrificed to demons, and the demon is a participator in that sacrifice. If Christians partake of that sacrifice they commune with demons to whom the sacrifice is made. and I would not that ye should have communion with demons.—We are said to be in communion with those between whom and us there is congeniality of mind, community of interest, and friendly intercourse. In this sense we are in communion with our fellow Christians, with God, and with his Son Jesus Christ. And in this sense the worshipers of idols have fellowship with evil spirits. They are united to them so as to form one community, with a common character and a common destiny. Into this state of communion they are brought by sacrificing to them. It was of great importance for the Corinthians to know that it did not depend on their intention whether they came into communion with demons. The heathen did not intend to worship demons, and yet they did it; what would it avail to the reckless Corinthians, who attended the sacrificial feasts of the heathen, to say they did not intend to worship the idols? The question was not what they meant to do, but what was the import and effect of their conduct. A man may not intend to pollute his soul when he frequents the haunts of vice. The effect is altogether independent of his intention. This principle also applies with all its force to the compliance of professed Christians with the religious services of churches that are using mechanical instruments of music in the worship of God. Whatever their intention may be, by the force of the act they become one with those in whose worship they join. We constitute with them and with the methods of their worship one communion. 21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord,—[The cup of the Lord is that cup which brings into communion with the Lord.] and the cup of demons:—[The cup of demons is the cup which brings into communion with demons.] ye cannot partake of the table of the Lord,— [The table of the Lord is the Lord’ s Supper at which the Lord presides and at which his people are his guests.] and of the table of demons.—This would be to make them one. [The table of demons is the table at which demons preside, and at which all present are their guests. Here the apostle teaches that there is not merely an incongruity and incon¬sistency in a man’ s being the friend and guest of Christ and in being a guest and friend of demons, but the thing is impossible. A man cannot eat at the table of demons without being brought under their power and influence; nor can he eat at the Lord’ s table, without being brought into contact with him, either to his salvation or to his condemnation. If he should come thoughtlessly; without any desire to commune with Christ, he eats and drinks judgment to himself. But if he comes in faith with an humble desire to obey his Master and to seek his presence, he cannot fail to be welcomed and blessed.] 22 Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy?—The comparison here is to a wife who would provoke her husband to jealousy by showing her affection for another man. Can we af¬ford thus to treat Christ? [This illustration is the most effec¬tive that can be borrowed from human relations, and is often employed in Scripture to set forth the heinousness of the sin of idolatry.] are we stronger than he?—If we arouse his jealousy, he will destroy us. [As he has threatened to punish such transgres¬sors, it is therefore madness and folly to expose ourselves to the fury of his indignation.] LIBERTY AS REGARDS MEATS OFFERED TO IDOLS WHEN EATEN AT PRIVATE MEALS 1 Corinthians 10:23-33 and 1 Corinthians 11:1 23 all things are lawful;—[This is limited to things indifferent, not having a moral quality.] The reference here is to chapter eight, where he insisted that, as the idol was nothing, he who could eat without offense to others was at liberty to do so. but not all things are expedient.—Here he is referring to the sacrifices made at the altars of the false gods, and as the gods are nothing the altars are nothing, and a man might eat at them without injury to himself; but it was not expedient for Christians to do so, lest weak Christians and the heathen world should be encouraged to worship the idol. All things are lawful; but not all things edify.— Eating meat at the altar of an idol may be lawful, but will not build up or strengthen the weak, which is the chief concern of the Christian. When we lead a weak brother into sin, or encourage one in sin to remain in it, we sin against Christ who died to save the weak and lost. 24 Let no man seek his own, but each his neighbor’ s good. —Spiritual good is under consideration, and he warns them to let no man seek his own good to the disregard of his neighbor’ s good. In neglecting his neighbor’ s good, he destroys his own. Spiritual good is unlike material good, the more we seek the good of others, the more we promote our own. The more we look to our own good to the neglect of others, the more we destroy our own good. The more we divide our blessings with others, the more our own blessings grow. 25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles,—[In the public meat market.] Of the sacrifices made to idols, the part given to the officiating priest was sometimes sold in the meat market ; the devotees bought this meat. Sometimes an animal was consecrated to a certain god when slaughtered that it might be sold to the devotees of that god. Certain stalls in the market place were consecrated to a certain god, and its devotees patronized that stall. [But with the Christian it was different. If he merely bought his meat in the open market, no one could suspect him of meaning thereby to connive at or show favor to idolatry. It would, therefore, be needless for him to entertain fantastic scruples about matters purely indifferent; for when thus sold it was wholly disassociated from the rites of idolatrous sacrifice, and one so using it could not be suspected of doing so as an act of worship.] eat, asking no question for conscience’ sake;—[He was not to trouble his conscience by scruples arising from needless investigation about the food.] 26 for the earth is the Lord’ s and the fulness thereof.—“ For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving.” (1 Timothy 4:4.) The intelli¬gent Christian, then, may eat of it as the Lord’ s. 27 If one of them that believe not biddeth you to a feast,— The Christian was not forbidden to retain his friendship among the heathen, nor was he forbidden association with them. and ye are disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience’ sake.—[If a heathen friend should ask him to a meal in a private house and not in a sacri¬ficial feast in an idol temple, he was not to trouble himself to ask whether the meat that was served was a part of the idol sacrifice, for such a dining was in no sense an act of worship.] 28 But if any man say unto you, This hath been offered in sacrifice, eat not, for his sake that showed it, and for conscience’ sake:—If a fellow Christian, one of the weak brethren, being scrupulous himself about such things, thinks that he ought to warn the other of what he chances to know, he is not to eat. 29 conscience, I say, not thine own, but the other’ s;—Not for the sake of his own conscience, which could eat without injury, knowing that the idol is nothing; but for the sake of the weak brother or the unbeliever who sits at meat with him. He is not to eat lest the weak brother be encouraged to eat in worship to the idol. for why is my liberty judged by another conscience?—Why should he make such a use of his liberty as to give offense when no good end will be served by his eating? 30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks?—In this Paul seeks to induce the strong to respect the scruples of the weak. They might eat of sacrificial meat at private tables with freedom, so far as they themselves were concerned; but why, he asks, should they do it so as to give offense, and cause the weak to stumble and speak evil of them ? 31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.—All that Christians do should be done to the glory of God, and his glory is never enhanced by our destroying his weak children to gratify ourselves. Jesus pleased not himself, but gave up all to save men and so glorify God. He is our great exemplar. We must glorify God by sacrificing self for the good of others. 32 Give no occasion of stumbling, either to Jews, or to Greeks, or to the church of God:—The Christian is to do nothing that encourages a Jew or Gentile to remain in sin, and to stay away from God, or that would lead the weakest mem¬ber of the household of faith to stumble or go into sin. [Love to God and love to men should govern all our conduct.] 33 even as I also please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of the many,—As showing how far this method of action may rightly be carried, Paul’ s own course is given as an example for them to follow. [He sacrificed his personal comfort, and personal liberty of action; but he never sacrificed any important principle, or compromised the liberty of others. (Galatians 2:5.) With him to please others is what he chose in love to do instead of pleasing himself; he did not sacrifice to it the pleasing of God. We may also be liberal with that which is our own to give. When Peter, in becoming as a Jew to the Jews (Galatians 2:11-14), abandoned his previous habit of eating with Gentile converts, he both made a serious compromise of principle and went far to impose the burden of the law upon those who were free from it. Hence Paul’ s rebuke.] that they may be saved.—The chief consideration with Paul was to save men and honor God. In this he was following in the footsteps of Jesus, who gave up heaven with the glory he had with the Father, and came to earth, and suffered and died to save men. Paul drank of the same spirit, was willing to suffer the loss of all things of earth, and make himself the servant of all if thereby he might save men. 1 Corinthians 11:1 1 Be ye imitators of me, even as I also am of Christ.— Having just told them how he himself acted in cases of the kind referred to, Paul bids them to follow his example, and in so doing they would copy that of Christ. [Christ alone is the perfect model; each believer is a model to his brethren only in so far as he is a copy in relation to Christ. In making the exhortation Paul had in mind especially the greatness of the self-denial of the Son of God in taking upon himself “ the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross” (Philippians 2:7-8), that he might save men from their sins.] If we are not willing to deny self, and suffer the loss of all earthly things in order to serve and honor God and save men, we have not the spirit of Christ and are none of his. Verse 1 1 Corinthians 10In this chapter, and through verse 1 of the next, Paul completed his answer to the triple question regarding the permissibility of Christians: (1) sitting down at idol feasts, (2) purchasing meat in the common markets, and (3) being guests where facts about the origin of the meat were unknown. The very first word in this chapter demands that a close connection with the previous two chapters must be recognized; and it is deplorable that the RSV omitted that word, ignoring it completely. That word is "for"; and such a perversion of the sacred text was, as Farrar said, "due to the failure to understand the whole train of thought."[1] Also, it may be suspected that the omission of this authentic connective could be related to the critical bias which would make this chapter "the relic of a previous epistle."[2] It is now recognized, however, that such a view is concocted out of "no sufficient evidence."[3] The understanding of Paul's full line of thought in these chapters also explodes any notion that two different positions are advocated by the apostle in 1 Corinthians 8,1 Corinthians 10. It will be recalled that in chapter 8, the apostle effectively blasted the conceit and arrogance of his Corinthian questioners by warning them that: (1) knowledge puffs up, but does not build up (1 Corinthians 8:1); (2) those who thought they knew, actually knew nothing as they should have known (1 Corinthians 8:2); (3) their actions defiled the consciences of the weak (1 Corinthians 8:7); (4) such "liberty" was a stumblingblock to the weak (1 Corinthians 8:9); (5) sitting down in an idol's temple encouraged idol worship (1 Corinthians 8:10); (6) through their conduct the weak perished (1 Corinthians 8:11); and (7) their actions were not merely sins against brethren but a "sin against Christ" (1 Corinthians 8:12). In this light, it is ridiculous to make 1 Corinthians 8 to be in any manner permissive with regard to the worship of idols. The cautious manner of Paul's dealing with the question in 1 Corinthians 8, however, was to make a distinction between the legitimate claims of Christian liberty and the heartless abuse of the principle. Having fully made that distinction in 1 Corinthians 8, and also having reinforced his own example in such matters by explaining his forbearance in the matter of financial support in 1 Corinthians 9, Paul in this chapter returned to make an unqualified demolition of the thesis that any Christian could have anything whatever to do with idol worship. [1] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 322. [2]; ISBE p. 713. [3] Ibid. For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea. (1 Corinthians 10:1) At the end of 1 Corinthians 9, Paul had hinted that it was possible, even for himself, to be a "castaway," after preaching to others, requiring the conclusion that even he (who had as much "knowledge" as any of the Corinthians, and who knew all about Christian liberty) took the most vigorous precautions against sinning, and that such precautions required him to give up everything such as the indulgences of the Corinthians. Apparently, the inherent error in the philosophical Corinthians was the impression that the Lord's Supper and Christian baptism had made them immune to any contamination from the idol feasts, especially in the light of their presumed "knowledge" that idols were actually nothing anyway. Paul refuted this by reference to the allegorical nature of historic Israel, many of them, in fact most of them, being lost despite their covenant relationship to God. For ... This connective requires the understanding that this section of the epistle is a continuation of the argument in previous chapters. See in the chapter introduction. I would not have you ignorant ... was a favorite expression with Paul. He used it in 1 Corinthians 12:1; 2 Corinthians 1:8; Romans 1:13 Romans 11:25, and in 1 Thessalonians 4:13, as well as here. It is not likely that Paul thought his readers would have been ignorant of the history of Israel, but rather that they would not have been aware of the typical nature of that history. Our fathers ... Many of the Corinthians were not of Jewish extraction, and therefore the reference here regards Israel as the spiritual ancestry of all Christians. As Russell said, "The Old Testament was used in the Christian church, and even Gentile converts were expected to be familiar with it."[4] See Romans 9:6;Galatians 3:27-29, etc. All under the cloud ... all passed through the sea ... The word "all," repeated five times in these first four verses, emphasizes the fact that the entire Jewish people enjoyed the high privilege of covenant relationship with God, being fed miraculously, and that they were thus constituted as God's chosen people. Some of the Corinthians seem to have regarded the fact of their being baptized into Christ as some kind of endowment that made them immune from dangers, or in some manner exempt from sin even while indulging themselves at idol feasts. By the analogy of what happened historically to Israel, Paul would teach them that high privilege does not mean immunity from sin and death. ENDNOTE: [4] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 419. Verse 2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.By this bold comparison, Paul made the marvelous deliverance of Israel through the Red Sea from the pursuing armies of Pharaoh as a figure, or type, of Christian baptism. It should be carefully noted that the figure in evidence here is not baptism, that being the reality of which the great deliverance of Israel was the figure. Nowhere in the New Testament is baptism ever referred to as any kind of "figure" or "sign." "The voluntary character of that baptism is suggested by the aorist middle,"[5] as in Acts 22:16; Acts 2:38, where the meaning is "have yourselves baptized."[6]Bruce presented the analogy between Israel and Christians thus: Their (the Christians') baptism is the antitype of Israel's passage through the Red Sea; their sacrificial feeding on Christ by faith is the antitype of Israel's nourishment with manna and the water from the rock; Christ the living Rock is their guide through the wilderness; the heavenly rest before them (the Christians) is the counterpart to the earthly Canaan which was the goal of the Israelites.[7]As the next verse indicates, there is also a reference to the Lord's Supper in Paul's analogy. [5] Paul W. Marsh. A New Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 394. [6] W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1940), p. 97. [7] F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrew (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967), p. 62. Verse 3 And did all eat the same spiritual food.Just as Israel's commitment "unto Moses" by their passage through the sea corresponded to the Christian's baptism, their being fed with "spiritual food," that is, food of supernatural origin, as in the manna, and the water from the rock, corresponded to the Christian's eating the flesh of Christ and drinking his blood in the manner of Joh 6:54-58. John Wesley said that this spiritual food was "typical of the bread which we eat at Christ's table."[8] Dummelow noted that "Only here in the New Testament are the two Sacraments mentioned side by side,"[9] giving three reasons why the term "spiritual food" was used in this verse: (1) it was miraculous; (2) it was typical; and (3) it assured them of God's presence. [8] John Wesley, One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1972), in loco. [9] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 907. Verse 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them; and the rock was Christ.Rock that followed them ... This is not to be understood as Paul's reference to the Jewish legend about a literal rock that followed the Israelites in their wanderings. The rock to which Paul referred here was clearly stated: "The rock was Christ." The miracle of Moses' bringing forth water from the rock in the wilderness (Exodus 17:5 ff) provided literal water for Israel; but much more than that is in evidence here. As Marsh said, "The rock was Christ, not `is' or `is a type of' ... and this is a clear statement of the pre-existence of Christ."[10]One of the most beautiful and instructive titles of Christ in all the Bible is "Christ the Living Stone"; and for a full discussion of this, see my Commentary on Romans, pp. 352-357. In these first four verses, the broad outlines of the great allegory of fleshly Israel are laid down; and a little further attention is due to it. As DeHoff declared: "The story of the Israelites and their journey from Egypt into Canaan is a type of our journey from the Egypt of sin into the everlasting Canaan."[11]THE GRAND ANALOGY OF ISRAELEgypt is a type of sin and bondage. God's sending Moses to deliver them is a type of God's sending Christ to deliver us from the degrading slavery of sin. Pharaoh is a type of the devil. The compromises he offered Moses are like the compromises that Satan still suggests to Christians. Moses is the most eloquent type of Christ in all the Bible (see my Commentary on Hebrews, pp. 67-69). Israel's crossing the Red Sea is typical of Christian baptism. Their spiritual food is typical of the Lord's Supper. Israel's entering the wilderness is typical of the Christian's entering the church. The wilderness is a type of the church. That Israel sinned is typical of the sins and rebellions of Christians. The majority of them failed to enter Canaan; and this is typical of "the many" Christians who will not be saved eternally. Canaan is a type of heaven. Some of Israel entering Canaan is typical of the final victory of victory of Christians who shall enter into the joy of the Lord. That some of them "fell" is typical of Christians who fall away and are lost. God's providential care of Israel in the wilderness is typical of his providential care of Christians till "the end of the world." The fact of Israel's being "baptized" and having the Lord's Supper (in the analogy) did not make them immune to sin and death, as Paul was teaching here; and the same is true of Christians now. Canaan was entered when Israel crossed Jordan, making Jordan a type of death, beyond which Christians enter heaven. The dangers which beset Israel in the wilderness are typical of the dangers confronting Christians during confronting Christians during their probation. They were tempted to commit fornication, even as the Corinthians were being tempted, and by the same means, through the licentious celebrations of idol worship. Other analogies in this remarkable allegory may be pointed out, but the above is sufficient to show the extensive parallel between the fleshly Israel and the spiritual Israel. [10] Paul W. Marsh, op. cit., p. 394. [11] George W. DeHoff, Sermons on First Corinthians (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: The Christian Press, 1947), p. 79. Verse 5 Howbeit with most of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.Of all that great host who passed through the Red Sea and witnessed God's mighty act of delivering them from slavery, all of them except Caleb and Joshua failed to enter Canaan (Numbers 14:30-32). This brief, pungent verse is the apostle's summary of one of the most tragic and pathetic failures of all history. Passing over, except for the brief references in the first four verses, the startling parallels between fleshly and spiritual Israel, Paul here called attention to the pitiful defeat of an entire generation in the wilderness and made their overthrow a warning to the Corinthians and the Christians of all generations of the dreadful consequences of disobedience. Verse 6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.The blunt meaning here is that Christians should not suppose that their having been baptized into Christ and having been made partakers of the Lord's table, nor the fact of their sharing high privileges of spiritual life in God's kingdom, could endow them with any immunity to sin, a conceit which it seems some of the Corinthians had. Were our examples ... Farrar believed that these words might also be rendered, "Now in these things, they also proved to be figures of us";[12] but the meaning is the same either way. After having been totally and completely "saved" from Egyptian slavery, they were lost and rejected; and, corresponding to that, Christians who are completely and totally saved may fall into sin and lose their hope of eternal life. Lust after evil things ... Although the technical meaning of "lust" is "to desire either good things or bad things,"[13] its use in the holy Scriptures is invariably a reference to illicit and harmful desire. The inspired author James identified this inward desire ever burning in people's hearts as the embryonic source of all sin. To paraphrase James, "Lust has a child, which is sin; and then sin also has a child, which is death" (James 1:12-15). Self-denial is the soul's rejection of all unlawful desire. The surrender to Christ is the subordination of all selfish desire to the will of the Lord. The lust after evil things is the first of five rebellious actions of fleshly Israel; and, enumerating them one by one, Paul demanded that Christians avoid committing them. [12] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 323. [13] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1969), p. 405. Verse 7 Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.The Scriptural quotation here is Exodus 32:6; and thus the idolatry Paul mentioned was that of Israel's worshipping the golden calf. The mention of idolatry almost in the same breath with "lust" (v. 6) shows the close connection, the one leading to the other, indicating that idolatry depended for its motivation upon the gratification of fleshly lusts. It is of great significance that in the incident thus cited by Paul, the Old Testament specifically revealed that the people "were naked" (Exodus 32:25); and this may not be dismissed as a mere reference to their nakedness! Sat down to eat ... rose up to play ... The "playing" was not some innocent diversion, or game, this being a reference to the wild naked dances which concluded the idol feasts. As Wesley said, "(the word play) means to dance in honor of their idol."[14] McGarvey declared that the kind of playing in view here "was familiar to the Corinthians who had indulged in such licentious sportfulness"[15] in such temples as those of Bacchus, Poseidon and Aphrodite (Venus). [14] John Wesley, op. cit., in loco. [15] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on 1Corinthians (Cincinnati: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 100. Verse 8 Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand.Notice the list of sins: (1) we should not lust after evil things; (2) neither be idolaters; (3) neither let us commit fornication. The whole sequence was the normal procedure in idol worship. In one day three and twenty thousand ...; Numbers 25:9 gives the number who fell as 24,000; and many have been perplexed by this, even Lipscomb saying, "Why this discrepancy I am not able to explain."[16] The explanation is in the words "in one day," a phrase not in the Old Testament narrative. Paul's 23,000, therefore, did not include those slain by the judges before this "one day." It will be recalled that, before the plague broke out, God through Moses had commanded the judges of Israel to "hang all the heads of the people" who had condoned and encouraged the worship of Baal-Peor, the idol god of the Moabites, especially the Moabite women who had used the device of idol worship to seduce the Israelites to commit fornication. Putting the two figures together, in which there is no discrepancy whatever, it is clear that the judges hanged one thousand men in connection with this disaster which are not counted in Paul's 23,000 who perished in one day. Guthrie pointed out a Jewish tradition which confirms this explanation. He said, "Jewish tradition ascribed 1,000 deaths to the action of the judges described in Numbers 25:5."[17] Another pseudocon bites the dust! [16] David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 149. [17] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1064. Verse 9 Neither let us make trial of the Lord, as some of them made trial, and perished by the serpents.Make trial of the Lord ... refers to provoking the Lord through disobedience and murmuring against his benign government, in a sense "testing" the Lord to see whether or not he will punish the disobedient. The Old Testament background of this admonition is found in Numbers 21:5-6. Significantly, all sin and disobedience of God fall into the category of making "trial" of him. The particular sins of Israel mentioned here were those of speaking against God and Moses and complaining of the manna. The Lord ... Many ancient authorities read "Christ" instead of "Lord" (English Revised Version margin); and, as Barnes observed, "It cannot be denied that the more natural construction is ... `Christ' ... rather than `God.'"[18] As the reference is to a time before Christ came, however, the translators rendered it "Lord," thus avoiding the difficulty. The point is not crucial, because, as a matter of fact, they made trial of both God and Christ. The view preferred here is that Paul meant "Christ," the same being another reference to his pre-existence, and indicating that our Lord's pre-incarnation activity included that of shepherding the chosen people in the wilderness. It was not Christ, however, who spake the law to Israel, for Hebrews 1:1 makes it clear that God did that through the prophets, and not through his Son. ENDNOTE: [18] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1949), p. 185. Verse 10 Neither murmur ye, as some of them murmured, and perished by the destroyer.The sin of murmuring rounds out the five: lusting, idolatry, fornication, making trial of God, and murmuring. Neither murmur ye ... For a more detailed comment on this vice, see my Commentary on Acts, pp. 121-122. The murmurers are the complainers, fault-finders, objectors and critics who, alas, form a part of every congregation that ever existed. The attitude represented by such behavior is not a minor or negligible "fault" but an atrocious sin, standing in sequence here as the climax involving even greater guilt than idolatry and fornication; for it would certainly seem to be true that Paul arranged these in ascending order of magnitude. Verse 11 Now these things happened unto them by way of example; and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages are come.Now these things happened ... This is a bold testimony to the Old Testament record, which contains not legends, myths or traditions, but what "happened." By way of example ... This same thought was expressed in 1 Corinthians 10:6; and under 1 Corinthians 10:4 is given a list of analogies in the great allegory of fleshly Israel, the type of spiritual Israel. Romans 15:4 has much the same teaching, indicating that the Old Testament is for the "learning" of Christians, and making it clear that the Old Testament is a legitimate part of the teaching which applies to every Christian, only with this limitation, that all of its forms and ceremonies and TYPES have been replaced by the great realities of the new covenant. Upon whom the ends of the ages are come ... This is similar in thought to "this is the ... last days" (Acts 2:16-17) mentioned by Peter on Pentecost, and a number of other similar references in the New Testament; and the usual interpretation is to refer these to the final dispensation of God's grace, the Christian age, which at that time was only beginning. In this interpretation, the meaning is that the present dispensation is terminal, which is believed to be true of course; but the words have a more immediate application to the end of the Jewish dispensation which had already occurred in the crucifixion of Christ; but that terminus of the whole Mosaic age would shortly be marked by the destruction of the Jewish state, the city of Jerusalem and the temple. It is not incorrect to see this also in Paul's words here. It was indeed the "ends of the ages" shortly to be fantastically demonstrated before their eyes in 70 A.D. As Barnes truly observed, "This by no means denotes that the apostle believed the world would soon come to an end."[19]ENDNOTE: [19] Ibid., p. 186. Verse 12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.Whether taken alone or in context, this verse may not be referred to anything else other than to the danger of apostasy, which is an ever-present for all of the saved in Christ as long as they are under the probation of earthly existence. We shall not take occasion here to demonstrate the lengths to which scholars have gone in their vain efforts to edit such a thought out of it. Unless there is a real and present danger of falling away so as to be lost, the message of this whole chapter is meaningless. "The history of Israel not only showed the mere possibility of apostasy, but demonstrated its actual reality and the sad prevalence of it."[20]ENDNOTE: [20] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 102. Verse 13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as man can bear: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation make also the way of escape, that ye may be able to endure it.No temptation ... but such as man can bear ... The notion of temptations being irresistible was not allowed by Paul. "Any temptation that comes to us is not unique! others have endured it, and others have come through it."[21]God ... The agency of God himself is in view in this passage. All temptation, while allowed by God, is also controlled by him; and the Father will simply not allow a child of God to be tempted above what he is able to bear. In the wise providence of God, he has made a way out of every temptation; and, as Barclay noted, "There is the way out, and the way out is not the way of surrender, and not the way of retreat, but the way of conquest in the power of the grace of God."[22]This instruction regarding "the way of escape" seems to have been given by Paul to alleviate any undue discouragement caused by the blunt and dreadful warning in 1 Corinthians 10:12. The fact that many may, and do, apostatize cannot mean that they were overwhelmed by irresistible temptations, but that they neglected to take "the way of escape." [21] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 100. [22] Ibid. p. 101. Verse 14 Wherefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry.This is Paul's dramatic summary of the whole epistle from 1 Corinthians 8:1 to this place, tying the whole passage together as one ardent and sustained plea against any indulgence whatever, by any persons whatever, including both the weak and those who thought of themselves as "strong," and demanding absolutely that they "flee from idolatry." The meaning of that is to get as far away from it as possible. Such dilly-dallying with idolatry as that being engaged in by the "knowledge" party in Corinth was the most stupid kind of folly. Their acceptance of any kind of participation in the idol feasts was a violation of their status as participants in the Lord's Supper; and Paul's saying, "I speak as to wise men," in the next verse, far from complimenting them on their wisdom, is a bitter irony spoken in rebuke of their phenomenal spiritual density. Verse 15 I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say.Wise men ... (?)" To these who were sitting down in the temples of idols and criticizing the "weak" who would not do likewise, these who were boasting of their "liberty" and declaring that "all things were lawful" for Christians, Paul's remark here has the weight of "All right, you smart people, listen to this." Verse 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ? seeing that we who are many are one bread, one body: for we all partake of the one bread.The cup of blessing ... This was one of the four cups which marked participation in the Jewish Passover (see my Commentary on Luke, pp. 467-468), being the final one, over which the patriarch pronounced a blessing at the end of the Passover. "It is here transferred to the chalice of the Eucharist."[23]Which we bless ... Paul's use of the plural "we" reveals "his representing the entire company present, and not as individually possessed of some miraculous gift."[24] The superstition that the one presiding at the Lord's table performed any function that could change the nature of the elements of bread and wine did not arise until a much later time. The thought of this whole verse is that participants in the Lord's supper were unified and bound together in one spirit. Their taking the supper was a declaration that "They had the same object of worship, the same faith, the same hope, etc., with others whom they joined in such a religious act."[25]Nothing may be made of the fact that Paul mentioned the cup first in this passage, a circumstance which probably resulted from the fact that, "In the heathen feasts, the libation came before the food."[25] Also, there is the obvious intention of the apostle to dwell at greater length upon the bread. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ 1 Corinthians 10:2. Notice that both the cloud and the sea were required to accomplish the baptism. That is because the word means a complete burial or envelopment. The sea at their sides and the cloud over the top made a literal surrounding. They are said to have been baptized unto Moses because he was their leader, even as Jesus is the leader of Christians unto whom they are baptized. 1 Corinthians 10:3-4. The meat they ate was literal but had a typical or spiritual significance, because it had to be provided by miracle; it refers to the manna and quails recorded in Exodus 16. The drink also was literal water but had to be produced by miracle (Exodus 17:6). The rock at Horeb from which the drinking water was drawn was a type of Christ who is the Rock of Ages. 1 Corinthians 10:5. For they were overthrown in the wilderness is stated as the proof that God was displeased with them. 1 Corinthians 10:6. These things refers to the judgments sent upon the Israelites, and they were to serve as punishments for them, and a warning for Christians not to lust after evil things as they lusted. 1 Corinthians 10:7. The idolatry referred to is recorded in Exodus 32. Verse 6 of that chapter says the people "rose up to play," which is the passage Paul quotes in our present verse. And verse 19 of the chapter in Exodus says when Moses came in sight, the people were dancing. The word play in our verse is from PAIZO which Thayer defines, "to play, sport, jest; to give way to hilarity," and he explains it to mean, "by joking, singing, dancing." It is significant that Paul connects idolatry with the playing, which we now have learned included dancing. That is a serious conclusion, and we are sure the idea is from the truth that in promiscuous dancing, the participants are devoted to the goddess of lust. 1 Corinthians 10:8. The case of fornication referred to is recorded in Numbers 25. The occasion of it was the failure of Balaam to curse Israel in his speeches. Afterward, however, he gave Balak some advice by which the men of Israel were induced to commit fornication with the girls of Moab; this is mentioned in Revelation 2:14. The secular history of the event is recorded in Josephus, Antiquities, Book 4, Chapter 6, Sections 6-9. It was especially appropriate to warn the Corinthians against fornication, in view of the immorality that was so common in that city. 1 Corinthians 10:9. We know when this temptation took place by the fiery serpents that Paul mentions in connection with it. The case is in Numbers 21:5-6, and consisted in the complaints of the people "against God, and against Moses." Christ was not specifically known to the Israelites, but He was with God in all of the dealings with man. If Christians utter words of opposition against Christ, as those Israelites did against Moses and God, it is regarded as a temptation which Paul is warning against. 1 Corinthians 10:10. Murmur is from GOGGUZO, which Thayer defines, "to murmur, mutter, grumble, say anything in a low tone," and he explains it at this place to mean, "those who discontentedly complain." The instance Paul refers to is in Numbers 14:1-4. The word is used of members of the church who manifest an unfavorable attitude toward things in general, yet will not specify anything they can show to be unscriptural. 1 Corinthians 10:11. These things means the same as the phrase in verse 6, namely, the judgments sent on the Israelites for their sins. They were thus punished on account of their own deserts, and the account of them is written for the benefit of us who are living in the Christian Dispensation; we should profit by their mistakes and the punishment inflicted on them. Ends of the world. The last word is from AION and means "age." The word is plural, so the phrase means "the ends of the ages." God has given the world three ages or dispensations, and the Christian Dispensation is here declared to be the last one. The theory that Christ will come and set up another age (the Millennial age) is therefore false, and implies that Paul did not tell the truth here. 1 Corinthians 10:12. This verse is good general advice, appropriate for all people in all ages. No one is in as much danger of falling as the man who is too sure of himself. (Paul showed the opposite attitude in chapter 9:27.) The Corinthians were so puffed up over their spiritual gifts and other advantages; they had that overconfident feeling, so the admonition was peculiarly needed for them. 1 Corinthians 10:13. The Bible does not teach that God will do something for the salvation of one man that He will not, do for another under the same circumstances, therefore this verse does not justify the theory known as "Special Providence." The plan of salvation is completely offered in the New Testament (Colossians 2:10), and all of the human race have equal access to it. The other passages showing this truth are too numerous to be cited here. No miracle is promised as an escape from temptation that has not been provided for in the Gospel. If such a favor were intended by this passage, Paul certainly would not have written chapter 9:27, for he would have expected the Lord to provide such an escape for him that he should not become a "castaway." Will with the temptation, etc. In the management of the universe, if it is God's will to bring about some conditions that might be too trying for a Christian, then He will so regulate those conditions that nothing will be beyond the protection offered the Christian in the written Word. 1 Corinthians 10:14. Idolatry was frequently mingled with immorality, both of which were common in Corinth. In chapter 6:18 Paul exhorts the brethren to "flee" from the latter, and in this verse he urges the same action toward the former. To flee from a thing means more than merely not partaking; it means to run as from a poisonous adder. 1 Corinthians 10:15. The original for wise means one who is intelligent, a man who is capable of forming logical conclusions. Paul believed the Corinthian brethren were able to "see the point" in all of the present reasoning. 1 Corinthians 10:16. In chapter 8 Paul deals with the subject of meat that had been offered in sacrifie to idols. He shows that the mere eating of such meat was not wrong in itself, but that when it was used as a religious performance it constituted a form of idolatry; fellowship (or communion) with idols. On the same principle, to partake of the cup and bread in the Lord's Supper means to have fellowship with the blood and body of Christ. Note that Paul does not call the cup and bread "The Communion," as a familiar but careless saying puts it. In truth, the term is not to be found in a single passage in the New Testament, much less is it applied to the Lord's Supper which is only a part of the communion or general service to Christ under the Gospel system of salvation. Bless is from EULOGEO, and Thayer's first definition is, "to consecrate a thing with solemn prayers; to ask God's blessing on a thing," hence it does not mean to confer some miraculous quality on the cup and bread. 1 Corinthians 10:17. One bread means that Christians have only one use for bread as a religious act, and that is to represent the body of Christ that was given for the salvation of man. When it is partaken of for that purpose, all who do so are acting as sharers of the same blessing of salvation through Christ. 1 Corinthians 10:18. Ancient Israel not only offered certain articles in sacrifice upon the altar, but the roper ones ate of a part of those animals. In doing so they became participants of the altar service. On the same principle, when disciples eat of the bread in view of the body of Christ, they receive benefits of His body. 1 Corinthians 10:19. In chapter 8:4 Paul had said that an idol was "nothing," and yet he showed that if a man participated in the sacrifices offered to the idol, it made him guilty of a real sin, that of idolatry. In the present passage he sees that a wrong impression as to the importance of the idols, might have been made of his comparison to the body and blood of Christ. He wishes to prevent such an erroneous conclusion, which he does with this introductory question. It is as if he would say, "Do you think I have changed my mind, and am granting to the idols some important existence?" 1 Corinthians 10:20. In answer to the foregoing question, the apostle affirms that the beings to whom the Gentiles offer their sacrifices are only devils, a word coming from . Thayer defines the word, "a spirit, a being inferior to God, superior to men . . . evil spirits or the messengers and ministers of the devil." He then adds historically, "According to a Jewish opinion which passed over to the Christians, the demons are the gods of the Gentiles an the authors of idolatry." With this view of the subject in mind, the idolatrous worship is considered as fellowship with devils. 1 Corinthians 10:21. The thought of this verse is that people cannot be in fellowship with the Lord and with devils at the same time, which Christ taught in Matthew 6:24. 1 Corinthians 10:22. To be jealous means to be fearful of losing something that may be obtained by another. Paul implies that men might give their devotion to idols and thereby cause God to be jealous, which would actually take place according to Exodus 20:5. The Corinthians may not have been doing it for that purpose, but Paul shows them that their conduct implies it. 1 Corinthians 10:23. All things is said with regard to questions on which there is no specific legislation from the Lord, some of which will be considered soon. To be expedient means to be profitable; a thing might not be wrong, but if it would not benefit anyone it would not be expedient. 1 Corinthians 10:24. There is no original word for wealth. The verse means that no man should be selfish, but should seek to bring happiness to others. 1 Corinthians 10:25. The shambles was a market where they sold meat and other provisions of food. Meat that had been offered in service to idols was taken to these markets for sale. Paul means they need not have any conscientious scruples about partaking of food that might have been purchased at these markets. 1 Corinthians 10:26. All articles that are suitable for food have been created by the Lord and no restrictions need be made as to their use. The law of Moses did make some regulations against certain creatures, but that was for the purpose of ceremonial training and not because of any literal unfitness in them. That law passed away and now "every creature of God is good" (1 Timothy 4:4). 1 Corinthians 10:27. Them that believe not mean one's personal friends who are not members of the church. To a feast is not in the original but is implied by the rest of the verse. Asking no question means the same as the phrase in verse 25. 1 Corinthians 10:28. Eat not . . . for the earth is the Lord's, etc. See the comments on verse 26 for the last phrase. That phrase shows that it would be right in itself to eat of any food, yet he should not eat for the sake of one who thinks it is wrong. 1 Corinthians 10:29. Paul explains that it is the other man's conscience he means, not the one who would otherwise eat. For why, etc., means as if Paul said, "Why do I give you this instruction? Answer, because my liberty is to be controlled by the other man's conscience with reference to these un-legislated questions." 1 Corinthians 10:30. This verse means the same as the preceding one. 1 Corinthians 10:31. In regulating one's liberty on these matters of eating and drinking so as not to offend a weak brother, it will redound to the glory of God. 1 Corinthians 10:32. Give none offence means not to do anything that might cause another to stumble or sin. Some things would be regarded wrong in the eyes of the Jews that would not offend the Gentiles, and vice versa. Also, there might be matters on which neither would have any scruples as far as their nationality is concerned, yet would be objectionable to the brethren. Paul means for the disciples to have regard for the conscience of all these classes. Verse 33. This is the same as 1 Corinthians 9:19-23. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1st Corinthians 11 IN WORSHIP IN THE CHURCH 1 Corinthians 11:2-34 OF THE MANNER IN WHICH WOMEN PRAYED AND 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 2 Now I praise you that ye remember me in all things,—[This verse is introductory to the whole of this section of the letter which treats of worship. With his usual tact and generosity, Paul before reproving them mentions things which he could honestly and heartily approve.] and hold fast the traditions, even as I delivered them to you.—By traditions is meant the precepts, ordinances, and doctrine he had taught them orally, and had been given orally from one to another. When Paul was with them he had taught them orally concerning the ordinance of the Supper, and they had kept it up as he had commanded them. They continued the meetings on the first day of the week (16: 1), but corruption had crept in. 3 But I would have you know,— -He turns now to properly direct the behavior of women in the worship and in their man¬ner of appearing before God, and defines the relationship of man and woman. that the head of every man is Christ;—Jesus Christ is the head of the man, and man cannot approach God save in sub¬jection to his head, Christ. and the head of the woman is the man;— Woman cannot approach God save in subjection to her head, man. The duties and bearing of women and men grow out of their respective relations to each other and to God. The same relationship of husband and wife is presented in another place in these words: “ Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives also be to their husbands in everything.” (Ephesians 5:22¬24.) In the Lord is here implied, as all are to obey him above every one else. [Let it here be distinctly understood that the subordination thus expressed involves no degradation. As the church is not dishonored by being subject to Christ, so neither is woman dishonored by being subject to man.] and the head of Christ is God.—Considered as the Father’ s servant (Isaiah 42:1 Isaiah 52:13), in which capacity he spoke when he said: “ I glorified thee on the earth, having accomplished the work which thou hast given me to do” (John 17:4). “ Though he was a Son, yet learned obedience by the things which he suffered” (Hebrews 5:8), “ becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross” (Philippians 2:8). It is in this aspect of mutual relation in the work of redemption that “ the head of Christ is God.” 4 Every man praying or prophesying,—Praying and prophesying are the two exercises in which the churches engage in the assembly. All pray, or should pray; one.leads, the oth¬ers pray as sincerely as does the leader. The purpose is to show how the women should appear before God in the assem¬bly, not that she should lead in the service. Most assuredly the apostle does not here tell the women how to lead in the prayer and teaching in the assembly, and in chapter 14: 34, 1 Timothy 2:11-12, gives specific directions for her to keep silent. The very fact that in all the history of Christ and the apostles no example is found of women speaking publicly or leading in public prayer, although they were endowed with miraculous gifts, and did prophesy and teach in private and in the family circle, ought to satisfy all as to the will of God in that matter. having his head covered, dishonoreth his head.—Then a man must not have his head covered when he comes before God, either with long hair or with hat, veil, or cloth of any kind. This would be a shame to him. He may have it cov¬ered at other times, but not when he approaches God to pray or prophesy in his name. [Such conduct dishonors his head because covering it is a usage which symbolizes subjection to some visible superior, and in the worship man has none. Those who are visibly present are either his equals or his inferiors. Every man, therefore, who in praying or prophesying covers his head, thereby acknowledges himself dependent on some earthly head other than his heavenly head, and thereby takes from the latter the honor which is due to him as the head of man.] 5 But every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled dishonored her head;—The woman is under subjection to the man. Because of this, any approach to God with head uncovered is not permitted. It is a dishonor to her head. Man cannot come to God save through and in the name of Christ his head, so woman cannot come to Christ save with the tokens of subjection to man on her head. for it is one and the same thing as if she were shaven.—To have her head uncovered is the same as to have her head shaven. 6 For if a woman is not veiled, let her also be shorn:—[The word “ also” in this verse plainly shows that the two veils— the natural hair and the veil with which the head was covered —are under consideration. If her head be not covered with a veil, let her hair be shorn. Let her be consistent by laying aside all the usual and proper indications of her sex. If it be done in one respect, it might with the same propriety be done in all. In verse 13, he says: “ Judge ye in yourselves: is it seemly that a woman pray unto God unveiled?” The impro¬priety of it, he seems to take for granted as apparent to all.] but if it is a shame to a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be veiled.—[It is a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven because it fashions her, to that extent, as a man, and it is God’ s will, distinctly revealed in the Scriptures, to keep the sexes distinguishable. For a woman to remove her hair is in part to obliterate this outward distinction, and is therefore a trampling under foot God’ s will. And as further defense of womanly modesty and morality, God forbids the sexes wearing each other’ s clothes: “ A woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’ s garment; for whosoever doeth these things is an abomination unto Jehovah thy God.” (Deuteronomy 22:5.) ] 7 For a man indeed ought not to have his head veiled, foras¬much as he is the image and glory of God:—The man is the image of his maker, was created for him, and to add to his glory. [Man is the glory of God as the;crown of creation and as endowed with sovereignty like God himself, naming all creatures and .having dominion over all the earth, and over ev-erything that moveth upon the earth. (Genesis 1:26-28.) He is also the glory of God as showing forth the glory of his Creator, and being his masterwork. The man existing in this dou¬ble character, as the image and glory of God, must not have his head covered when he comes before God, either with long hair, or with hat, veil, or cloth of any kind. This would be a shame to him. He may have it covered at other times, but not when he approaches God to pray or prophesy in his name.] but the woman is the glory of the man.—The woman was created of and for the man. [That God provided for man a companion and helper so noble as woman proves the worth of man in God’ s sight, and thus adds dignity to him; she shares and manifests his superiority; reflects it, as the moon does the light of the sun.] 8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man:—The woman was not first, but the man, and out of the man was the woman made. She was taken out of him, and was created as a separate being for the good and happiness of man. “ And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him. . . . And Jehovah God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof: and the rib, which Jehovah God had taken from the man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And the man said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” (Genesis 2:18-23.) What was in woman was taken out of man. It takes both man and woman to make one reproductive being. Both sets of organs necessary to re¬production were originally in man. God separated them into two beings, counterparts and complements of each other, but the woman was taken out of and from man, and for his good. The twain are one, but one in man. Hence the world over she takes his name. 9 for neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man:—The man was first and the woman was created for him. Man’ s priority and consequent leadership over woman are here affirmed. 10 for this cause ought the woman to have a sign of authority on her head,—On account of this priority and supremacy of man, woman, as subject to man, should always approach God with the tokens of her subjection on her head. The sign of authority means the sign or token on her head that she acknowledges the authority of man over her. because of the angels.—Much diversity exists as to who the angels are. Many think they were the messengers of the churches. But the apostle nowhere presents a thought as to how woman shall appear before men; the question is, How shall she appear before God? How shall she approach God in prophecy or prayer? The direction applies to her, whether in public or private. It is necessary for a woman to approach God with the tokens of her subjection to man in secret prayer, or private teaching as in public, just as it is necessary for man to approach God as a servant of Christ in private or in public. Not a word is said here as to how woman should appear before man when she prayed or taught. The presence or absence of men, friends or strangers, has nothing to do with how she shall appear before God. Neither does the question whether she leads in public prayer or in prayer follows others who lead. These questions are not here touched. I think the angels in heaven who see and rejoice or sorrow over what men do here will rejoice or sorrow over her coming properly or improperly before God, or in the place to which God assigned her. Whether the woman prays in the closet at home, or in the assembly, she should approach God with the tokens of her subjection to man on her head. The reason of this we may not know. That God requires it, the Bible plainly teaches, and that should suffice. The meaning is, when she comes to worship in prayer or praise, no matter whether she leads or not, she should be veiled. 11 Nevertheless, neither is the woman without the man, nor the man without the woman,—Although by original constitution woman is dependent upon man, they are mutually dependent upon each other— the one cannot exist without the other. in the Lord.—By divine arrangement and direction the twain are one in the Lord. 12 For as the woman is of the man, so is the man also by the woman;—Since the woman was taken from the man, she is of him, yet man is born, or comes into the world through the woman. That man had the priority in time and position, yet no man can be born without woman. They mutually de¬pend for existence upon each other. So the two constitute but one real self-propagating being. but all things are of God.—The twain are one, and both are of God, and live, move, and have their being in him. [This expression seems designed to suppress any spirit of complaint or dissatisfaction with this arrangement; to make the woman contented in her subordinate station, and to make the man humble by the consideration that it is all owing to the appointment of God. The woman should therefore be contented and the man should not assume any important superiority since the whole arrangement is of God.] 13 Judge ye in yourselves: is it seemly that a woman pray unto God unveiled?—The impropriety of it he takes for granted as apparent to all. How should she approach God is the question. Man should do it with uncovered head, woman with covered head; and all distinction between public or private prayer is man’ s imagination. It is as wrong for a man to approach God with covered head in the closet as it is to do it in the public assembly. So also of woman, God makes no difference as to how he shall be approached in public or in private. 14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a dishonor to him?—While in all nations in the world, women wear long hair, and men short hair, is it nature that suggests it? It does not mean custom. The fact so universal, and the declaration of the apostle, seems to settle this. Sometimes nature suggests a custom. A practice prompted by nature becomes a custom, and is said to be from or by nature. How came the custom to be universal among all nations and in all parts of the world, if there is not something in nature to suggest it? 15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.—[From the creation God intended that woman should wear a veil as a symbol of her subjection to man, but instead of an artificial covering he gave her a covering of long hair, a covering of glory, in which she could take pride. When woman sinned he gave her a second veil of covering, which is a sign of authority to which she must submit as a memorial of her transgression. The reason for the two veils or coverings becomes apparent when we get before us woman’ s relation to man and God’ s will concerning them. Paul directed woman to “ learn in quietness with all subjection” for two reasons: (1) “ Adam was first formed, then Eve” ; (2) “ Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression” (1 Timothy 2:11-14); that is, when woman was created, she was created for man (11: 8, 9), and was subjected to him (Ephesians 5:22-24), not as a slave, but as the weaker vessel (1 Peter 3:7). Then when Eve transgressed, God placed her under a curse and said: “ I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception; in pain thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire s'hall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” (Genesis 3:16.) Thus twice was woman subjected to man. Hence the argument is: Since it is a glory for woman to wear a covering of hair which God gave her at creation instead of an artificial covering, she should wear also an artificial covering when she approaches God in prayer.] 16 But if any man seemeth to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.—The custom referred to must be women wearing short hair and approaching God in prayer with uncovered heads. He reasoned on the subject to show the impropriety, but adds in an authoritative manner, if any are disposed to be contentious over it, neither we nor the churches of God have any such custom. [With such disturbers of the peace of the church all argument is useless. Authority is the only thing that will silence them. The authority here adduced is that of the inspired apostles, which was decisive, because they were invested with the authority not only to preach the gospel, but to instruct the church and to decide everything relating to the worship.] REPROOF ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR GROSS OF THE LORD’ S SUPPER1 Corinthians 11:17-34 17 But in giving you this charge, I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better but for the worse.—The object of the weekly meeting was to unite them more closely to the Lord, and in doing this, to draw them into closer union with each other; but their services were so perverted that they produced strife and separation instead of unity. 18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that divisions exist among you;—The parties, in following the different leaders, which had been reported to him by the house of Chloe, were accompanied by divisions when they met for worship. and I partly believe it.—The facts had possibly been exag¬gerated by others, [but he was forced to believe enough to excite his strong disapproval.] 19 For there must be also factions among you,—It is a part of the policy of God in governing the world to test those serving him, and to that end he allows evil men to come into their midst. that they that are approved may be made manifest among you.—The church of God, like the Jewish nation, will continually fall away from steadfastness in the faith. Those who cannot be faithful to God under temptations to disobey him are not worthy of his kingdom. So God allows evil men to come among his people who would lead away from God and his order, to try and test who among them are faithful and true to him. Paul said to the elders of the Ephesian church: “ Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood. I know that after my departing grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disci¬ples after them.” (Acts 20:28-30.) This was permitted to prove and to show who could stand firm and steadfast under temptations to turn away from God. God tests them on the points of fidelity to him in faith and doctrine as well as love of the world, lusts of the flesh, and pleasures of life. One who cannot resist these and give them up for the Lord is rejected by him as unworthy to be his disci¬ple ; so every one who cannot stand fast for the truth despite the divisions and the popular currents that sweep through the churches to carry them away from their steadfastness is un¬worthy of Christ. These are God’ s tests to purify the churches. He desires only true and tried and faithful subjects in his kingdom. Those who cannot stand the test must be purged out. So divisions come to every church to make mani¬fest those who are approved. It is God bringing the churches to judgment in this world, that those who are approved and true may be made manifest. All we have to do is to stand true and firm to God and his word, and leave the results with him. 20 When therefore ye assemble yourselves together, it is not possible to eat the Lord’ s supper:—Their meeting to¬gether did not result in their eating the Lord’ s Supper. That was the occasion of their coming together, but they so per¬verted it that it made it impossible for them to do so. 21 for in your eating each one taketh before other his own supper; and one is hungry, and another is drunken.—The eating of a feast with its attendant gluttony and drinking led many to attend. Each family brought its own portion and each partook of his own. The rich eating and drinking to satiety of their abundance. The poor were shamed by the scantiness of their food and went hungry. This was all wrong. It is thought by some that this feasting preceded the Lord’ s Supper, so that some were filled to satiety, while others were hungry when they partook of the emblems of the Lord’ s body and blood. 22 What, have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and put them to shame that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you?—He shames them with these questions. If they had a feast in public, brotherly love for each other would have suggested a common table at which all would have fared alike, and as a consequence those without food at home would have had their wants supplied. The course pursued caused shame to the poor and left them hungry. In this I praise you not.—He had told them (verse 1) that he praised them for remembering him and holding fast the traditions, but here was such a perversion that he could not praise them for doing it. 23 For I received of the Lord—[The information of which he treats was what he himself had received from the immediate and personal communication of the Lord himself, and according to the express injunction therein contained was ap¬pointed for their observance. It was not therefore of his own devising, not that of any man, but divinely instituted, and consequently imperatively binding on all Christians.] that which also I delivered unto you,—[He transmitted to them the very thing which he had received from the Lord, so that they were well aware of what ought to have made these disorders impossible.] that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed —[The delivery of Jesus to his enemies had already begun and was going on at the very time when the Lord instituted the Supper. The marginal reading, “ delivered up,” is better than “ was betrayed,” which confines the meaning to the action of Judas; whereas the Father’ s surrender of the Son (John 19:11) and Jesus’ self-surrender (John 10:17-18) are also included.] Paul mentions the sad solemnity of the occasion in contrast to the irreverent revelry of the Corinthians, to show how they perverted the Supper. took bread;—The bread used was the unleavened bread of the Passover week. (See Exodus 12:15 Exodus 13:3 Exodus 13:7; Deuteronomy 16:3.) 24 and when he had given thanks,—In Matthew 26:26 and Mark 14:22, it is “ blessed.” In Luke 22:19, it is “ had given thanks.” The two expressions, being used interchangeably, mean the same thing. Both express the act of consecration, by a grateful acknowledgment of God’ s mercy and a prayer that God will make it a means of blessing to those who partake. (See note on 10:16.) he brake it, and said, This is my body, which is for you:— [That we may understand what the Lord meant when he spoke these words, we should place ourselves in the position of the apostles to whom they were first addressed. If, as Jesus spoke these words, he had suddenly disappeared, and they had seen nothing but the bread, they would have understood that the body had been miraculously transformed into the bread. p, His body was still there; and the bread which he held in his hand was also there; and as his body still remained there after the bread had been broken and eaten, it is impossible that the apostles could have understood him as meaning that the bread was literally his body, and impossible that he could have intended to be so understood. They could not, therefore, have understood it otherwise than as a representa¬tion or symbol of his body to them.] this do in remembrance of me.—This solemn sacrifice and thanksgiving was so little in harmony with their selfish greed and lightness that to report it was to reprove them. To do it in remembrance of his sacrifice for them was to do it in a wholly different spirit from the way in which they acted. 25 In like manner also the cup, after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood.—The covenant referred to was the one mentioned by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:31-34), and quoted with comments in Hebrews (8: 7-13). It was the new covenant or will of God set forth in his blood, shown in shedding it for the sins of the world. God, through Jesus Christ, made a new covenant, as that made through Moses is called the old covenant. This is the memorial of that blood to seal and confirm this new covenant. The old covenant was sealed with the blood of animals; this was sealed with the blood of Jesus Christ shed for the remission of sins. this do, as often as ye drink it,—That it was the common custom of the disciples to meet together upon the first day of the week to break bread is clearly indicated by the following: “ And upon the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them, intend¬ing to depart on the morrow.” (Acts 20:7.) [In the original institution of the Supper nothing is said of the frequency with which it was to be observed. Had nothing more been said, every congregation of believers would have been left to its own judgment as to the frequency of the observance. But the apostles were guided by the Holy Spirit in this, and their example is our guide. Here it is represented as furnishing the purpose of the meeting on the first day of the week. Such being the purpose of the meeting, as surely as the disciples met every Lord’ s day, they broke bread on that day.] in remembrance of me.—It was to be done in memory of him, to commemorate the shedding of his blood for the sins of the world, not as a feast to gratify the appetite. 26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord’ s death till he come.— -From this we learn that it was a memorial institution to keep in memory the heroic deeds of Jesus in dying to redeem man. Monuments are designed to commemorate the worthy deeds of those in whose memory they were built, with the hope that future generations, when they learn the deeds commemorated by the monument, will be inspired with the same spirit, and be led to emulate those worthy deeds. Just so this memorial institution was ordained to perpetuate the memory of the self-denying spirit and heroic deeds of Jesus Christ for the good of man. It is done with the view that those who see these memorials of the deeds and death of Jesus will drink into the same spirit, and be led to emulate his life and deeds of self-sacrifice for the good of others. Man builds monuments of marble and granite; he seeks the imperishable; but despite all his precautions they molder and crumble. God, through Jesus, selected the perishable bread and volatile fruit of the vine as the material out of which he would build a monument that would endure with perennial freshness through all time. No mortal would ever seek to build an imperishable monument out of material so perishable as bread and the fruit of the vine. God only could breathe into it a spirit that would render it immortal, that would cause it to continue in its freshness till Jesus comes again. 27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat the bread or drink the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner,—[To eat or drink in an unworthy manner is in general to come to the Lord’ s table in a careless, irreverent spirit, without the intention or desire to commemorate the death of Christ as the sacrifice for sins, and without the purpose of complying with the obligations thereby assumed. The way in which the Corinthians ate unworthily was that they treated the Lord’ s table as though it were their own; making no distinction between it and an ordinary meal; coming together to satisfy their hunger, and not to feed on the blessings of the body and blood of Christ.] shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord.—Inasmuch as the eating and drinking were intended to proclaim and keep in memory the death of Jesus Christ, whoever should eat of this memorial in a light and frivolous manner, in forgetfulness of the spirit of sacrifice that led to the death of Christ, is guilty of profaning the body and blood of Christ. He incurs the guilt of treating lightly the slain body of the Lord Jesus. 28 But let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of the bread, and drink of the cup.— [Let him ascertain by earnest consideration whether he is in a proper state of mind for commemorating and proclaiming the Lord’ s death; whether he feels a suitable gratitude for the sacrifice it commemorates, and is firmly resolved to observe the injunction of its founders.] On this verse Macknight says : “ First, whether he comes to this service to keep up the memory of Christ; secondly, whether he is moved to do so by a grateful sense of Christ’ s love in dying for man; thirdly, whether he comes with a firm purpose of doing honor to Christ, by living in all respects conformably to his precepts and example.” To this I add, whether he comes in a submissive and worthy manner, drinking into the same spirit of self-sacrifice for others that Christ manifested. [Such examination of one’ s motive would have made impossi-ble the shameful scenes here described.] 29 For he that eateth and drinketh, eateth and drinketh judgment unto himself, if he discern not the body.—He who comes to it not remembering the Lord’ s crucified body and shed blood, not drinking into the true spirit of Christ, not striving to walk worthy of his goodness and love, as shown in his sufferings and death, eateth unto condemnation rather than justification. Observing the body of Christ as a pledge of sanctification and justification and redemption to him who comes to it in a proper spirit, but of wrath and condemnation to him who comes not observing this spirit. 30 For this cause many among you are weak and sickly,— Because so many come to it unworthily, not discerning his body and blood, not in the true spirit of Christ, many among them were weak and sickly as Christians. and not a few sleep.— Many are spiritually asleep—dead. Some commentators have applied the expression to physical disease and death; but spiritual neglect must bring spiritual penalties. Many had grown indifferent and some had lost interest in Christ and their duties to him. 31 But if we discerned ourselves, we should not be judged. —If they watched themselves to see that they waited upon the Lord in the proper spirit, with a true sense of their obliga¬tions to him, and kept themselves in a condition to be blessed in his service, then they would not be condemned by the Lord. 32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world.—When God judged and chastened them, as he did when they began to ne¬glect their duties to him, he afflicted them to cause them to turn away from their ways, that they might be saved and not be condemned with the world that forgets God. 33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, — [The eating referred to is, of course, the Lord’ s Supper, and he enjoins perfect order, respect, and sobriety. The table is common for the rich and poor, and the rich have no claim of priority over the poor.] wait one for another.—By their indecent haste, each eating his own meal without waiting for the rest, they had turned the Supper from the memorial purpose into an ordinary and insignificant meal, a mere eating and drinking. He therefore exhorts them to wait for one another, and make their coming together a joint service in commemoration of the Lord’ s suffering and death.] Every congregation should have a definite time for meeting and should never begin the service before that time without due notice. While the apostle says, “ Wait one for another,” he also says, “ In diligence not slothful; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord.” (Romans 12:11.) No man can be diligent and fervent in spirit and be lazy and laggard in assembling for religious service. Not only does he who is slow lack diligence and fervor in spirit, but there is nothing that destroys the zeal and fervor of others like having to sit and wear out their patience, waiting for the slothful and indifferent. 34 If any man is hungry, let him eat at home;—He should take that in his own house which is necessary for the support of the body before he comes to the assembly, where he should have the feeding of the spiritual man alone in view. that your coming together be not unto judgment.— [That they may avoid the curse that must fall on such worthless communicants as those mentioned; and that they may get that special blessing which every one who discerns the Lord’ s body and blood must receive.] And the rest will I set in order whensoever I come.— [There were other irregularities which the apostle leaves to be corrected until he should again visit Corinth, but when that would be was certainly regarded by him as uncertain.] Verse 1 1 Corinthians 11This and the following three chapters are usually construed as Paul's corrective admonition regarding the "worship services"; but since the first paragraph (1 Corinthians 11:1-16) undoubtedly refers to social customs, there being even some doubt of its application to any worship service whatever, there is no need for adherence to such an outline. Throughout this epistle, the apostle Paul dealt with miscellaneous church conditions and disorders, making it nearly impossible to fit the epistle into any form of classical outline. The first paragraph regards the veiling of women (1 Corinthians 11:1-16), and the second teaches concerning the Lord's supper (1 Corinthians 11:17-34). THE VEILING OF WOMENPaul's teaching here is the basis of diametrically opposed views, Lipscomb holding that "Whether the woman prays in the closet at home, or in the assembly, she should approach God with the tokens of her subjection to man on her head."[1] Johnson limited the ruling to the worship meeting, saying, "This alone is in view."[2] He interpreted the words here as "Paul's ruling that women must cover their heads during the meeting."[3] This writer admires and respects the immortal Lipscomb; but, in his comment above, the words "tokens of her subjection to man" betray a basic misunderstanding of this difficult passage. If Paul really meant that women should be veiled, then no fancy little hat will do it. This student of the Scriptures is adamantly opposed to tokenism and would just as soon accept "token baptism" as a "token veil." As Marsh said: One thing is certain; within the context of our contemporary culture, the modern western hat - decorative, attractive, and often obstructive - cannot be said to compare with the veil, either in appearance, function or purpose.[4]As McGarvey said, "In western countries a woman's hat has never had any symbolism whatever."[5] The notion that any kind of hat, in the modern sense of that word, can in any manner be construed as a "token veil" is founded in neither reason nor Scripture; and to get that simple fact in focus is to go a long way to understanding this subject. Eldred Echols, Professor of Bible, South Africa Bible School, Benoni, South Africa, summed up an extensive study of this problem by the Bible faculty with the following conclusion: The dogmatic position that 1 Corinthians 11 requires a woman to wear a hat at a religious service is linguistically and historically impossible. To enjoin it as an obligation upon Christian women is dangerously presumptive, since it is not based upon Biblical authority. On the other hand, there is not the slightest reason why any Christian woman should not wear a hat at church or elsewhere if she wishes to do so. Nevertheless, she should not be deceived into imagining that her hat has any bearing upon first century doctrine or practice.[6]References to key words in the exegesis below will further elaborate the facts supporting Echols' conclusion. This writer wholeheartedly concurs in this conclusion and also with that of McGarvey who wrote: "The problem in western assemblies is how best to persuade women to take their hats off, not how to prevail upon them to keep them on!"[7]"Drawings in the catacombs do not bear out the assumption that Christian women wore veils at services in the early church."[8] The extensive art of the Middle Ages, however, invariably portrays the women as fully veiled; but, of course, this was derived largely from the Roman Catholic culture of that era. In fact that culture may be viewed as the source of the custom of wearing hats (by women) in church services in the present times, the same having been accepted in Reformation and post-Reformation times without critical reappraisal because more urgent issues commanded the attention of scholars. Despite the conclusion accepted by this commentator to the effect that Paul does not here require women to wear hats at church, it is felt that Barclay went much too far in saying that "This is one of these passages which have a purely local and temporary significance."[9] On the contrary, Paul's teaching here is invaluable and relevant to all generations with regard to the Christian's relation to the culture in which he lives. Before proceeding to a line-by-line study of this paragraph, one other colossal fact should be noted, that being the word "custom" which appears in 1 Corinthians 11:16, at the end of the paragraph. Paul did a similar thing in Romans 8:1, where the word "now" flies like a banner, demanding that the antithesis "then" be understood as a description of what he treated in Romans 7. See my Commentary on Romans, pp. 262,263, 278. The word "custom" as used in 1 Corinthians 11:16 clearly identifies the subject under consideration in this paragraph as the customs of the times, and not as an apostolic treatise on what either men or women should wear in religious services, except in the degree that the one had a bearing upon the other. Sex differentiation as indicated by hair-length is outlined; and it is hair, not clothes, of which Paul spoke: [1] David Lipscomb, Commentary on 1Corinthians (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 167. [2] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 622. [3] Ibid. [4] Paul W. Marsh, A New Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 397. [5] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on 1Corinthians (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 113. [6] Eldred Echols, a private manuscript circulated throughout the area of Benoni, South Africa by the faculty of the Bible School. Other references to this will be attributed to Eldred Echols. This writer is indebted to John H. Banister, Dallas, Texas, for this manuscript. [7] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 113. [8] Eldred Echols [9] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1954), p. 107. 1 Corinthians 11:1 was discussed at the end of 1 Corinthians 10. Verse 2 Now I praise you that ye remember me in all things, and hold fast the traditions, even as I delivered them to you.Traditions of men are not necessarily binding, but the holy traditions delivered by the apostles of Christ were of the highest authority. For a considerable part of the first century, there existed many written documents of the Christian religion (Luke 1:1); but such written documents were extensively supplemented by the word-of-mouth teaching which was promulgated by apostles and eyewitnesses of the inception of Christianity. See my Commentary on Mark, pp. 3,4. Hold fast the traditions ... "This ordinarily means `handed down from generation to generation'; but here it refers to the doctrine orally delivered by the apostles to the churches in the first Christian generation."[10] In view of the meaning here, the old KJV rendition of "ordinances" is better than "traditions," despite the fact of the latter being the literal meaning.[11][10] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 421. [11] F. W. Farrar, Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), p. 361. Verse 3 But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.In the threefold step from woman to man to Christ to God, it may appear surprising that Paul began with the center stop; but there seems to have been a design in this. Paul, who was about to speak of the subordination of woman to her husband, would first speak to man with a reminder that he himself is subordinated to Christ the Lord. In Ephesians 5:22-33, Paul made it abundantly clear that the subjection of wives to their husbands was coupled with the sternest commandments with regard to the husband's duty to the wife. In the current era, there are those who would set aside the apostolic authority regarding the question of the subordination of the wife to her husband; but the wisdom of the ages and also the word of God concur in teaching the necessity that every organism must have a head; and there cannot be any denial that in God's basic unit of all civilization and all progress, which is the family, the head must be either the man or the woman; and God here commanded man to fulfill that function of being the head of the family. If history has demonstrated anything, it is the truism that a matriarchal society is, by definition, inferior. The head of Christ is God ... The equality of Christ with the Father is everywhere apparent in Scripture, as Paul himself said in Philippians 2:6; but, even so, the Godhead itself could not function in the project of human redemption without the subordination of the Son "for that purpose." Just so, the subordination of woman to her husband does not set aside the equality of both male and female "in Christ," but it is for the purpose of making the family a viable and successful unit. This verse makes the "headship of the man over the woman parallel to the leadership of God over Christ."[12] Thus the same equality, unity of purpose and unity of will, should exist between a man and his wife as exists between the Father and the Son. ENDNOTE: [12] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 109. Verse 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoreth his head.Having his head covered ... Here is where the misunderstanding of this passage begins. This clause, as rendered in the popular versions, is commentary, not Bible. As Echols noted: "Having his head covered" is a commentary, not a translation. Lenski translated the sense correctly: "having something down from his head." What the "something" is is neither stated nor implied in 1 Corinthians 11:4.[13]The logical understanding of this would refer it to "long hair," being long enough to hang down from the head, as clearly indicated by the apostles' words a moment later: "If a man have long hair, it is a dishonor to him" (1 Corinthians 11:14). The ancients accepted Paul's dictum on this and went so far as to define the length of hair that was considered an infraction of Paul's words. The hair of the head may not grow so long as to come down and interfere with the eyes ... cropping is to be adopted ... let not twisted locks hang far down from the head, gliding into womanish ringlets.[14]Significantly, the words "hang far down" strongly resemble Paul's words "having something down from his head." The above is from Clement of Alexandria and was written in the second century. The notion that Paul in this place referred to the [~tallith] (shawl), or [~yarmelke] (skull cap) worn by Jewish worshipers is refuted by the fact that the Greek New Testament does not indicate in this verse an artificial covering of any kind.[15] This does not mean, however, that Paul would have approved of the use of either in Christian worship. "For Paul such a covering probably symbolized that the Jewish male continued in spiritual darkness, from which Christians had been liberated."[16] We may therefore interpret this verse as a simple admonition that it was a disgrace for any long-haired Christian male to participate in praying and prophesying; and this interpretation certainly harmonizes with verse 14. History has certainly vindicated this view; because universal human behavior has departed from it only in isolated instances and for relatively very short periods of time. Every man ... It is wrong to understand this in the generic sense as "every man or woman." Russell said: There are two Greek words for "man"; one for man as a human being; the other contrasting man with woman or child; the latter form is used for man in every instance in this chapter (1 Corinthians 11:3-16).[17][13] Eldred Echols [14] Clement of Alexandria, in the Ante Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1956), Vol. II, p. 286. [15] Eldred Echols [16] Paul W. Marsh, op. cit. p. 397. [17] John William Russell, op. cit., p. 421. Verse 5 But every woman praying or prophesying with her head unveiled dishonoreth her head; for it is one and the same thing as if she were shaven.Every woman praying or prophesying ... As Lipscomb said: In all the history of Christ and the apostles no example is found of women speaking publicly or leading in public prayer, although they were endowed with miraculous gifts, and did prophesy and teach in private and in the family circle.[18]However, McGarvey construed this passage as an example of "women when exercising the prophetic office in the church." Macknight took another view (see below). For further discussions, see under 1 Corinthians 14:34, below. We may suppose that the Corinthian women affected to perform such offices in the public assemblies on pretence of their being inspired; and, although Paul did not here condemn that practice, it does not follow that he allowed it, or that it was allowed in any church.[19]With her head unveiled ... The word here rendered "unveiled" is [@akatakaluptos].[20] "There is no intrinsic meaning in this word which suggests either the covering material or the object covered; it is simply a general word."[21] [@Katakaluptos] means covered completely. [@Akatakaluptos] means not completely covered. Thus again, the passage falls short of mentioning any kind of garment. To suppose that Paul here meant "mantle" or "veil" or any such thing is to import into this text what is not in it. We have seen that he was speaking of "hair" in 1 Corinthians 11:4; and that is exactly what he is speaking of here. "Not completely covered" would then refer to the disgraceful conduct of the Corinthian women in cropping their hair, after the manner of the notorious Corinthian prostitutes; which, if they did it, was exactly the same kind of disgrace as if they had shaved their heads. It is crystal clear that Paul is not speaking of any kind of garment; because he said in 1 Corinthians 11:15, below, "For her hair is given her instead of a covering."[22] (See under 1 Corinthians 11:15.) Only in 1 Corinthians 11:15 does Paul mention any kind of garment ([@peribolaion]) and even there he stated that the woman's hair took the place of it. Dishonoreth her head ... Understanding the "unveiled" in the preceding clause as a reference to cropping her hair explains this. Any man's wife adopting the style of the notorious "priestesses" on the Acro Corinthus would bring shame and dishonor upon her "head," that is, her husband, who would thus be scandalized in the conduct of his wife. Also, from this, it is clear that in 1 Corinthians 11:4, man's "head," which is Christ, is the one dishonored there. Thus the thing which concerned Paul here was the arrogant adoption of the hairstyle (by women) of the shameless priestesses of Aphrodite. Is there any lesson for modern Christians in this? Indeed there is. Any time that Christian men or women adopt styles, whether of clothing or hair, which are widely accepted as immoral, anti-social, anti-establishment, or in any manner degrading, such actions constitute a violation of what is taught here. [18] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 163. [19] James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles and Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1969), p. 172. [20] W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1940), p. 174. [21] Eldred Echols [22] Eldred Echols Verse 6 For if a woman is not veiled, let her also be shorn: but if it is a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be veiled.Here again the sense of this place is destroyed by the traditional rendition "veiled." No artificial covering of any kind has thus far been mentioned by Paul in this chapter, nor will there be any reference to any kind of garment or artificial covering until 1 Corinthians 11:15, below, where it is categorically stated that her hair is given her "instead of" any other covering. Paul is only repeating here the obvious truth that for a woman to adopt the Aphrodite hair style was the same thing as being shaven. The shaving of any woman's head was considered either a sign of deep mourning, or a fitting punishment for adultery; and the overwhelming inference here is not that the Corinthian women had thrown off the oriental style "veil" that obscured almost all of the female person, there being no evidence at all that first-century Christian women ever wore such a thing, but that they had adopted the chic hair-styles of the women of Aphrodite. Can it be believed that Paul was here pleading for the Corinthian women to put on "veils" in the style of present-day Moslems, when he was about to say in 1 Corinthians 11:15, below, that their hair had been given them "instead of" such a covering? It is the flagrant mistranslation of this passage which has obscured the truth and confused millions of students of it. Verse 7 For a man indeed ought not to have his head veiled, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man: for neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.Ought not to have his head veiled ... See under 1 Corinthians 11:4 for the true meaning which is that "a man ought not to have anything hanging down from his head," an obvious reference to long hair, as more thoroughly explained above. Whatever "covered" means in 1 Corinthians 11:4 must also be the meaning of "veiled" in this verse. Moreover, the fact that Paul is speaking of something fundamental and intrinsic in human appearance, and not merely about some kind of clothing, is inherent in the reasons assigned to support his words. In these verses, the big thing in view is the eternal propriety of woman's submission to her husband, a subject already in Paul's mind, from the reference to "man as the head of woman" (1 Corinthians 11:3). The facts of creation reveal that: (1) woman was taken out of man, (2) she was given to man, (3) she was created for man, and (4) she was intended to be the glory of man. The scandalous behavior of the Corinthian women had contravened God's purpose in all of these things, hence the mention of them here. Charles Hodge stated in connection with these verses: In this way does the New Testament constantly authenticate, not merely the moral and religious truths of the Old Testament, but its historical facts; and makes the facts the grounds or proofs of great moral principles.[23]ENDNOTE: [23] Charles Hodge, An Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974), p. 210. Verse 10 For this cause ought the woman to have a sign of authority on her head, because of the angels.This verse should be read without the words "a sign of," the same being not in Paul's writings at all, but having been merely added by translators to help out with what they conceived to be the meaning of the passage. As Farrar said, "A great deal of irrelevant guesswork has been written on this verse."[24] We shall not trouble the reader with any of the wild guesses concerning the danger that women without veils might tempt some of the angels attending church and seeing them, or any such speculations. The simplest explanation (since Paul was speaking of the proper subordination of woman) is that this is a reminder that the "angels who kept not their first estate" lost heaven; and it is not far-fetched to draw the analogy that those precious angels called women should not go beyond the limitations imposed upon them by their creation. Authority upon her head ... Scholars do not agree on the exact meaning implied by the use of "authority" here; but it is clear that Paul referred to the woman's head being properly covered; but it is of the utmost importance to note that "the nature of that covering" is not here specified. The opinion of this writer is that the reference means she should not have her hair cropped. Even in such a regulation as that, the implication is that the prohibition is not absolute, but qualified. The sin was not in cutting off hair, but in cutting it off in such a manner as to obscure the sexes or to imitate the shameless prostitutes of the pagan temples. ENDNOTE: [24] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 362. Verse 11 Nevertheless, neither is the woman without the man, nor the man without the woman, in the Lord For as the woman is of the man, so is the man also by the woman; but all things are of God.Despite the fact of Paul's speaking on the subordination of woman in God's order of created beings, he was careful here to point out what kind of subordination he was speaking of. Man and woman are mutually dependent upon each other, each enjoying unique prerogatives and blessings under the will of God, as Paul stressed in Ephesians 5:22-33, etc. While true enough that the first woman was made out of man, it has been true of all others since then that they are born of woman. The natural relationship between men and women, like everything else, is ordained of God. Johnson believed that the point of emphasis here is that "The man must always remember that he exists by woman, and that both are of God."[25]ENDNOTE: [25] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., op. cit., p. 623. Verse 13 Judge ye in yourselves: is it seemly that a woman pray unto God unveiled?As Farrar said, "This is an appeal to the decision of their instinctive sense of propriety."[26] Johnson believed that "seemly" here should be read "proper."[27] It should be noted again that "unveiled" here has no reference at all to what is commonly referred to as a "veil." The word is exactly the same as the one used in 1 Corinthians 11:5.[28] A covering of some kind is meant; but the Greek text leaves totally out of sight anything that would enable this to be identified as some kind of artificial covering, or man-made garment. See under 1 Corinthians 11:5. The instinctive judgment of men is much more easily associated with their approval of long hair for a woman than with the approval of some kind or style of clothing. The fallibility of human instinct in that whole area of concern is proved by the new styles accepted every spring! [26] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 363. [27] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., op. cit., p. 624. [28] W. E. Vine, op. cit., p. 175. Verse 14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that if a man have long hair, it is a dishonor to him?As Johnson observed, "The fact of short hair for men and long hair for women is a divine suggestion in nature itself."[29] It is quite evident throughout this whole paragraph that Paul is talking about "hair," not clothes! If such is not the case, such a verse as this is totally out of place. The judgment of history as well as the New Testament confirms Paul's words here are true. People may deny it if they please; but the sacred text and the usage of centuries are against any such denial. ENDNOTE: [29] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., op. cit., p. 624. Verse 15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.It is a glory to her ... This would have been the ideal place for Paul to have said that a mantle thrown over a woman's head and shoulders is a glory to her, if he ever had such a thing in mind. On the contrary, it comes out here, as it does in every verse in the whole passage, his subject was "hair"! Her hair is given her for a covering ... Here again is an enormous mistranslation; and one may only wonder at the efforts of commentators to make this conform to the misinterpretations they have foisted upon this innocent passage. For example, Johnson declared that "This does not mean that her hair is her covering";[30] but a glance at any interlinear Greek New Testament will reveal the meaning instantly. Nestle gives it, "instead of a veil."[31] The Emphatic Diaglott has "Her hair is given her instead of a veil."[32] Echols emphatically stressed this expression "instead of" as follows: The idea conveyed by "instead of" is that if the noun preceding this preposition is available, the noun following the preposition is not required. Therefore, the conclusion is quite inescapable that, if a woman's hair conforms to apostolic standards of propriety, she requires no artificial covering.[33]But of paramount importance in this verse is the noun [@peribolaion], here rendered "veil." This is the one noun in the whole passage that unmistakably refers to a head covering. Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament translates it, "a covering thrown around, a wrapper." This is the "veil" which has already been imported into the passage five times; but this is Paul's first reference to anything of the kind; and, significantly, it is mentioned in the same breath with woman's hair which is given to her "instead of" any such covering. The only conceivable situation in which it may be inferred that Paul expected women to wear the kind of mantle, or veil, spoken of here, would be one in which a woman's hair had been lost, from disease, accident, or something of that kind. Echols thought that "instead of" in this verse "forces us to accept the alternative that, if a woman's hair does not fulfill its proper function, then she should wear a mantle or hood."[34]However, this seems to be an unnecessary conclusion, since the natural modesty of almost any person would lead to the wearing of a head covering in such a circumstance. [30] Ibid. [31] Nestle's Greek text [32] The Emphatic Diaglott [33] Eldred Echols [34] Eldred Echols Verse 16 But if any man seemeth to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.If any man seemeth to be contentious ... This was Paul's way of saying, "Look, we do not intend to argue this question endlessly; the whole matter is already solved by the type of behavior which marks God's churches everywhere." This is grounds for holding that in this whole passage it is decorous conduct with which Paul is concerned, since it touched on the all-important question of the proper submission of women to their husbands, and was also related to the prevailing opinion of the people in that community. This whole passage affirms the necessity for Christians to have a decent respect for the opinions of mankind, and not to flaunt social customs of any kind merely for the sake of being different. As McGarvey said, "One who follows Christ will find himself conspicuously different from the world, without practicing any tricks of singularity."[35] ON THE VERSES ABOVEIf Paul meant "hair," why did he use the word "covered"? The answer is that in the vocabulary of the Old Testament "to uncover the head" was to shave off the hair. When Nadab and Abihu sinned (Leviticus 10:1 ff), God commanded Aaron not to "uncover his head" in mourning at their death; and this meant not to cut off his hair (the customary sign of mourning). Job shaved his head when he learned his children were dead (Job 1:20). Many examples of this usage could be cited; but as Echols noted: "Wherever the expression `uncover the head' occurs in the Hebrew Old Testament, it means `remove the hair.'"[36] The culture of that era as well as the environment at Corinth suggests that some of the Corinthian women (in the church) were violating decent rules of conduct, not by discarding the mantle ([@peribolaion]) which there is no evidence that any of them were wearing, but by adopting the cropped hair of Aphrodite's priestesses. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ 1 Corinthians 11:2. In all things is said in the sense of a general statement. The Corinthian brethren were generally favorable to the apostle's teaching, and for that he praises them. But there were some particulars in which they were at fault, and Paul is dealing with them in this chapter. 1 Corinthians 11:3. This verse presents four persons: God, Christ, man and woman, named in the order of their rank. The last two are on earth and are visible to others, which accounts for some regulations of customs that are discussed in this chapter. 1 Corinthians 11:4. Praying does not require spiritual gifts, hence the prophesying need be no more specific than the description given in chapter 14:3. The original Greek word for covered means to be veiled so as to hide the face. If a man covers his head he dishonors it, because it should be exposed to view due to his position of authority in the social world. 1 Corinthians 11:5. Praying and prophesying have the same meaning as explained in the preceding verse. The word shaven shows Paul is considering the hair as the veil or covering. It was customary for women to veil or cover their face with their hair when praying in the presence of men. To neglect this was a dishonor to her head, because it exposed it and put her in the class of men who are the rulers in the social rank. If she thus keeps her hair away from her face, she is as much exposed to shame as if her hair had been cut. 1 Corinthians 11:6. If the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn. This does not endorse a woman's shearing her hair but rather condemns it, for Paul compares it to something else that we know he condemns because it is a dishonor to her. If it be a shame is a phrase that takes it for granted that the thing named is commonly thought to be a shame, namely, for a woman to have her hair cut. 1 Corinthians 11:7. God, Christ and man are all rulers in their respective ranks, hence a man should not cover his head and thus put himself in the same subject class as the woman. A woman can be a glory to man only by maintaining an attitude of submission to him. 1 Corinthians 11:8. This verse refers to the fact recorded in Genesis 2:21-23, which shows the woman was made from a part of the man. 1 Corinthians 11:9. The woman was created for the man because God said it was not good for the man to be alone (Genesis 2:18). 1 Corinthians 11:10. Submission to authority is the outstanding thought which Paul has been discussing. We have seen that an unveiled head indicates authority, for which reason a woman should be veiled as a sign that she is under authority. Angels are ministering spirits under the authority of God, and are invisible persons in the assemblies of Christians. Some of their class have been rebellious in times past (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 1:6), and Paul wishes the woman to show to the faithful angels who are present in the assembly, that they are submitting to the authority that is over them. 1 Corinthians 11:11-12. Lest the foregoing teaching might make a wrong impression as to the importance of the woman, Paul adds these verses to show that both man and woman are necessary in the general plans of God; the same is taught in verses 8, 9. 1 Corinthians 11:13. Judge in yourselves has about the same force as "nature" in the next verse. Comely is from PREPO, which Thayer defines, "to be becoming, seemly, fit." 1 Corinthians 11:14. Nature is from PHUSIS, which Thayer defines at this place, "nature, i.e., natural sense, native conviction or knowledge," and he adds the explanation, "as opposed to that which is learned by instruction and accomplished by training or prescribed by law." Robinson gives virtually the same definition. The explanation given of the definition is an exact description of the customs discussed in the preceding verses as to what use a woman should make of her hair, and he says it is opposed to (different from) that which nature teaches. Customs change because they are the product of man, while nature never changes because it is the creation of God. As long as nature exists it will be a shame for a man to have long hair, and, as a necessary conclusion, it will be a shame for a woman to cut her hair. Sometimes a quibble is made by asking just what it takes to constitute long hair. In the first place, the statement of Paul remains in the text, and it is as much the obligation of the quibbler to answer the question and prove his answer, as It is that of the one who insists on observing the teaching of the apostle. However, for the benefit of the sincere inquirer, I will state that the Lord has given us a clear-cut definition of what constitutes, long hair, in the stipulations for a Nazarite which included Tong hair. The passages that state the law on it are Numbers 6:5; Judges 13:5; 1 Samuel 1:11. These all require that no razor is to be used on the head, hence by long hair the Lord means hair that is as long as nature makes it. If a man cuts any of it off he ceases to have long hair, and exposes his head to shame. By the same token, if a woman cuts any of her hair she also ceases to have long hair in the sense the apostle is using the term, and thus she does that which is a shame. 1 Corinthians 11:15. This verse is virtually explained in the preceding paragraph. It has the added thought that by having long hair, which nature teaches her that she should have, she is in a condition to observe also what custom has established in the time of the epistle, namely, using that long hair as a veil when praying in man's presence. 1 Corinthians 11:16. This verse is often pounced upon by the quibblers, like a "drowning man grasping at a straw," in their desperate attempt to find some justification of women in their unnatural and unfeminine act of cutting their hair. I have never yet heard anyone who made a serious effort to show this passage to be related in the remotest degree to the issue at hand. Any man is from the one Greek word TIS, which means any person or thing, indefinitely, and would apply to a woman as well as a man. Contentious is from PHILO-NEIKOS, which Thayer defines at this place, "fond of strife, contentious." No one would be contentious over anything that was not objectionable to another. It would have to be over something he wished to do that some other one did not want him to do. In the present case it could not be over short hair for women, for nobody was wanting that. Instead, verse 6 shows that there was common objection to that, which was a basis for one of Paul's arguments. The only thing in dispute was whether a woman should cover her face with her hair, or keep it away in a manner that would look as if it were shorn, a condition which Paul states would be a shame. Since no person was contending for short hair with women, the contention could not be over that. The point the apostle is making in this verse, is that the custom of all the other churches was for the women to veil their faces with their hair when praying in the presence of men. 1 Corinthians 11:17. In verse 2 the apostle told the brethren there were some things for which he would praise (commend) them. In the present verse there were some things for which he would not praise them, one of which was that their coming together was not for the better but for the worse. Verse 18. The divisions in the church were over several subjects, but Paul is writing of a particular one in the rest of this chapter; and one that is very important because it pertains to the Lord's Supper. A report of the divisions in the church had come to Paul in some manner not stated. Partly believe it cannot apply to the degree of his belief, for a man either believes a report or he does not. The idea is that Paul believed the report to be true in regard to a part of the congregation, but that some of them dis approved of the divisions. The argument in the next verse justifies this conclusion. Verse 19. Must is from DEI, which Thayer defines, "it is necessary," and explains it to mean at this place, "necessity in reference to what is required to attain some end." Robinson's definition and explanation give virtually the same thought as Thayer's. It is clear the word means that heresies are necessary for a certain purpose, and that is stated to be, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. This agrees with the conclusion expressed in the preceding paragraph, namely, that a part only of the congregation was guilty of the divisions among them, the faithful ones being "approved" by their opposition to the heresies. But this necessity for heresies should not encourage anyone to promote evil doctrines, for Jesus pronounces a woe on those who cause offences, even though He had just declared that it was impossible for them not to come (Luke 17:1). Verse 20. Having set forth some general principles concerning heresies in the foregoing verses, Paul comes to the special subject at hand, namely, the Lord's Supper in the course of their coming together. The Englishman's Greek New Testament renders the last clause, "it is not to eat the Lord's Supper." Of course Paul does not deny the Corinthians professed to come together for that purpose, but he means that under the circumstances what they did could not be rightly called so for reasons soon to be stated. 1 Corinthians 11:21. Taketh before means that such persons were so eager to eat that they did so before the others were ready. In the first years of the church it was a custom for the disciples to partake of a common meal before attending to the Lord's Supper. This was somewhat after the order of events occurring at the time Jesus established the Lord's Supper, namely, they had the Passover first, then Jesus set forth his memorial supper next. These common meals are referred to in the New Testament as "feasts of charity" (Jude 1:12; 2 Peter 2:13). In some way the Corinthians tried to blend the common meal with the Lord's Supper. That corrupted it and caused Paul to say they were not eating the Lord's Supper when they came together. Drunken is from METHUO, and primarily means to be intoxicated with drink. But it is used here as the opposite of hungry, hence it is in the sense of being filled. Groves defines the word, "to be filled, plentifully fed," and it has that meaning in our verse. Those who look before their own supper would be filled, while the ones who waited--the "approved" ones whom Paul's word "partly" in verse 18 included would still be hungry. Verse 22. Some might claim they would become too hungry to wait until the rest were ready to eat. Paul tells all such that they should eat at home before coming to the assembly if their appetites were thus demanding gratification. But instead of doing that, they were abusing the purpose of the feasts of charity by their disorderly conduct. By such practices they despised (belittled or put to shame) the the public assembling place, and also embarrassed the poor, who are meant by the phrase them that have not. I shall quote Thayer's remarks about the feasts as they were related to the poor of the congregation: "AGAPAI, agapae, love-feasts, feasts expressing and fostering mutual love which used to be held by Christians before the celebration of the Lord's Supper, and at which the poorer Christians mingled with the wealthier and partook in common with the rest of the food provided at the expense of the wealthy." Such disorderly conduct of the more prosperous brethren as Paul describes, would confuse the poorer ones and make them feel that they were not welcome to the public feasts of the congregation. This is one of the things for which the apostle said he would not praise them. The poorer sort of the brethren would not appreciate these free meals (feasts of charity) when they saw the corruption practiced by the wealthier classes, and the whole procedure thus made a mockery of the institution of the Lord's Supper, which is why Paul said when they came together they would not eat the supper. Verse 23. The Corinthians had so corrupted the divine institution that the apostle thought it necessary to describe it to them again, Just as he had delivered it to them when he was with them for so long (Acts 18:1-11). The simple phrase took bread states all we need to know as to the article to be eaten in the Lord's Supper. In every place where it is referred to after the church was set up, it is mentioned by the simple word "bread" (Acts 2:42 Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 10:16; 11:23; 27, 28). In all of these places except our present chapter, the word is used independently of any consideration for the Jewish passover. Therefore, to insist on any particular kind of bread for the Lord's Supper is to be more specific, than the Lord is. Verse 24. Brake it. The term is from the same original Greek word as "brake" in Matthew 14:19 and it has no more spiritual significance in one place than in the other. The only reason for breaking the bread is that more than one person may partake of it in decency. I have known instances where a group of disciples was so few in number that only one attendant (commonly but erroneously called "deacon") was used. Then if the one presiding at the table happened to forget about "breaking" the loaf in two pieces, it was thought a terrible mistake was made. Such a tradition shows that the real significance of the institution is overlooked almost as much as the Corinthians did it. Whether the one presiding breaks the bread (so as to place it on a number of plates), or the attendants break off a piece to serve to each participant, or he breaks it off himself, the bread is sure to be "broken," and that is all that is required. My body, which is broken for you is another expression that is misapplied. It is a common thing to hear the one "presiding" to quote this, then refer to the Roman spear that "broke" the body of Jesus after his death. The mechanical act of piercing His side, or even that of driving the nails through his hands and feet, was only a means to an end, namely, "to be shattered, as it were, by a violent death"--Thayer. Robinson says virtually the same thing. Had it been the Lord's will that Jesus be killed by a violent blow on the head but leaving the surface of the body intact, it would still have been true that his body was broken for us, in the sense the apostle uses the term. When Christians eat of this bread, they are to do so in remembrance of the "violent" death of Christ. It is significant that in Luke 22:19 where the supper is being instituted, it is stated that the body of Jesus was "given" for his people, which agrees with the idea that the mechanical fact of the spear and nails was not necessary to the word "broken." Verse 25. After the same manner is not a comparison to the form or performance in the procedure, for the phrase is from the same word as "likewise" in Luke 13:3, and we know Jesus did not mean that all impentitent sinners would perish just as the Galilean did. It means as if it said, "for the same purpose," etc. Supped is from the same Greek word as "supper" in Luke 22:20; it means He took the cup after the passover supper was ended. New testament in my blood. In Hebrews 9:16 Paul says that a testament requires the death of the testator. The beasts that were slain under the Mosaic system constituted the testator for that covenant, which is the reason they were slain. The New Testament (or covenant) also required the shedding of the blood of the Testator (who was Christ), hence we have the phrase italicized here. The expression is my body in the preceding verse, and in my blood in the present verse, are used with the meaning that they represent the body and blood of Christ. Partaking of the cup, like that of the bread, is for the same purpose, namely, to be in remembrance (a memorial) of Christ. 1 Corinthians 11:26. Often is not used in view of the frequency of the observance of the Lord's Supper, for Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:1-2 settles that question, and shows it is to be done once each week. The term means that each time the institution is observed it is for the one purpose, namely, to show ("proclaim publicly" Thayer) the Lord's death. A common speech that may be heard at the table is as follows: "We now come to the Lord's Supper in which we will commemorate the death, burial and resurrection of Christ." Such a statement is not only unscrip-tural but is foolish. It is evident that anything that represents the death of Christ could not also represent his life. The life of all creatures is in the blood, and when the body and blood are separated, that body is bound to be dead. Likewise, when the guests see the fruit of the vine in one vessel, and the bread in another place on the table, it represents the separation of the body and blood, and in such a condition it "shows" or represents the death of Christ. Till he come signifies that the Lord's Supper is to be perpetuated until the end of the world. 1 Corinthians 11:27. The general character of the persons eating and drinking is not under consideration, but the manner or purpose of the act is the subject. (This will be enlarged upon in verse 29.) Guilty of the body and blood means to be guilty of sin against the body and blood of Christ. 1 Corinthians 11:28. Examine himself; this phrase is perverted many times. The speaker will say, "I cannot examine you nor you me, for I do not know how you have been living." The way a brother "has been living" is not in this text, and such a remark shows that the one making it is in danger of condemnation himself. The manner or purpose of eating and drinking is the point. If a man asks himself why or for what purpose he is about to partake, he will be examining himself in the sense the apostle means. When he does this, and concludes it is for the purpose of showing the death of Christ, he is then ready to eat and drink worthiLY (an adverb and not an adjective). 1 Corinthians 11:29. Discerning is from DIA-KRINO, which Thayer defines at this place, "to separate, make a distinction, discriminate." The thought is that the participant should eat and drink with his mind on the body and blood of Christ, remembering that the two parts were separated and that He died for us. Unless this is done, the person partaking will bring condemnation upon himself. The Corinthians did not distinguish between the body of Christ and food for natural hunger. The same guilt may be brought upon us today without eating to satisfy our hunger. If we partake of the "emblems" while our mind is on some other subject instead of the death of Christ, such as our plans for the day, etc., we will be just as guilty as were the ones at Corinth. Sometimes disciples will be engaged in conversation at the time, and will partake of the bread and/or cup mechanically or as a habit only. When they do so they eat and drink damnation to themselves. 1 Corinthians 11:30. The question is asked at this verse whether it means physical or spiritual sickness, and my answer is that it includes both. In the first years of the church God sometimes inflicted physical punishment upon disciples, even to the extent of putting them to sleep (in death). (See the case of Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5.) But the days of such demonstrations are over, while the guilt of corrupting the Lord's Supper is just as possible, and also just as deserving of being judged (condemned) as ever. Therefore, when disciples corrupt the holy ordinance, or commit any other violation of the Lord's spiritual law, it brings unon them the serious condition mentioned here unless they repent. 1 Corinthians 11:31. This verse states a principle that may have an application to other subjects besides the one at hand with the Corinthians. Had they examined themselves as directed in verse 28, and then brought themselves under the necessary correction (judgment), it would not have been necessary for the Lord to judge them. Likewise, the New Testament today gives very positive instructions about the conduct of disciples, and they should be able even in themselves to decide between right and wrong. However, if they will not do so, it then becomes the duty of the rulers of the church to make the application for them, and administer such corrective discipline as needed. 1 Corinthians 11:32. In the days of miracles the judgment or punishment was administered directly by the Lord (verse 30). Today the correction has to be delivered by the church, and when it is done it is counted as coming from the Lord (chapter 5:3, 4; 2 Corinthians 2:10 2 Corinthians 7:11-12). 1 Corinthians 11:33. Tarry one for another. This is another statement that is often perverted and made to mean that public services should not start until others arrive. Not only does such an application miss the thought intended by the apostle to be conveyed, but it violates other scripture. Romans 12:11 forbids Christians being slothful or lazy in coming to the services. A soldier who fails to appear at the time he is told to receives the stain of AWOL, and the disciple who is late in arriving at the place of services deserves the same blot. The tarrying of our verse was to be done after the congregation was assembled, and it means not to take before other (verse 21) his supper, but to wait (tarry) until the others were ready to eat. 1 Corinthians 11:34. If any man hunger is explained by the comments on verse 22. It does not mean to rule out the observance of the feasts of charity, but only to correct the abuses of it by those who claimed to be too hungry to wait. Come together to condemnation is the same subject that is considered in verse 17. There were other items that needed to be set forth for their instruction, but the apostle thought it well to do that when he made his next journey to them (chapter 4:18, 19). David Lipscomb Commentary On 1st Corinthians 12 THE NATURE AND UTILITY OF GIFTS1 Corinthians 12:1 to 14:40 TEST OF THE SPIRIT’ S AS THE SOURCE OF ITS VARIOUS GIFTS1 Corinthians 12:1-3 1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren,—When Jesus told his apostles that he was going away to prepare a place for them, he told them also that if he went away he would send them another Comforter to guide them into all the truth and prepare and fit them for the place he would make ready for them— that the Spirit would guide them into all the truth and call to their remembrance all things whatsoever he had com¬manded them. (John 14:26 John 16:13.) The Holy Spirit came upon the apostles on the day of Pentecost; took up his abode in them to guide them in teaching to others the things Jesus had taught them. The Holy Spirit in the apostles bestowed gifts upon disciples qualifying them for the performance of the different duties arising in their Christian life. These gifts were to remain and make known the will of. God, and continue'until the perfect will was come. In speaking of these partial gifts, Paul says: “ For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away.” (13: 9, 10.) The gifts which bestowed the partial knowledge were to be done away when the perfect will of God was made known. (Ephesians 4:11-16.) The different gifts are enumerated in the order of their importance and the measure of the Holy Spirit bestowed. (Verse 28.) These gifts carried with them ability to know and to make known the will of God, and to confirm it by signs and wonders. These gifts were to serve until the full and perfect will of God was made known and confirmed to the world. The will of God was made known and confirmed through these gifts; then they passed away and left men to be governed by the word of God, to be led by the Spirit in that word. The Corinthians had been bountifully supplied with these gifts, but difficulties concerning their use had arisen. would not have you ignorant.—They had no doubt inquired of Paul concerning the use of these gifts and the privileges of those possessing them. 2 Ye know that when ye were Gentiles ye were led away unto those dumb idols, howsoever ye might be led.—[He contrasts their former miserable condition as idolaters with their present state in order to make them sensible of their ad¬vantages as Christians and that they might be led more highly to appreciate their present condition.] 3 Wherefore I make known unto you, that no man speaking in the Spirit of God saith, Jesus is anathema;—Because of their former ignorance and evil life, he would have them know that the Spirit of God instructs, teaches, leads out of this idolatry into the knowledge of the Son of God. So that one led by the Spirit cannot say that Jesus is anathema, or that he is the source of evil. and no man can say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy Spirit. —No one can truly believe and say that Jesus is the Son of God, save as he is taught by the Holy Spirit. The Spirit came to testify concerning Jesus, and all the testimony we have of him comes through the teaching of the Holy Spirit. The word of God is the teaching given by the Spirit, and in it is contained all that man knows concerning Jesus. No man can believe that Jesus is the Christ save upon the testimony given in the word of God by the Holy Spirit. OF THE SPIRIT WITH ONENESS OF PURPOSE AND AIM 1 Corinthians 12:4-11 4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.—The Holy Spirit came to the apostles, and through them bestowed a number of gifts or powers on others. The gifts differed in the work they enabled each to perform, and the degree of spiritual power they bestowed; but the same Spirit is the giver; it is he who is the immediate and proximate author of all these various endowments. 5 And there are diversities of ministrations, and the same Lord.—There are different services, such as rendered by apostles, prophets, teachers, discerners of spirits; but they are all from the same Lord in whose service and by whose authority these various gifts are exercised. 6 And there are diversities of workings, but the same God, who worketh all things in all.—It is the same God, who hav¬ing exalted the Lord Jesus, and “ put all things in subjection under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all” (Ephesians 1:22-23), and having sent the Holy Spirit, works all these things. 7 But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit to profit withal.—But whatever gifts or manifestations of the Spirit are given to any one, are given for the instruction and profit of all. No gift was bestowed by the Spirit for the personal good of him alone on whom it was bestowed. These gifts were never so used. The most highly gifted suffered persecution, hunger, and sickness; but no one used the gifts for personal relief or help. Nor did the possession of the gift bestow moral strength or spiritual power to free from or resist temptation, save as it gave them knowledge of the will of God and left them to contend with the temptations the same as those not gifted. Hence Peter dissembled and did wrong (Galatians 2:11-12), and Paul prayed that he might not, after having preached to others, be rejected (9: 27). The gift bestowed on each one was for the instruction and help of all the church, and not for the private benefit of the gifted. The apostle now gives the separate gifts bestowed by the Spirit. It is difficult to define the scope, as they have all disappeared in the appearance of the completed word of God contained in the New Tes¬tament. 8 For to one is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom;—The word of wisdom is generally construed to mean the gospel, which is the power of God to save. It is God’ s wisdom. [This was the gift which enabled its recipients to reveal the whole plan of salvation. It stands first in the list of spiritual gifts as the most important, as the characteristic gift of the apostles, and was peculiar to them, having been prom¬ised to them by Christ, as the effect of the constant indwelling of the Spirit. (John 14:17 John 15:26-27 John 16:13-15.) And of Paul an apostle has said: “ Account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you.” (2 Peter 3:15.) And besides this, Paul says: “ We have the mind of Christ.” (2:16.)] and to another the word of knowledge,— The word of knowledge enabled the gifted to understand and teach the truths revealed by the apostles. according to the same Spirit:—[The Spirit governs these manifestations giving the law of them. The fact, that in the same Spirit in all these manifestations, is emphasized throughout the paragraph, in order to show the unity as well as purpose of these gifts.] 9 to another faith, in the same Spirit;—A faith that enabled one to remove mountains, of which Jesus speaks. It enabled one to exert power. and to another gifts of healings, in the one Spirit-The gift of healing diseases is one of the powers bestowed by the Holy Spirit. 10 and to another workings of miracles;—All the gifts here enumerated enabled them to work miracles as we use the term. To know all things without learning, to heal diseases, to speak with tongues, to discern spirits are all miracles. Why, then, among these should one special gift be called the working of miracles? The word here translated “ working” literally means the “ inworking” of powers. That is, the bestowing on persons the ability to impart the power of working miracles to others. Simon Magus offered Peter money for this power. (Acts 8:18-19.) Macknight says: “ The word energius does not signify to work simply, but to work in another. Thus verse 11: ‘ All these (gifts) the one and the same Spirit (energei) inworketh,’ namely, in the spiritual men.” One and the same Spirit inworks all the different powers into the gifted persons, distributing to each severally as he will. It is generally contended that none save the apostles could impart the power to work miracles. That they possessed it in common with all Spiritual powers is not doubted. The apostles were endowed with all the power and gifts of the Spirit. But to others these gifts were distributed. All other gifts of the Spirit were distributed to one or another person, why not this also? Ananias, having been instructed by the Lord to go to the house where Saul abode, “ departed, and entered into the house; and laying his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, who appeared unto thee in the way which thou earnest, hath sent me, that thou mayest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 9:17-18.) While it is not said that the Holy Spirit was imparted by the imposition of his hands, it is certain that he was to be filled with the Holy Spirit by the coming of Ananias, and that Ananias laid his hands on him, and he did receive his sight and a gift of the Spirit that enabled him at once to proclaim Jesus, “ that he is the Son of God.” And when Simon the sorcerer proposed to purchase the power to bestow miracle working power on others, Peter did not tell him that no one but an apostle could have such power. But he said to him: “ Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter.” (Acts 8:21). This implies that it might have been possible for him to have part or lot in the matter had his heart been right in the sight of God. Once more, I quote from Macknight: “ Though the inworking of powers be the spiritual gift which most forcibly struck the minds of mankind, and raised the apostles highest in their estimation, the word of wisdom, the word of knowledge, and faith, are placed before it in the catalogue. The reason is, by these gifts the gospel was communicated to the world; whereas it was only confirmed by the inworking of powers.” Those placed before the inworking are greater than this. If the apostles bestowed the greater gifts, why not this less one ? and to another prophecy;—[This was the speaking of the message of God under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, whether with reference to the past, the present, or future. The purpose of this ministry was to edify, to comfort, and to encourage the believers (14: 3), while its effect upon unbeliev¬ers was to show that the secrets of man’ s heart are known to God, to convict of sin, and constrain to the worship of God (14 : 24, 25). With the completion of the canon of Scripture this gift passed away. (13: 8, 9.) In his measure the teacher has taken the place of the prophet. The difference is that, whereas the message of the prophet was a direct revelation of the mind of God for the occasion, the message of the teacher is gathered from the completed revelation contained in the Scriptures.] and to another discernings of spirits:—The power bestowed on certain persons by the Spirit to discern the secret dispositions of men. It was one of the gifts peculiar to that age, and was especially necessary at a time when God’ s revelation was not fully established or generally understood, and when many deceivers were abroad. (2 John 1:7.) This seemed to have been exercised chiefly upon those who came forward as teachers of others, and whose real designs it was important that the church should know. to another divers kinds of tongues; and to another the inter¬pretation of tongues:— The ability to speak different tongues. Some spoke in tongues they did not understand and could not interpret, and so Paul commanded them to be silent, unless they or some one else present could interpret. (14: 28.) 11 but all these worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as he will.—This unity of the source of all spiritual gifts, in the midst of their variety, he presses as against those who valued some and undervalued others, or who deprecated them all. BETWEEN THE UNITY OF THE SPIRIT IN THE VARIETY OF ITS GIFTS AND THE UNITY IN THE VARIETY OF ITS MEMBERS1 Corinthians 12:12-30 12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ.—He now introduces the human body with the differ¬ent members performing different offices, yet altogether com¬posing the one body, to illustrate the body of Christ or the church with its different members, and these different gifts performing the different offices needful to the well-being of the body. 13 For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free;—As the body is animated by one spirit and under the guidance of one spirit, the different members of the body act, so guided or ruled by the one Spirit, all the members of the church, the body of Christ, were baptized into the one body, whether Jews or Greeks or bond or free. The baptism is that commanded by Christ and the Holy Spirit, but inasmuch as it is done by the disciples under the direction of the Holy Spirit, it is said that the Spirit baptizes. God sent his Son, his Son sent the Holy Spirit as the abiding^ guest of the church of God, and he is ever present to guide and help every one walking under the guidance of the word of God. If we could realize that in deed and in truth Jesus baptizes every one that is baptized according to his will, that we are baptized by the directions of the Spirit, that this is God’ s work, it would be a security and safety to us, and would help us to walk with him that he might be our God and dwell in and with us. Some expositors think that being baptized in one Spirit refers to the baptism in the Holy Spirit. The example of the body led by one Spirit does not bear this interpretation. For it could not be said that they were all made to drink of one Spirit if they had all been baptized or overwhelmed by the Holy Spirit as the apostles had been on the day of Pentecost. Beside this, there is no evidence that all the disciples at Cor¬inth had been baptized in the Holy Spirit. There is no evidence whatever that any of them had been. and were all made to drink of one Spirit.—The drinking into one Spirit is gradually imbibing the Spirit of Christ that we may be animated and led by it and become like him in character. 14 For the body is not one member, but many.—The human body, like the church, is not all one member, but is composed of many different members. [The word members means a constituent part having a function of its own.] 15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; it is not therefore not of the body.—There seems to have been some strife between the spiritually endowed as to the standing of each. Some seemed to contend that because they did not have certain of the more important gifts, they were not essential to the body. He corrects this by saying that each of the members of the human body constitutes an important part of it. 16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; it is not therefore not of the body.—All the members are essential to the performance of all the functions of the body. [The point is that the humble members as well as the more honored are all members of the body. Each, because of this fact, must perform his function to the best of his ability. ] 17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?—[The very existence of the body as an organism depends on the union of the members of the body endowed with different functions, and it would be absurd to require or expect all the members to perform the same function; and the application to the church is equally plain. It, like the human body, requires a diversity of gifts and offices; all, therefore, are to be satis¬fied with their allotment; all are to be honored in their proper place.] 18 But now hath God set the members each one of them in the body, even as it pleased him.—God set each in its proper place in the body, to perform a needed office as God saw was good, and if they were all one member, even the most impor¬tant or honorable, they could not constitute the body. 19 And if they were all one member, where were the body? —The different members, with their distinct functions and offices, are each needful to the completion of the body. 20 But now they are many members, but one body.—[He here repeats this truth, for on it everything which he desires to indicate turns. From the oneness of the whole the mutual dependence of the parts follows of necessity.] 21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee: or again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.— One member of the body cannot do without another. The eye needs the foot, the hand, the head. The eye is a member of the body, and depends upon the health and life of the body for its own good and vigor. The body could not maintain its life without the offices of the hands and feet. So the eye depends on the hands and feet for ability to perform its office. So of the ear. So of all the members. They depend one upon the other as members of the body. 22 Nay, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary;—The vital organs, as we call them, are the more weak and helpless, and must be carried, protected, supplied by the other members, yet the body is more dependent upon these members for life and strength than upon others. The body can lose the hand, the foot, the eye, and live; but it cannot lose any of those depen¬dent organs and live. 23 and those parts of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor;— [Naturally no member of the body is dishonorable or uncomely, since God has made each and all to subserve the purposes for which the whole frame of members is put together; but we esteem some members less honorable than others.] The honor which seems to be comparatively wanting to the parts themselves we clothe, giving them in the clothing we put on them and the body a more comely appearance. and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness;— [The parts referred to, that in themselves are unseemly and immodest, have for that very reason more pains bestowed on them to give them seemliness.] 24 whereas our comely parts have no need:— -The comely parts of the body— the ear, the eye, the nose, the mouth— add of themselves comeliness to the body, so do not need to be ornamented or covered up. but God tempered the body together, giving more abundant honor to that part which lacked;—God has put the members of the body in such relation to each other that the stronger and the more beautiful are compelled, for their own good and indeed for their existence, to defend and care for, and thus to honor, the weaker members. 25 that there should be no schism in the body;—That there should be no divisions in the body, and that all the members mutually depending one upon the other for its own good would look to the common good of all. but that the members should have the same care one for another.—[Each member should be moved by anxious care for the well-being of all. And it was in order to evoke this harmony and mutual care that God so joined the members together that we are compelled to treat them not according to their beauty but their need; and has done this that [here may be complete harmony in the body, and that each member may put forth its peculiar powers for the general good, thus securing for veery part of the body the benefit of all the various powers with which its various members are endowed.] 26 And whether one member suffereth, all the members suffer with it;—[So wonderfully is the nervous system diffused through the body that every part sympathizes with every other part, and the whole with any part. They are not only physically joined together, but they are so united as to feel together.] or one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.—[All the members partake of the benefit. If one member is sound and healthy, the benefit extends to all. If the hands, the feet, the heart, the lungs, the brain be in a healthy condition, the advantage is felt by all the members, and all derive advantage from it.] 27 Now ye are the body of Christ,— -The ye referred to the membership at Corinth as a whole. They constituted the body of Christ. Not a part of it, but the body complete and entire, within itself a complete body of Christ. To another church Paul says: “ In whom ye also are builded together for a habitation of God in the Spirit.” (Ephesians 2:22.) The Bible clearly recognizes each separate congregation as the body of Christ, as builded together for a dwelling place in the Spirit. So that God in his Spirit dwells in each distinct and separate church. The church is the body of Christ in the community in which it is situated. It is not a foot in Corinth, an arm in Colosse, an eye in Ephesus, and an ear in Thessalonica; but each was a complete integral body of Christ composed of all the different members needed to make up his body. Take the church at Jerusalem, it was in existence before any other church. Was it not the body of Christ when it was the only church on earth ? Did the planting of another and another church take from it any of its parts, and of its functions, despoil it of its integralism and completeness as a body of Christ? Certainly not. What about the eunuch? My conviction is that he possessed within himself all the elements of a church of Christ when no other churches were in reach of him, and the multiplication of the seed or the word of God in him would produce a church of God wherever he went, and the same is true of every child of God. A child of God in a strange land has only to worship God himself, multiply the word of God in the hearts of others and the result is a church of the living God, complete in itself without reference to any other organism in the world. and severally members thereof.—That is, each has his own place and function in the body of Christ. All the members constitute the one body as the human body is composed of the separate and distinct members and is dependent upon the others for happiness, and should have the same care one of an¬other as the members of the fleshly body. One cannot suffer but all must suffer with it. The members that are most lacking in Christian graces, that are most helpless, need our care. And those most helpless are necessary for the good of all. This may seem strange at first, but the object of church serv¬ice is to discipline the members into characters that please God and make the persons like unto Jesus Christ in character. The poor, the sickly, the helpless, the wayward, and sinning are needful to school the more comely members. Without the patience and self-denial developed in looking after and helping the poor, the sick, and the wayward, the members of the church could never be fitted in character to dwell with God. As the church, the body of Christ, is here compared to the human body, an apologist for the innovations that are being introduced into the churches makes the following argument: “ The human body is composed of different organs and members. Some of these organs or members are vital, necessary to the life of the body— such as the heart, the liver, the lungs, and the stomach. Without these the body cannot live or exist. Then there are other members— as the hands, the feet, and the eyes— that are not vital organs; they are not necessary to the life or existence of the body. The body may exist and live without these. So the church, as the body of Christ, is composed of parts or organs. Some of these are vital, necessary to the existence of the church--such as faith, repentance, and baptism. Others are not vital or necessary to the life or sustenance of the church— such as instrumental music, so¬cieties, etc.” The illustration is an apt one if properly applied. In the first place, every organ or member set in the human body by God is vital or necessary to the performance of the work God appointed it to perform. The foot is essential to walking; the eye, to seeing; and the hand, to doing the work of the hand. That work of God ceases when the member God appointed to do it is destroyed. Sometimes when the member God appointed is destroyed, an artificial or man-made member is sup¬plied, but fails to do the work the natural or God-made mem¬ber performs. An artificial foot or hand is a poor substitute for a God-given one. An artificial eye may deceive the people, but can never see. What this man calls the organs not vital to a church are not organs or members of the church, or body of Christ. They are artificial, man-made members. The organs God gave to do the work are the churches themselves,, with the members for the work and the human voices for the worship. These, like the hands and feet of the human body, may not be necessary to the bare life or existence of the body, but are vital and necessary to the work and vigor of the body. Sometimes the church fails to use its natural members to do the service God ordained them to do, and then substitutes artificial members or man-made substitutes to do the work the real organs or members fail to do. The whole thing is a miser¬able makeshift and a failure. No life or warmth or vigor can ever dwell in or pass through these artificial limbs; no spiritual life or warmth or vigor can ever dwell in or pass through these artificial additions to the church of God. The whole work of substituting these man-made or artificial organs, or works, to do the work of the church of God destroys the true work of God, drives out the Spirit and life of God. The whole business of mending the body of Christ, or patching up or changing the church of God, drives out the Spirit, and is an insult to God. 28 And God hath set some in the church,—This is the order in which these gifts bestowed by the Spirit are set in the church. first apostles,—The apostles were the first and highest, endowed with the fullness of the Spiritual gifts and knowledge. They were sent as ambassadors of Christ, to be witnesses of what he did and taught. Jesus said to his apostles: “ Ye are witnesses of these things.” (Luke 24:48.) “ And ye also bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” (John 15:27.) When one was to be chosen to take the place of Judas, Peter said that he must be one that had been “ with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and went out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us, of these must one be¬come a witness with us of his resurrection.” (Acts 1:21-22.) So, too, Paul had to see Jesus after his resurrection and in his glorified state before he could be an apostle. Ananias said to him: “ The God of our fathers hath appointed thee to know his will, and to see the Righteous One, and to hear a voice from his mouth. For thou shalt be a witness for him unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard” (Acts 22:14-15); and Jesus said: “ I have appeared unto thee, to appoint thee a min¬ister and a witness both of the things wherein thou hast seen me, and of the things wherein I will appear unto thee.” (Acts 26:16.) No one could be an apostle unless he had seen Jesus after his resurrection from the dead. secondly prophets,—The prophets were inspired to make known the will of God after it had been revealed through the apostles. thirdly teachers,—Those endowed to feed and teach those already Christians the duties and obligations resting on them as the children of God. then miracles,—The inworking of powers. (See note on 12:10.) then gifts of healings,—The power which enabled them to heal diseases. helps,—This denotes the various kinds of relief which it was sought to procure for all sufferers, widows, orphans, and others in need. governments,—Wise counselors, and advisors of the weak and erring. divers kinds of tongues.—This was to speak in tongues they had never learned. It was the least and lowest of all gifts. The New Testament enumerations all begin with the greatest and end with the least. In the beginning of the church, men were enabled by the Holy Spirit to do what they were after¬ward trained to do by the word of God. 29-30 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? have all gifts of healings? do all speak with tongues? do all interpet?—These questions were in answer to the complaint that they all did not have the higher gifts. As in other things, the fewest number attained to them, and these questions were to impress on them this truth; and yet, all were required to make one body. Verse 1 1 Corinthians 12This and the following two chapters were written to correct disorders which had arisen in the Corinthian church over the question of spiritual gifts, especially with regard to envy and strife over the relative importance of various gifts. The great test of all spirituality is its relation to Christ and his spiritual body the church. So-called "gifts" that led to the denunciation of Christ or any conduct that contravened the will of Christ were not of God, but of the devil. "Gifts" that take people away from the church are not of God's Spirit at all, but are derived from the evil one (1 Corinthians 12:1-3). There is diversity in the unity of the church, since the Lord has not given the same gifts to all Christians (1 Corinthians 12:4-11). The great metaphor of "the body" is developed as a figure of Christ's spiritual body, the church (1 Corinthians 12:12-31). Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant. (1 Corinthians 12:1) The word "gifts" is supplied; and this does no violence to the text, since it may not be denied that the "gifts" were very much in Paul's thoughts. The setting of the entire Corinthian letter should be noted. Before the New Testament was completed, while it was still being written, in certain places and at certain times, God gave special miraculous manifestations of the Holy Spirit's help of the churches.[1]It is with such miraculous gifts that this and the following chapters are concerned. As Kelcy said: These gifts were necessary in the days of the infancy of the church when as yet the body of perfectly revealed truth was incomplete. They were temporary measures designed for a special purpose.[2]The trouble was that in Corinth "The whole idea of the gifts of God's Spirit had degenerated, most of them being ignored, and the one being stressed above all others was speaking in tongues."[3] Thus most of these three chapters deals with that phenomenon. However, there are beautiful insights into many other things as well. [1] Henry H. Halley, Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1927), p. 548. [2] Raymond C. Kelcy, First Corinthians (Austin, Texas: R. B. Sweet Co., Inc., 1967), p. 55. [3] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City, Missouri: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p. 424. Verse 2 Ye know that when ye were Gentiles ye were led away unto those dumb idols, howsoever ye might be led.There is a reminder to the Corinthians here that just as they had been carried away (led away) into idolatry, there was another danger that some were being "carried away" with charismatic gifts! The impotence of idol worship also appears in this. As Wesley paraphrased it, "Ye were led by the subtlety of your priests."[4]"Literally, they were led about like a condemned prisoner."[5] As Morris noted: There is something pathetic about idol worship. The heathen are pictured, not as freely following the gods their intellects have fully approved, but as under constraint, helpless, men who know no better.[6][4] John Wesley, One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1972), in loco. [5] Donald S. Metz, op. cit., p. 425. [6] Leon Morris, Tyndale Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), p. 425. Verse 3 Wherefore, I make known unto you, that no man speaking in the Spirit of God saith, Jesus is anathema; and no man can say, Jesus is Lord, but in the Holy Spirit.The genuine test of true spirituality turns upon the attitude of the soul toward the Lord Jesus Christ. It is astounding that some of the tongue speakers in Corinth had (presumably) blasphemed the name of the Lord himself, "anathema" meaning accursed! If this seems astonishing, then let it be compared with certain "charismatics" of our own times who deny many of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity "in the name of Christ"! As Russell pointed out, Paul did not refer to those alone who actually used the words "Jesus is anathema," but to all those who practice "what amounts to the same thing."[7] To deny or renounce Christ's teaching would be the equivalent error. Jesus is Lord ... The sure mark of spirituality is the soul's confession of Jesus as Lord (Romans 10:9), coupled with the exhibition of a life in harmony with such a profession. The immaturity of the Corinthian church is evident in the fact of their seeking some shortcut to spiritual excellence. This is precisely the motivation, it would seem, of many in various ages who have aspired to miraculous manifestations, thinking that in these they achieved genuine spirituality. It should be noted in this connection that Corinth was the most carnal of all the churches mentioned in the New Testament; and it was precisely there that "a church had mostly gone to tongues."[8][7] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 423. [8] A. B. Bruce, St. Paul's Conception of Christianity (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1898), p. 247. Verse 4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.VARIOUS GIFTS "Here the apostle called the supernatural endowments of the first Christians GIFTS, because they were foretold under that name (Psalms 68:18; Ephesians 4:8)."[9] They are also referred to in the several terms ofHebrews 2:4 as "signs and wonders, and manifold powers, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will." All such supernatural wonders were scheduled to disappear (1 Corinthians 13:8); and their unique purpose was that of "confirming" the word of God (Mark 16:20), certainly not that of flattering the ego of Corinthian charismatics. Diversities ... This is used nowhere else in the New Testament.[10] Likewise the word "gifts" is "a typically Pauline word, used only once by any other New Testament writer (1 Peter 4:10)."[11] It is derived from [@charismata], whence the term "charismatic." another form of the word being [@charis] (grace). thus these were "grace-gifts." The big point Paul made here is that all gifts came from the same Spirit. Significantly, 1 Corinthians 12:4-6 speak of "same Spirit ... same Lord ... same God," giving a strong trinitarian emphasis. [9] James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles and Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1969), p. 194. [10] Paul W. Marsh, A New Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 401. [11] Ibid. Verse 5 And there are diversities of ministrations, and the same Lord.Verse 6 And there are diversities of workings, but the same God, who worketh all things in all.The mere fact of some of the Corinthian Christians having one gift and others another gift really made no difference, since it was the same godhead working through all of them. Unlike the numerous idols of the pagans, the one true God is a unity, a unity which was denied by the parties and divisions in Corinth; and these words were written with a view to restructuring the broken unity. Verse 7 But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit to profit withal.To profit withal ... "This means that they were for the common good; the spiritual gifts were to benefit others"[12] Charismatic gifts were being utilized by the Corinthians for self-promotion, especially the more spectacular and showy gifts like tongue-speakings. This, of course, was totally wrong and contrary to God's purpose. ENDNOTE: [12] Donald S. Metz, op. cit., p. 427. Verse 8 For to one is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom; and to another the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit.Here begins Paul's enumeration of those miraculous gifts with which God endowed certain men in the primitive period of the church's history. The word of wisdom ... "This was the doctrine of the gospel, communicated by inspiration, ... peculiar to the apostles, and enabling them to direct religious faith and practice infallibly."[13] This is mentioned first because it was first chronologically and first in importance. The word of knowledge ... This was the gift of that superior order of prophets, among whom were Barnabas, Stephen and Paul himself. As Macknight pointed out, it was this class of persons who unraveled the mystery hidden before times eternal, who discovered the deep secrets hidden in the ancient Scriptures regarding the call of the Gentiles, the rejection of Israel, the salvation of all people through the faith and obedience of Christ, etc. Paul received divine knowledge with reference to all these things; Barnabas apparently discerned the mystery of the new name and Paul as the name bearer; and Stephen unlocked the mystery of the Jewish temple, revealing that, from its inception, it represented a departure from God's will. ENDNOTE: [13] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 195. Verse 9 To another faith, in the same Spirit; and to another gifts of healings, in the one Spirit.The list of miraculous endowments continues here. "Faith" is the endowment of all Christians, but more than faith ordinary is meant here. It has a special meaning here. It must mean a faith that has special, visible results, a faith that enables one to do miracles (Matthew 17:20; 1 Corinthians 13:2).[14]Lipscomb identified faith here as "that which enabled one to remove mountains, as Jesus said, enabling one to exert power."[15]Gifts of healings ... As Hodge said, "This evidently refers to the miraculous healing of diseases."[16] There were many examples of this recorded in Acts, as for example when Paul healed Publius and many others on Malta (Acts 28:8-9). In this connection, it is clear that not even Paul used such a gift for the indiscriminate healing of all who were sick. There was a divine purpose in miracles, that being confirmation of the word of God. Significantly, Paul did not heal Timothy (1 Timothy 5:23), nor Trophimus (2 Timothy 4:20). As Johnson said of the gifts of healing in view here: They are not to be confused with the work of so-called divine healers today. The gift of healing provided restoration of life, which is beyond the power of `divine healers' (see Acts 9:40 Acts 20:9).[17][14] F. W. Grosheide, The New International Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 286. [15] David Lipscomb, Commentary on 1Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 182. [16] Charles Hodge, An Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974), p. 247. [17] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 628. Verse 10 And to another working of miracles; and to another prophecy; and to another discernings of spirits: to another divers kinds of tongues; and to another the interpretation of tongues.Five other miraculous gifts are enumerated here, making nine mentioned in this paragraph. Working of miracles ... It appears that miracles would be a greater gift than healings, mentioned above them; but McGarvey thought that these included miracles of judgment such as those executed upon Elymas, Ananias and Sapphira, saying that "The miracles of mercy stand higher in God's esteem than those which execute his judgments and mete out punishment."[18]Prophecy ... Gifts of prophecy, including the ability to foretell future events, were the endowment of certain Christians in the apostolic age; and there would appear to have been two orders of these, the higher including those mentioned under 1 Corinthians 12:8, and others whose ability concerned the prediction of events such as those prophesied by Agabus (Acts 11:28 Acts 21:11). Discernings of spirits ... This was a gift enabling its possessor to identify and expose false teachers. Presumably this gift was held by all of the apostles and prophets of the new dispensation as well as by other persons not so generally known. Divers kinds of tongues ... The nature of the tongue speaking Paul discussed in these chapters has been the subject of much disagreement. Many of the older commentators have held that only one kind is mentioned in the New Testament, that being the miracle of Pentecost in which the apostles spoke in tongues and were understood by all who heard them, each in his own language. McGarvey and Lipscomb both understood it thus. Nevertheless, there appears to be insurmountable difficulties in such an understanding of what is in view here. "Kinds of tongues" forbids the idea of there having been only one kind; and, besides that, the special gift of interpreting tongues mentioned a moment later and the absolute necessity of having an interpreter (as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 14:27-28) make it impossible to identify the "tongues" discussed here with the miracle of Pentecost. There was no interpreter then! For those who might be interested in a further examination of the interpretation that only the speaking of foreign languages unknown to the speaker (but spoken miraculously) is meant here, James Macknight treats it extensively. John Peter Lange, Adam Clarke, Matthew Henry, and John Calvin all held this view; and despite the reluctance of this student to disagree with such giants of exegesis, in conscience it must be done. The lack of any need to interpret on Pentecost, plus the opinion of outsiders that the tongue speakers were "mad" (1 Corinthians 14:23); plus the fact that there were many of them engaging in this activity all at once, requiring Paul to restrict it to one at a time (1 Corinthians 14:27); plus the impression that inevitably comes from reading the entire context - all of these things support the conclusion that the phenomenon was different from that of Pentecost. Why was it? Why did not Paul condemn it out of hand, instead of containing it by a series of regulations clearly designed to discourage and diminish it? We do not certainly know. Yet we shall hazard the opinion that whatever purpose of the divine mind was fulfilled by it, the Corinthians had contravened it by their shameless distortion and abuse of it. Interpretation of tongues ... This is perhaps the key to understanding the whole passage. Through the influence of God's Spirit some could speak languages they had never learned; but for this to do any good at all, someone was required to interpret what was said, the ability to do so being the "gift" in view here. Furthermore, such a thing raises all kinds of questions. Some have supposed that both gifts of tongues and interpretations were held by the same individual; but, if that is so, why did not such an individual speak in the proper language to begin with? On the other hand if the gifts were not joined in one individual, then only on the mission field could there have been any utility whatever in it. Perhaps it was this abuse of a genuine gift God had intended for missionary work, making it a plaything and diversion in an established church, which was the thing being done in Corinth. Despite abuses, however, there was a genuine gift, which appears from Paul's words that he "spoke with tongues more than ye all" (1 Corinthians 14:18), and also his admonition, "forbid not to speak with tongues" (1 Corinthians 14:39). Paul's firm declaration, however, to the effect that he certainly would not speak with tongues in Corinth (1 Corinthians 14:6 ff) would strongly indicate that whatever the gift was, it did not belong in the assembly of Christians; and this agrees with the dogmatic statement that tongues were a sign "not to them that believe, but to the unbelieving" (1 Corinthians 14:22). From this, it has to be inferred that any tongue speaking Paul did, it was in the mission field, and for the purpose of reaching people whose language he did not know. The fact of Paul's doing such a thing at all, coupled with his refusal to do it in the presence of believers, emphasizes the limited nature of the gift and also refutes the conceit that what he did was merely ecstatic jabbering. The Corinthians had probably prostituted the gift to that low level; but Paul would never have done so. The fact of his having used the gift himself, however, and the knowledge of its true utility (in certain limited circumstances, and for that age only), were doubtless the facts underlying his refusal to denounce and forbid the thing altogether. The conclusion, therefore, is valid, which may be summarized thus: All of the nine gifts in view here were miraculous. All disappeared completely at the end of the apostolic age. The mess at Corinth was a mingling of the true gift of tongues with emotional and psychologically induced ecstatic utterances, which were not miraculous at all but nonsense. A further element of the disorder was the perversion and prostitution of the true gifts (on the part of a few), making it a device of self-glorification. It was this mixture of genuine and false elements which made it impossible for Paul to condemn the false without appearing also to condemn the true gift. Remember, he was not present, but was writing a letter. Therefore, he laid down the rules which would eliminate and destroy the false, but which would leave undisturbed the true gift. Thus, there were three kinds of tongues in New Testament times: (1) those spoken by the apostles on Pentecost, (2) the gift of tongues in this passage which required an interpreter, and (3) the false tongues which had invaded Corinth. Paul had the true gift of 1 Corinthians 12:10 here; but it may never be supposed that he engaged in the non-sensical blabberings affected by the Corinthian tongue speakers. The nine miraculous gifts mentioned here are: (1) wisdom; (2) knowledge; (3) faith; (4) healings; (5) miracles; (6) prophecy; (7) discernments of spirits; (8) tongues; and (9) interpretation of tongues. Is the true gift of speaking in tongues on earth today? The answer has to be negative. What is admittedly true of all other gifts in this list may not be denied as true of the eighth and ninth also. A more extensive examination of this entire question is found in 1 Corinthians 14. Wonderful as was the true gift of tongues, it cannot fail to be significant that it appears last in Paul's list, both here and in 1 Corinthians 12:30. Why? Perhaps it was the fact of its being so easily counterfeited. In those days, as now, anybody could do it, not the real thing, of course, but the counterfeit. This is not intended as a denial of the sincerity of some who practice this; but the sincerity of its advocates has never been a reason sole for accepting any proposition, religious or otherwise. ENDNOTE: [18] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on 1Corinthians (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 123. Verse 11 But all these worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as he will.Paul's evident purpose in this was to discourage the inordinate over-valuation of some gifts above others, the humble teacher of the word of God being no less honorable than the holder of some more spectacular gift. He at once presented the marvelous metaphor of "the body" to prove that there are no unimportant members; because the Spirit of God has created, endowed and maintains them all. Verse 12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ.THE ONE BODYThe great Pauline teaching that the church comprises the spiritual body of Christ is among the most important teachings revealed to man. God's device of accounting people righteous is that of forming them into a corporate unity, of which Christ is head, all the saved being members of it, the body itself being identified as "Christ," and therefore partaking of the perfect righteousness of the Son of God himself. God saves people, not by injecting righteousness into them (on the grounds of their faith and/or obedience), but by transferring them "into Christ," identifying them "as Christ," and making them, in fact, to be Christ. By this heavenly device, man becomes truly righteous and thus saved, not as John Doe, but as Christ. Faith and obedience of the gospel are the conditions antecedent to God's transfer of sinners into Christ, baptism being the action through which God effects the actual entry into Christ; but neither the faith of the sinner nor any act of obedience is the ultimate ground of his redemption, that all-important ground being the perfect faith, obedience and righteousness of the Christ himself. For full discussion of this, see my Commentary on Romans, pp. 118-126. Any man failing to fulfill the prior conditions of being "in Christ" is not a part of the body in view here, as evidenced in the next verse. Verse 13 For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all made to drink of one Spirit.In one Spirit were we all baptized ... Throughout the New Testament, Christian baptism is revealed to be one of the two essential elements of the new birth, without which no man may see the kingdom of God. These are: obedience to the ordinance of baptism and the reception of the Holy Spirit. Jesus joined these two essential elements by his requirement that people be "born of the water and of the Spirit" (John 3:5 ff). Peter joined them on Pentecost by the command that all people should "repent and be baptized ... and ... receive the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38 ff). There is no doubt whatever that Paul's words here refer to the same twin essentials of the new birth, the same being a prior condition of participation in the body of Christ. In one Spirit ... As Kelcy said, `This is actually `by one Spirit,' making the Holy Spirit the agent or administrator of baptism."[19] In a similar way, Christ was named as the actual administrator of the rite of baptism, even though his disciples actually did the baptizing (John 4:1-2). The unity of the godhead makes it correct to refer any action ordained and commanded by God, to the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit; and when the action is obeyed, it is proper to say that any one of them did it. This truth does not exclude the reception of the indwelling Spirit in Christian hearts, as Paul dogmatically emphasized that in the very next clause, "made to drink of one Spirit." We were all baptized ... and were all made to drink of one Spirit ... As Metz correctly noted, "the word `baptized' relates to the actual act of baptism."[20] The mention of the Spirit as the administrator of baptism in this verse provoked Hodge to declare that the baptism in view, therefore, is "the baptism of the Holy Ghost!"[21] If that is true, it would make Paul here declare that all of the Corinthians were baptized in the Holy Ghost, or had received the Holy Spirit baptism! Who could believe such a thing? It is true of course that all of them had themselves baptized, and in consequence had all received the gift ordinary of the Holy Spirit, common to all Christians; but to suppose that those carnal Corinthians had "all" participated in the baptism of the Holy Spirit is impossible. Of course, the design of many scholars is to get water baptism out of this text altogether; but that is also impossible. All made to drink of one Spirit ... This refers to the reception of the ordinary gift of the indwelling Spirit by the Corinthians in consequence of primary obedience to the gospel. "There is no evidence that all the disciples at Corinth, or any of them, had been baptized in the Holy Spirit."[22][19] Raymond C. Kelcy, op. cit., p. 57. [20] Donald S. Metz, op. cit., p. 432. [21] Charles Hodge, op. cit., p. 255. [22] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 186. Verse 14 For the body is not one member, but many.The spiritual body of Christ, like the human body, is composed of many members, having various functions, and some "from the human viewpoint" being of lesser or greater honor; but, by the very fact of being "of the body," each member is necessary, partaking of the destiny of the whole body. Verse 15 For if the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; it is not therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it not therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?The great lesson is that various members of Christ's spiritual body have many various talents, perform many different services, some (in the eyes of men) receiving distinctions and honors; but no member of the holy body should be envious of any other. All are necessary; all are genuinely a part of the sacred whole. The differences among Christians are similar to the differences in nature, in which arena there is infinite diversity, not even two snowflakes ever having been exactly alike. This is according to God's will. In the current era, people are apparently determined that all shall be alike; but this can never be. In some limited political sense, perhaps, it may be affirmed that "all men are created equal"; but as a matter of simple fact, the opposite is true. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart at the age of five years composed a concerto in one sitting and then played it from memory![23]Robertson suggested that in this passage people "should observe the difference in the Christian doctrine of unity and equality, and the world's idea of leveling all to one standard."[24][23] Helen L. Kaufmann, The Story of Mozart (New York: Grosset and Dunlap, Publishers, 1955), p. 18. [24] Robertson as quoted by John Wesley, op. cit., in loco. Verse 18 But now hath God set the members each one of them in the body, even as it pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they many members, but one body. And the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee: or again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.As it pleased him ... God made people different, each person being unique; and there were never two "equal" people on earth. This may displease man, but it pleased God, that being His holy purpose so to do. But one body ... Since the figure here represents the corporate body of Christians on earth, it must be accepted as God's purpose that "they all should be one" (John 17:21), even as Christ prayed. The shattered unity of Christianity is due not to the will of God, but to the devices of Satan. I have no need of thee ... I have no need of you ... The thought of Paul in this passage is that the learned, the famous, the talented and the honorable cannot possibly do without the rest of the body. The nation could get along without its philosophers and politicians much better than it could get along without its farmers and plumbers. The same principle holds in the church. Verse 22 Nay, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary: and those parts of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness; whereas our comely parts have no need' but God tempered the body together, giving more abundant honor to that part which lacked.Necessary ... together ... These are the big words, that show the mutual dependence and indispensability which characterize the relationship of every member of the body of Christ to every other member. There is even a sense in which the "less honorable" are more abundantly honorable. Eisenhower reprimanded a general in the army for speaking of a soldier as "just a private," adding that "The private is the man who wins the war." This is exactly what Paul was saying here. Verse 25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the care one for another.As Dummelow expressed it, "What is true of the human body, through the nervous connection of all of its parts, should be true of the church."[25]ENDNOTE: [25] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 913. Verse 26 And whether one member suffereth, all the members suffer with it; or one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.This means that "All the members will feel involved in the misfortune or prosperity of fellow-Christians."[26] If a brother suffers any kind of sorrow or loss, those who are really Christians will share in the hurt; and whatever honor, success or joy may come to a brother in Christ, the same should be an occasion of rejoicing on the part of all his Christian brothers. ENDNOTE: [26] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1068. Verse 27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and severally members thereof.As Farrar interpreted this, "Paul did not mean that the Corinthian church was a member in the body of all the churches, but that each Christian is a member of the body of Christ."[27] Johnson added that: There is no definite article (ye are body of Christ); and this does not refer to the local church at Corinth, for there are not many bodies, a thought contrary to the context. Rather, it points to the quality of the whole, which each of them individually helps to constitute.[28][27] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 399. [28] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., op. cit., p. 630. Verse 28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, divers kinds of tongues.Apostles and prophets ... The preeminence of these is apparent in all Paul's writings. See Ephesians 2:19. There is a conscious ranking of offices and functions of the Lord's church in this passage, as indicated by "firstly ... secondly ... thirdly ... then." It is significant that teachers of God's word are ranked next to the highest. It is of no consequence that the order of "miracles" and "healings" is reversed, due to their similarity. Helps ... governments, divers kinds of tongues ... Dummelow thought that "helps" refers to the office of deacons and "governments" to that of the presbytery. It is significant that "divers kinds of tongues" is placed last. That which had so captured and carried away the Christians at Corinth was here made to be the lowest in God's scale of values. Governments ... This reference to church government should not be downgraded nor overlooked. Church organization was not something that people contrived and added in the post-apostolic era. "God set some in the church," including elders of the church. Acts bears witness to the fact that apostolic churches did not exist without elders, except for the briefest time after their founding (Acts 11:29 Acts 14:23). The "miracles" in view in this passage ceased; but from this it might not be inferred that the office of elders also ceased. As Hodge said, "The evidence that an office was intended to be permanent was the command to appoint to the office."[29] those possessing the qualifications. No such continuity pertains either to the miracles, the apostles, the prophets, the healings, or the speaking in tongues. ENDNOTE: [29] Charles Hodge, op, cit., p. 263. Verse 29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? have all girls of healings? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? But desire earnestly the greater gifts. And moreover a most excellent way show I unto you.The tragedy at Corinth was that a few who had the genuine gift of tongues were displaying it for purposes of their own vanity in the public assemblies of the congregation, where it was never intended to be used, being absolutely unnecessary and unneeded there; and then, to compound the evil, there were evidently a great many others who were getting in on the action by exhibiting a kind of tongue speaking (called ecstatic utterances) which had absolutely nothing to do with the Holy Spirit, having only one utility, that of flattering the practitioners of it and bringing down the scorn of the whole community upon the whole church. With marvelous diplomacy, Paul avoided condemning "tongues" abstractly, for that might have been to reflect upon those who really possessed the gift; but he promptly gave orders which diminished and removed the objectionable conduct altogether. However, before he would give those orders (1 Corinthians 14), he would show them "a most excellent way." That way was the way of love, love itself being one of the fruits, indeed the first fruit, of the Holy Spirit in the lives of Christians (Galatians 5:22). The immortal words of the thirteenth chapter comprise the apostle's exhortation for the Corinthians to walk in the way of love. "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE " Chapter Twelve IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To be aware of the many different spiritual gifts enjoyed by the early church 2) To appreciate the interdependence of the members of the Body of Christ SUMMARY In this chapter Paul begins to address the issue of spiritual gifts. From what we read later in chapter fourteen, it appears the jealousy and envy that characterized their division mentioned earlier also expressed itself in their use (and abuse) of certain spiritual gifts. Expressing his concern that they be not ignorant about these matters, Paul first emphasizes that spiritual gifts, though diverse, come from the same Spirit and are to be used for the benefit of all (1 Corinthians 12:1-11). To demonstrate that every person (and spiritual gift) is important, He compares the church to a body with many different yet essential members (1 Corinthians 12:12-27). The chapter closes with Paul pointing out that not all serve the same function and have the same gifts, encouraging them to earnestly desire the best gifts, and preparing to show them a more excellent way in the next chapter (1 Corinthians 12:28-31). OUTLINE I. GIFTS: UNITY IN (1 Corinthians 12:1-11) A. OF PROPER GIFTS (1 Corinthians 12:1-3)1. Paul does not want them to be ignorant concerning spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:1) 2. For as Gentiles they had been misled by dumb idols (1 Corinthians 12:2) 3. Two general principles to bear in mind: a. No one speaking by the Spirit of God will call Jesus accursed (1 Corinthians 12:3 a) b. No one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:3 b) This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ 1 Corinthians 12:2. The Corinthians were Gentiles and worshipers of idols before they received the Gospel. Since the idols were dumb things, to be carried away with them or be devoted to such services was a proof of their spiritual blindness, and no such worshipers could exhibit any fruits of the Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:3. There were many false teachers coming round in those days, claiming to possess supernatural knowledge. A test of their genuineness was their manner of referring to Jesus. If they pronounced any evil wish or prediction concerning Him, the Corinthians were to know that no such persons were speaking by the Spirit. No man . . . but by the Holy Ghost. The idolatrous teachers would never be induced by the dumb idols to confess Jesus; the Holy Ghost only would so inspire them. 1 Corinthians 12:4. Up to this place the remarks of the apostle are general, and are offered as a preparation for instruction on the true spiritual gifts and the disciples possessing them. The dissensions over the gifts previously mentioned are now the direct subject that Paul is considering. Diversities of gifts . . . same Spirit. The Corinthians were contending with each other over the comparative importance of their different gifts. The point Paul is making is that since there is but one Spirit, there could be no actual difference as to the value of the various gifts. 1 Corinthians 12:5-6. Administrations and operations means the out workings of the Spirit through the gifts; that all come from the same divine source. 1 Corinthians 12:7. A foreman over a crew of workers knows his men and which tool each can use to the best advantage for the whole project. Likewise, the Lord knows which spiritual gift each disciple can best use to the profit of the Gospel work. Hence not all members of the church received the same gifts, and yet the diversities of the various assignments indicated no partiality as to the different brethren. 1 Corinthians 12:8. Wisdom and knowledge have much the same meaning in general use, but as spiritual gifts there is a difference. The second one means supernatural understanding, and the first means the special ability to teach it to others. 1 Corinthians 12:9. This faith is the miraculous kind such as Matthew 17:20; 1 Co-inthians 13:2. Miraculous healing requires this gift of faith, but the phrase is used as a specification of it, in relieving persons of their physical ailments. 1 Corinthians 12:10. Working of miracles is seek to cover them as not being comely more general, referring to any situation coming before the possessor of the gift that gives an opportunity for demonstration of spiritual power. This prophecy is the kind that enables the possessor to make predictions, not that described in chapter 14:3. Without the complete Word it was not always possible to detect an evil spirit claiming to be of God, hence this discerning of spirits was possible through the gift. One man could speak in a foreign tongue, perhaps, but would not kno its interpretation. Another man had the gift of interpreting such tongues.(See chapter 14:27, 28.) 1 Corinthians 12:11. This is virtually the same as verse 7. As he will denotes as the Lord willed in directing the Spirit as it delivered the various gifts. 1 Corinthians 12:12. The human body is used to illustrate the church which is the body of Christ, with the unified work of spiritual gifts in that body. 1 Corinthians 12:13. The main thought running through these several verses is that there is only one Spirit, hence no difference should be made in the importance of the different gifts of the Spirit. Men would never have been taught the necessity of baptism had not the Spirit given the apostles and other inspired teachers the instruction to pass on to others. The point is that all people who have been baptized have received the instruction as a result of teaching from one Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:14. It takes more than one member to constitute a human body. 1 Corinthians 12:15-17. This imaginary conversation between the different parts of the fleshly body, is written to show the point stated in verse 14. No one of the members of the body can take the place of the other. This reasoning drawn from the fleshly body is continued through verse 26. 1 Corinthians 12:18-21. This paragraph is similar to the preceding one. 1 Corinthians 12:22. Every part of the human body is necessary and should not be removed by surgery, unless it becomes so diseased that medication will not cure it. 1 Corinthians 12:23. Less honorable is from ATIMOS, which Thayer defines "less esteem." The comparison is made to the feet and certain hidden parts of the body. According to Thayer, more abundant honor means more "preciousness or value." That is true, for the feet and other parts referred to are prized very highly, even though we seek to cover them as not being comely or attractive. 1 Corinthians 12:24. The comely or more attractive parts of the body, such as the face and hands, need no special attention, but are able to "take care of themselves." 1 Corinthians 12:25. God has so arranged the human body that there need be no schisms (lack of harmony) in the body. For instance, if the feet and hands opposed each other, a man would be constantly hindered in what he wished to do or where to go. 1 Corinthians 12:26. The unity of the members of the fleshly body is demonstrated by this very sympathy of one for the other. If a man injures his little finger, his entire being is concerned and caused to suffer, and the whole person will try to help the wounded member to get well. Of course the point is that the different members of the body of Christ should have a like sympathy for and interest in each other. The spiritual application of the comparison is made in Romans 12:15. 1 Corinthians 12:27. The apostle now comes directly to the application of his illustration. The church is the body of Christ, and it is composed of disciples who are the members of the body. As the parts of the fleshly body act in harmony with each other, shown in the preceding verses, so the members of the body of Christ should be interested in each other and seek to assist them in the mutual service to Christ. If that is done, the dissensions over the different spiritually-gifted men and their gifts will be stopped. 1 Corinthians 12:28. Every function or office named in this verse still exists in the church except the spiritual gifts. In the early days of the Gospel age the gifts were possessed by each of these officers or workers, in order that they might perform them the better. After the New Testament was completed the spiritual gifts ceased, and these officers and workers continue down to our time, but are working only with the guidance of the Gospel. The apostles are still in authority (Matthew 19:28), doing their ruling or "judging" through the Gospel which they wrote and left with us. I shall next notice the various officers and functions mentioned in the verse. First, secondarily, etc., denotes the numerical order in which they were set in the church, the comparative importance of them being denoted as we discuss them. The apostles were first in order because Jesus selected them before the church was set up, and they had charge of the work under the Lord when the divine institution began (Acts 2). They are also first in importance because their inspired word is the permanent law of Christ, and will be until the end of the world. These prophets were men who could make predictions by the aid of their spiritual gifts. Miracles and healings are explained at verses 9, 10. Help is from , and Thayer explains it at this place to mean, "the ministrations of the deacons, who have care of the poor and sick." Governments is from , and Thayer's definition is, "a governing, government." We know from 1 Timothy 5:17; Hebrews 13:7 Hebrews 13:17 and 1 Peter 5:1-2, that the elders are the rulers in the church, hence they are the ones meant by these governments. Diversities of tongues refers to the men who could speak with various foreign tongues by the help of spiritual gifts. 1 Corinthians 12:29-30. Are all apostles?, etc. All of the questions in this paragraph should receive the negative answer; they are a summing up of the argument that Paul has been making regarding the relation of the different members of the church in the exercise of their spiritual gifts. 1 Corinthians 12:31. Covet earnestly is from ZELOO, which Thayer defines, "to desire earnestly, pursue." Best is from , and Thayer defines it, "more useful, more serviceable." Paul has consistently taught that all of the gifts are important, and he has rebuked the brethren for their contending with each other over their respective gifts. We should conclude, therefore, that he here means their main interest should he in that which will do the church the most good, and not which of them can exhibit the greatest power. More excellent way signifies that after all that can truly be said of the spiritual gifts, there is something that is more excellent; that will be shown in the next chapter. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1st Corinthians 13 OF THE MOST WAY WITH THE USE OF GIFTS1 Corinthians 12:31 and 1 Corinthians 13:1-131 Co 12:31 ζηλουτεG2206 [G5720] BE EMULOUS OF δεG1161 BUT ταG3588 THE χαρισματαG5486 ταG3588 GIFTS κρειττοναG2909 BETTER, καιG2532 AND ετιG2089 YET καθG2596 υπερβοληνG5236 MORE οδονG3598 A WAY υμινG5213 TO YOU δεικνυμιG1166 [G5719] I SHEW. 1 Corinthians 12:31 But desire earnestly the greater gifts.—If they desired the greater gifts, they must fit themselves to use them. God bestows honors and privileges as men are fitted to use them. While he admonishes them to seek the greater gifts, he tells them there is a better way than seeking or using any gifts. The gifts were temporary and would soon pass away. And moreover a most excellent way show I unto you.—The more excellent way is doing the will of God to all “ out of a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfeigned.” 1 Corinthians 13:1 εανG1437 IF ταιςG3588 WITH THE γλωσσαιςG1100 τωνG3588 TONGUE ανθρωπωνG444 OF MEN λαλωG2980 [G5725] I SPEAK καιG2532 τωνG3588 AND αγγελωνG32 OF ANGELS, αγαπηνG26 δεG1161 BUT LOVE μηG3361 εχωG2192 [G5725] HAVE NOT, γεγοναG1096 [G5754] I HAVE BECOME χαλκοςG5475 BRASS ηχωνG2278 [G5723] ηG2228 OR κυμβαλονG2950 A CYMBAL αλαλαζονG214 [G5723] . 1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels,—The apostle in this chapter presents the most excellent way. He shows that one may possess spiritual gifts and not be in this way. Though he should be able to speak all the tongues known to men or angels, that would not insure his salvation without he possessed love. Judas Iscariot possessed the power to work miracles in common with the other apostles. (Matthew 10:1.) He did not possess love, betrayed the Lord, and went to his own place. (Acts 1:25.) Paul himself, endowed with the apostolic measure of the Holy Spirit, said: “ I buffet my body, and bring it into bondage: lest by any means, after that I have preached to others, I myself should be rejected.” (9: 27.) There is no doubt that some of those who were endowed with the spiritual gifts turned aside into sin and were lost. When they turned from the Lord, it is certain that they lost their gifts. but have not love,—The possession of love is the essential requirement. What is love? Passion is often mistaken for love. They differ widely, yet resemble in some points. Love denies self for the good of object. Passion seeks its own gratification. The test and measure of love is how much of his own pleasure he is willing to forego for the well-being of the object of his love. The test of a mother’ s love for her child is how much of her selfish pleasure she will forego for the good of the child; the test of a husband’ s love is how much of his selfish pleasure he will deny himself to make his wife happy ; the test of a child’ s love for its parents is how much of its pleasure it will forego to please the parent. Man’ s love to God is measured by his willingness to sacri¬fice his own pleasure and his own ways to please God. “ This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” (1 John 5:3.) Christ’ s love to men was shown by his willing¬ness to give up the glory of heaven and die to save man. Love looks to the good of the person loved. “ Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: love therefore is the fulfilment of the law.” (Romans 13:10.) The greatest good any one can do to another is to fulfil the requirements of the law of God to him. To do what the law of God requires to a wife, a child, a hus¬band, a parent, a neighbor, or an enemy is to do the greatest good to them possible. Then the highest and truest love is shown in fulfilling the law of God toward them.'“ And hereby we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments . . . whoso keepeth his word, in him verily hath the love of God been perfected” (1 John 2:3-5)— that is, the love that God has toward us is transformed to our hearts by the Holy Spirit, and is perfected in us by our keeping his command¬ments. These Scriptures show plainly that love as used in the Bible is not a mere sentiment nor an excitement of the passions nor a feeling of magnetic attraction, but is an active desire to do good. In a believer in Jesus Christ it can be manifested only by doing to God, to man, in all the relations in which one stands to him, what God’ s law directs, this will bring the highest and only true good, and so is the manifestation of love. I am become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal.—To be able to speak with tongues, while refusing to do their duty to God and man was like sounding brass or a clanging cymbal, an empty pretense without sense or good. 1 Corinthians 13:2 καιG2532 AND εανG1437 IF εχωG2192 [G5725] I HAVE προφητειανG4394 , καιG2532 AND ειδωG1492 [G5762] ταG3588 KNOW μυστηριαG3466 πανταG3956 ALL καιG2532 AND πασανG3956 τηνG3588 ALL γνωσινG1108 , καιG2532 AND εανG1437 IF εχωG2192 [G5725] I HAVE πασανG3956 τηνG3588 ALL πιστινG4102 FAITH, ωστεG5620 SO AS ορηG3735 μεθιστανεινG3179 [G5721] TO REMOVE, αγαπηνG26 δεG1161 BUT LOVE μηG3361 εχωG2192 [G5725] HAVE NOT, ουθενG3762 NOTHING ειμιG1510 [G5748] I AM. 2 And if I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.—Though he should have all these greater gifts and have not love, or fail to perform the commands of God toward God and man, he would be a spiritual bankrupt before heaven and earth. 1 Corinthians 13:3 καιG2532 AND εανG1437 IF ψωμισωG5595 [G5661] I GIVE AWAY IN FOOD πανταG3956 ταG3588 ALL υπαρχονταG5224 [G5723] μουG3450 MY GOODS, καιG2532 AND εανG1437 IF παραδωG3860 [G5632] I DELIVER UP τοG3588 σωμαG4983 μουG3450 MY BODY ιναG2443 THAT καυθησωμαιG2545 [G5703] I MAY BE BURNED, αγαπηνG26 δεG1161 BUT LOVE μηG3361 εχωG2192 [G5725] HAVE NOT, ουδενG3762 NOTHING ωφελουμαιG5623 [G5743] I AM . 3 And if I bestow all my goods to feed the poor,—The giving of goods to feed the poor is considered by many to be the very essence of love. When done from a proper motive, it is a fruit of love, but if it is done for any other motive than to honor God, and to bless man in the name of God, it is not love. and if I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profiteth me nothing.— [A willingness to suffer for one’ s faith is not in every case a guarantee of the existence of a heart transformed from selfishness to love. Gifts and conduct which bring men prominently before the eyes of men are often no index to the character; and if they- be not rooted in and guided by love to God and man, their possessor has but little reason to congratulate himself. Too often it is a snare to judge himself by what he does rather than by what he is. At one period martyrdom became fashionable, and Christian teachers were compelled to remonstrate with those who fanat¬ically rushed to the stake and the arena. It is possible that many suffered through vainglory rather than the love of Christ.] 1 Corinthians 13:4 ηG3588 αγαπηG26 LOVE μακροθυμειG3114 [G5719] HAS , χρηστευεταιG5541 [G5736] ηG3588 IS KIND; αγαπηG26 LOVE ουG3756 ζηλοιG2206 [G5719] ηG3588 IS NOT ENVIOUS; αγαπηG26 LOVE ουG3756 NOT περπερευεταιG4068 [G5736] IS VAIN , ουG3756 φυσιουταιG5448 [G5743] IS NOT PUFFED UP, 4 Love suffereth long,—This long-suffering is the pro¬tracted endurance of wrong, such as is fitted to provoke re¬sentment. [It is that command over natural impulse which keeps just displeasure from breaking forth into action. Moses had more of this than any other in his day, yet to his cost he once failed in it. Indeed, Jesus Christ was the only one who possessed it in the fullest sense; “ Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again.” (1 Peter 2:23; see also Colossians 3:12-13.) and is kind;—It is kind to those who do evil. [It is good- natured, gentle, tender, affectionate. It is not sour, harsh, morose, ill-natured. It is active in doing good things to as many as possible, moved by the conviction: “ I shall pass through this world but once, any good thing, therefore, that I can do, or any kindness that I can show to any human being, let me do it now, let me not defer it, for I shall not pass this way again.” ] love envieth not;—[Envy is chagrin, mortification, discon¬tent, or uneasiness at the sight of another’ s excellence or good fortune, accompanied with some degree of hatred and a desire to possess equal advantages; malicious grudging. Love does not envy the happiness and prosperity others enjoy; but de¬lights in their welfare, and as their happiness is increased by their endowments, their reputation, their health, their domestic comforts, and their learning, it rejoices in it all and would not diminish it, and would not detract from that happiness.] love vaunteth not itself,— It does not thrust itself forward, nor take the highest seats in the synagogue. [Does not osten¬tatiously parade its superiority to others, whether real or supposed, priding itself on it. This quality is the exact opposite of envy; the one envying in another what is not possessed by ourselves, the other looking down on another for the want of something which we possess.] is not puffed up,—[It does not indulge in inflated opinions of itself; the words imply an instinctive aversion from all false glitter, pompous bluster, strutting in borrowed plumes, from extravagant words, looks, tones, styles, in short, a deep hatred of seeming to be more than one is.] 1 Corinthians 13:5 ουκG3756 ασχημονειG807 [G5719] ACTS NOT , ουG3756 ζητειG2212 [G5719] SEEKS NOT ταG3588 THE THINGS εαυτηςG1438 OF ITS OWN, ουG3756 παροξυνεταιG3947 [G5743] IS NOT QUICKLY , ουG3756 λογιζεταιG3049 [G5736] τοG3588 RECKONS NOT κακονG2556 EVIL, 5 doth not behave itself unseemly,—It behaves not haughtily ; but is kind, gentle, loving in character, defers to the wishes and rights of others, and in honor prefers others. [It seeks that which is proper or becoming in the circumstances in which we are placed. It prompts to that which is becoming in life; it saves from all that is unfit and unbecoming. It prompts to due respect for superiors; to a proper regard for inferiors, not despising their poverty, their dress, their dwellings ; it prompts to the due performance of all the duties growing out of the relations of life, as those of husband, wife, parent, child, brother, sister, and procures proper deportment in all these relations.] seeketh not its own,—Seeks not its own selfish desires and ends, but looks to the good and happiness of all. [And who so eminent in this as Paul himself— next to “ our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might become rich”— who so often inculcated this grace. (9: 22, 23; 10: 33; 2 Corinthians 7:3; Romans 15:2.) And yet, even then, rarely found noticeably among Christians. (Philippians 2:21.) The love here commended will prompt us to seek the welfare of others with self-denial, personal sacrifice, and toil. If all Christians would make it their grand object not to seek their own but the good of others; then true love would occupy its appropriate place in the heart, of every professed child of God; then there would be no lack of funds to carry forward the glorious gospel; then there would be no lack of men willing to devote their lives to the glorious work; then there would be no lack of prayer to im¬plore aid from God to live up to the fullest measure of duty.] is not provoked,— It does not readily take offense, nor is it easily excited to anger, or provoked to resent evils. [The one who is under the influence of love is not prone to violent anger or exasperation; it is not his character to be hasty, excited, or passionate. He is serious, calm, and patient. He looks soberly at things; and though he may be injured, yet he governs his temper, restrains and subdues his feelings.] taketh not account of evil;—It does not surmise evil and put the worst construction on the acts of others. [It makes no memorandum of evil done to itself, but allows it to pass unnoticed. It does not attribute evil motives to others, nei¬ther is it suspicious. It desires to think well of those whom it loves, and will not think ill of their motives, or conduct until it is compelled to do so by the most irrefragable evidence.] 1 Corinthians 13:6 ουG3756 χαιρειG5463 [G5719] REJOICE NOT επιG1909 τηG3588 AT αδικιαG93 , συγχαιρειG4796 [G5719] δεG1161 BUT WITH τηG3588 THE αληθειαG225 TRUTH; 6 rejoiceth not in unrighteousness,—It does not rejoice in the wrongdoing committed by others. (Romans 1:32.) It can¬not sympathize with what is evil, neither can it share the glee of the successful transgressor. but rejoiceth with the truth;—Rejoices when the truth re¬joices; sympathizes with it in its triumphs: “ I rejoice greatly that I have found certain of thy children walking in truth, even as we received commandment from the Father.” (2 John 1:4.) The truth is the gospel truth, the inseparable ally of love. (Ephesians 4:15; 3 John 1:12.) The false love which compromises the truth by glossing over iniquity or unrighteousness is thus tacitly condemned. (Proverbs 17:15.) 1 Corinthians 13:7 πανταG3956 ALL THINGS στεγειG4722 [G5719] COVERS, πανταG3956 ALL THINGS πιστευειG4100 [G5719] , πανταG3956 ALL THINGS ελπιζειG1679 [G5719] HOPES, πανταG3956 ALL THINGS υπομενειG5278 [G5719] ENDURES. 7 beareth all things,—“ Love covereth a multitude of sins.” (1 Peter 4:8.) It does not lay bare and expose to public gaze the infirmities and wrongs of the erring and those led into sin. It covers them up and tries to deliver from them. believeth all things,—It believes all the good which it can of any one as long as it is possible to do so without betraying the truth of God. hopeth all things,—Works for all, even the worst, hoping they will repent. endureth all things.—It suffers, endures, bears all evils, and is not driven from the true course by the wrongs and injuries of the wicked. These qualities seem to be successive steps in the treatment of the erring. They manifest true Christian fortitude. 1 Corinthians 13:8 ηG3588 αγαπηG26 LOVE ουδεποτεG3763 NEVER εκπιπτειG1601 [G5719] FAILS; ειτεG1535 δεG1161 BUT WHETHER προφητειαιG4394 , καταργηθησονταιG2673 [G5701] THEY SHALL BE DONE AWAY; ειτεG1535 WHETHER γλωσσαιG1100 TONGUES, παυσονταιG3973 [G5695] THEY SHALL CEASE; ειτεG1535 WHETHER γνωσιςG1108 καταργηθησεταιG2673 [G5701] IT SHALL BE DONE AWAY. 8 Love never faileth:—He now shows that spiritual gifts were temporary, and must pass away; while love, the doing of God’ s will to all, as a principle of action and a means of justification, would never pass away. Love is the ruling principle in heaven, and is eternal.— Prophecy, the foretelling of future events and the teaching by inspiration the will of God after it had been given by the apostles, would be done away. whether there be tongues, they shall cease;—The speaking with tongues they had never learned would cease. whether there be knowledge, it shall be done away.—The time would come when miraculously bestowed knowledge would be known no more. All those spiritual gifts pertained to the introductory age of the church. These powers were given to help men do what they could not do without the power, as the New Testament had not been completed. 1 Corinthians 13:9 εκG1537 μερουςG3313 γαρG1063 FOR IN PART γινωσκομενG1097 [G5719] WE KNOW, καιG2532 AND εκG1537 IN μερουςG3313 PART προφητευομενG4395 [G5719] WE ; 9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part;—At the time this was written, some things were unknown, had not been revealed. For the knowledge of God’ s will they were dependent upon those possessing the gift of prophecy. Most expositors think this refers to the partial knowledge of divine things we possess in this world, compared with the clear vision we shall possess when we shall have passed into the future ; but this is wholly outside the scope of the apostle’ s writing here. He is contrasting the spiritual gifts, their teachings and blessings, with the service of love under the completed and perfect law. 1 Corinthians 13:10 οτανG3752 δεG1161 BUT WHEN ελθηG2064 [G5632] MAY COME τοG3588 THAT WHICH τελειονG5046 IS PERFECT, τοτεG5119 THEN τοG3588 THAT εκG1537 IN μερουςG3313 PART καταργηθησεταιG2673 [G5701] SHALL BE DONE AWAY. 10 but when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away.—These gifts were to continue in the church to guide and instruct it until the completed will of God was made known. They were to serve a temporary purpose; then when their office was fulfilled, they were to pass away and give place to it. That perfection was completed, so far as God’ s work of the revealing work of the Spirit is concerned, when the full will of God should be revealed, or made known, and his provisions for saving men should be set in operation, as is set forth in the following: “ And he gave some to be apostles; and some, prophets ; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, unto the work of ministering, unto the building up of the body of Christ: till we all attain unto the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a fullgrown man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: that we may be no longer children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doc¬trine, by the sleight of men in craftiness, after the wiles of error; but speaking truth in love, may grow up in all things into him, who is the head, even Christ.” (Ephesians 4:11-15.) In this passage Paul explains the whole matter: showing that these miraculous gifts were to serve till the full knowledge was received to make them one in faith and to bring them to the fullness of men and women in Christ. That knowledge is given in the New Testament. There are two reasons why the gifts of the Spirit are not now imparted. These gifts were miraculous powers. First, there are no apostles now to impart gifts. The apostles were inspired men; so they knew all truth through inspiration, and they had seen and heard Jesus. Secondly, having revealed all truth needed to make men perfect, and thoroughly furnish them to all good works, having put in operation all the pro¬visions of God for instructing and blessing men, there is no further need for miraculous revelations. Men can now learn all truth needed for present and eternal well-being from his will revealed and recorded in the Bible, and it will lead him into all the blessings of God in this world and in that to come, if he will study it to know and do the will of God. What man can learn himself, God will not work miracles to make known to him. Again, to all creations and orders of God there have been creative and procreative ages. The creative age is that in which new creatures and a new order of things are brought into being; the procreative age is that in which these beings are multiplied and developed and the order is continued. In the creative age, the age of miracles, things are miraculously formed and created, afterwards they multiply and grow through the workings of law. Life was imparted to Adam and Eve by miracle; life, the same life that was given to them, has been passed on to their children through all the generations from them to us by law. No miracle has been needed to impart physical life since they were made alive. A miracle giving physical life would be a violation of the order of God. The same is true in the spiritual world. In the beginning spiritual life was imparted miraculously. Jesus Christ came into the world; through his teaching in precept and example; his suffering, death, burial; his struggle in the grave with the power of death and hell (in the grave the battle for man was fought and the victory won) ; his resurrection and ascension to his Father’ s throne, he created the material for the new spiritual kingdom. The apostles and their fellow disciples constituted the nucleus. Christ completed his work and left them with the words ringing in their ears: “ Behold, I send forth the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city, until ye be clothed with power from on high.” (Luke 24:49.) The Holy Spirit came, imparted unto them spiritual life miraculously, organized them, gave laws to guide in the operation and development in the spiritual realm. The same spiritual life bestowed on them through miracle has been per-petuated and multiplied through “ the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:2), so that all Christians now enjoy that life without miracle. It was given by miracle; it is perpetuated by law. 1 Corinthians 13:11 οτεG3753 WHEN ημηνG2252 [G5713] I WAS νηπιοςG3516 AN INFANT, ωςG5613 AS νηπιοςG3516 AN INFANT ελαλουνG2980 [G5707] I SPOKE, ωςG5613 AS νηπιοςG3516 AN INFANT εφρονουνG5426 [G5707] I THOUGHT, ωςG5613 AS νηπιοςG3516 AN INFANT ελογιζομηνG3049 [G5711] I ; οτεG3753 δεG1161 BUT WHEN γεγοναG1096 [G5754] I BECAME ανηρG435 A MAN, κατηργηκαG2673 [G5758] I DID AWAY WITH ταG3588 THE THINGS τουG3588 OF THE νηπιουG3516 INFANT. 11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child:—He compares this time of partial gifts in the church to childhood; that, when the perfect law is completed, to manhood. While the gifts last, he would use and speak by them as he spoke when a child. now that I am become a man, I have put away childish things.—When the perfect law is come, he will put away these partial gifts bestowed as helps for the childhood of the church and use the perfect law given to guide its manhood. 1 Corinthians 13:12 βλεπομενG991 [G5719] γαρG1063 FOR WE SEE αρτιG737 NOT διG1223 THROUGH εσοπτρουG2072 ενG1722 A GLASS αινιγματιG135 , τοτεG5119 δεG1161 BUT THEN προσωπονG4383 FACE προςG4314 TO προσωπονG4383 FACE; αρτιG737 NOW γινωσκωG1097 [G5719] I KNOW εκG1537 IN μερουςG3313 PART, τοτεG5119 δεG1161 BUT THEN επιγνωσομαιG1921 [G5695] I SHALL KNOW καθωςG2531 AS καιG2532 ALSO επεγνωσθηνG1921 [G5681] I HAVE BEEN KNOWN. 12 For now we see in a mirror, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know fully even as also I was fully known.—While in the state of childhood, with only the partial knowledge made known through the spiritually gifted, they saw as in a mirror darkly; but when the perfect revelation should be made known, they would know the things revealed through all. So that the knowledge we possess through the completed will of God is greatly more than any one of the gifted or inspired ones possessed, since the revelations made to and through all are given in the Scriptures. 1 Corinthians 13:13 νυνιG3570 δεG1161 AND NOW μενειG3306 [G5719] ABIDES πιστιςG4102 FAITH, ελπιςG1680 HOPE, αγαπηG26 LOVE; ταG3588 τριαG5140 ταυταG5023 THESE THREE THINGS; μειζωνG3187 δεG1161 BUT THE GREATER τουτωνG5130 ηG3588 OF THESE "IS" αγαπηG26 LOVE. 13 But now abideth faith, hope, love, these three;—While these miraculous gifts must pass away, faith, hope, and love remain as the permanent and abiding fruits of the word of God. Without these no one can be a child of God; with them and the perfect law of liberty, gifts are no longer needed. The word of God as the seed of the kingdom received into the heart produces faith. Faith, in the promises contained in the word of God, produces hope. The end of faith and hope is to bring man into perfect harmony with the will of God. Complete harmony with the will of God is perfect love to every being in the universe. and the greatest of these is love.—Love is the filling of all requirements, duties, and obligations contained in the law of God toward God and to all the creatures of heaven and earth. Love is the great underlying and all-pervading principle of the universe. God is love, and the laws of the universe are the manifestations and outgrowth of his love; and to love is to conform to the laws of God, to bring ourselves into harmony with them, and through these to work good to every being in the universe. This love will only be perfected in the state of glory, when we shall see him as he is and be like him, and it will be eternal. [Faith is not an end; it is faith in a Divine Deliverer and in his promise of salvation; it is the means toward eternal life. Hope is not an end; it is hope of final and eternal fellowship with God; it is the means to steadfastness and to heaven. But love is an end in itself. It is the bond of perfectness; beyond this even Christianity cannot carry us. As faith and hope realize their purpose when they produce love, it is obvious that the virtue which is their final purpose is greater than they. And this conviction is confirmed when we consider that, of all virtues, love is usually the most difficult and the last to be acquired. Love is the test and the crown of spiritual maturity. Society needs above all things to be penetrated with the spirit of love to God, sympathy and brotherly kindness to man. This is the radical cure for all its ills— this, and only this. Without it, all is disorder and chaos; with it, all is regularity and beauty. It represses hatred, malice, envy; and it cultivates considerateness, pity, gentleness, self-denial, and generous help.] Verse 1 1 Corinthians 13Barclay said, "For many, this is the most wonderful chapter in the New Testament";[1] but as McGarvey said, "It has been admired by all ages, but, unfortunately, practiced by none!"[2] A sample of the marvelous praise which has been heaped upon this chapter is the following: It is a glorious hymn or paean in honor of Christian love, in which St. Paul rises on the wings of inspiration to the most sunlit heights of Christian eloquence. Like Psalms 45, it may be entitled "A Psalm of Love.[3]There are elements of misunderstanding, however, in the view that "This passage found in the middle of a protracted argument suggests that we have here the result of a sudden burst of inspiration!"[4] Not part of, but ALL that Paul wrote was inspired of God. Furthermore, this whole chapter may not be separated from the argument in the preceding and following chapters; for itself is part of the argument, a very telling part of it. The chapter falls easily into three divisions: (1) the absolute necessity of love (1 Corinthians 13:1-3), (2) the characteristics of love (1 Corinthians 13:4-7), and (3) the permanence of love (1 Corinthians 13:8-13). Despite this classification, 1 Corinthians 13:13 evidently stands apart. The disorders of the Corinthian church are continually in view. Both the positive and negative attributes of love in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 are clearly the opposites of conditions among the Corinthians. Also, such words as "tongues ... prophecy ... knowledge ... faith so as to move mountains cannot be understood, except as references to the miraculous gifts at Corinth. This chapter should never be construed as merely an abstract teaching on love, parenthetically inserted. The situation at Corinth was still the center of Paul's attention here. [1] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 131. [2] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on 1Corinthians (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 127. [3] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 422. [4] T. Teignmouth Shore, Ellicott's Commentary on the Holy Bible (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1959), p. 337. If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am become sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal. (1 Corinthians 13:1) Tongues of men and of angels ... No affirmation is made here regarding the language of angels. Hodge paraphrased this as "all languages, human or divine."[5] That the speech of angels should have been brought in here could have derived from Paul's own experience in which he was caught up into heaven and heard words "unspeakable, unlawful to utter" (2 Corinthians 12:4). There is also an assumption here that "angels are superior in all respects to men."[6] Thus, Paul made his argument more overwhelming with the contrast between the tongues of angels and the distressing tongues of Corinth. But have not love ... Three Greek words for "love" are [@eros] (erotic love), [@fileo] (affection), and [@agape], the latter being the word here. "The word was not classical Greek. No heathen writer had used it."[7] Yet it was in the Greek language and was used in the Septuagint (LXX). Thus, the Spirit chose a word for Christian love which was free of the sensual overtones of more common Greek words. [Agape] is considered to be one of the grandest words in the New Testament. Sounding brass, or a clanging cymbal ... The cacophonous pretense of heathen worship included the clashing and banging of gongs and cymbals and the braying of brass trumpets. Barclay identified such noises as characteristic "especially of the worship of Dionysus and Cybele."[8] Paul teaches two things by this: (1) that the exhibitions of the Corinthian tongue speakers were of the same significance as heathen worship and (2) that both were noisy, empty and worthless. [5] Charles Hodge, An Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974), p. 266. [6] Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1949), p. 242. [7] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 422. [8] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 131. Verse 2 And if I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.Prophecy ... knowledge ... faith so as to move mountains ... These are to be added to "tongues" mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13:1, all of them being miraculous gifts which had caused so much trouble at Corinth. All faith ... Although this refers to a miraculous gift, faith is never to be viewed as appearing in various varieties, being of one kind only. In all the word of God, there is no mention of several kinds, or even two kinds of faith. It is always the AMOUNT OF FAITH which is determinative. True to that fact, Paul is not here speaking of some special kind of faith, but of "all faith," meaning the superlative AMOUNT, not some special "kind." No greater misunderstanding exists among religious people today than the notion that there is any such thing as "saving faith," understanding it as a special quality or variety of faith that inevitably procures salvation. Paul's words here are a sufficient refutation of the popular heresy regarding "faith alone" or "saving faith." "All faith" cannot mean anything less than faith in its superlative degree (degrees of faith being often mentioned ... "little faith ... great faith ... etc."); and if certain "kinds of faith" contrary to all Scripture, should be supposed as existing, there would be no way to exclude them from being included in Paul's sweeping words "all faith." Significantly, not even "all faith" can avail any man of salvation unless his heart is filled with love of man and of God. This obvious truth has resulted in some of the exegetes placing a false construction upon "love" as Paul used it here, making it to mean "God's love of men," not their love of God. Throughout this chapter it will be observed that it is love of humanity as a reflection of the love which Christians have for God which is being discussed. See under 1 Corinthians 13:13. Prophecy ... The miraculous gift of prophecy belonged to Balaam, but his having love neither of God or Israel caused his ruin. Caiaphas as God's high priest uttered prophecy; but his loveless heart made him an enemy of God (John 11:51; Numbers 24:1 ff Numbers 31:8). All faith so as to remove mountains... While true enough that removing mountains was a well-known Jewish metaphor for solving difficult problems (see Matthew 17:20; Luke 17:6, especially the comment in my Commentary on Luke, pp. 370-371), it is clearly the miraculous manifestation of faith that is meant here. As Wesley said, "This means the highest degree of miracle-working faith."[9]Judas Iscariot was cited by David Lipscomb as being an example of faith to perform miracles, but with no love of Christ. "Judas had faith to work miracles (Matthew 10:1); but he did not possess love, betrayed the Lord, and went to his own place."[10][9] John Wesley, One Volume New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1972), in loco. [10] David Lipscomb, Commentary on 1Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 194. Verse 3 And if I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and if I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profiteth me nothing.Bestow all my goods ... "The Greek word here means to feed others by giving them morsels of food,"[11]giving the meaning of giving away all the giver's property a little bit at a time so as to reach the greatest possible number. My body to be burned ... Coining as it did before the savage persecutions in which Christians were burned for their faith, this is surprising, being perhaps prophetic. Some have supposed that Paul was here thinking of the Hebrew children (Daniel 3:23), and Barclay thought it possible that Paul "referred to a famous monument in Athens called `The Indian's Tomb.' It honored an Indian who had burned himself in public."[12]Whatever may have prompted Paul's words here, the lesson is clear, that no liberal giver nor fanatical ascetic may be assured of eternal life without the all-important, indispensable virtue of love. In the days of the persecutions, some were tempted to seek martyrdom as a sure means of attaining eternal life; but a proper regard for what Paul said here would have discouraged such a thing. Paul in these first three verses did not mention all of the miraculous gifts, but the most respected; and thus what is said here of the examples chosen applied with equal force to all the others. [11] T. Teignmouth Shore, op. cit., p. 338. [12] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 132. Verse 4 Love suffereth long, and is kind; love envieth not; love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up.Patient endurance and active good are qualities of love. Paul enumerated fifteen qualities of love in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7; but this is far from being a methodical dissertation on love as an abstract subject. The qualities cited here have the utility of contrasting with the extraordinary gifts so coveted at Corinth; and they are presented here as exactly opposed to the characteristic of the puffed-up Corinthians. As Hodge said: Those traits of love are therefore adduced which stood opposed to the temper which they exhibited in the use of their gifts. They were impatient, discontented, envious, inflated, selfish, indecorous, unmindful of the feelings or interests of others, suspicious, resentful and censorious.[13]ENDNOTE: [13] Charles Hodge, op. cit., p. 269. Verse 5 Does not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not its own, is not provoked, taketh not account of evil; rejoiceth not in unrighteousness, but rejoiceth with the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.The true meaning of all of these qualities is seen in their opposites as cited by Hodge (under 1 Corinthians 13:4). Seeketh not its own ... Barclay rendered this "Love does not insist upon its rights."[14] He also stated that "It would be the key to almost all the problems which surround us today, if men would think less of their rights and more of their duties."[15] The essential selfishness in all human nature has been exploited politically in this generation, and the ultimate fruits of unbridled selfishness are yet to be reaped. Believeth all things ... As Johnson said, "This does not include gullibility, but means rather that the believer should not be suspicious."[16][14] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 135. [15] Ibid. [16] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 632. Verse 8 Love never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall be done away; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall be done away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away.Beginning here, and to the end of the chapter, it is the permanence of love, as contrasted with the supernatural gifts which were so highly treasured by the Corinthians, which is stressed. And before moving to declare that all of these things which had so dazzled and inflated the Corinthians were soon to end, Paul had just outlined the glory and desirability of Christian love, the same being the "most excellent way" mentioned in1 Corinthians 12:31b. But here he made the unqualified declaration of the end of supernatural gifts in the church. It may only be hoped that the Corinthians got the point better than many of the modern commentators. Love never faileth ... As in the RSV, "Love never ends." Prophecies ... shall be done away ... This cannot mean that prophecies shall be contradicted by events, but as Hodge said, "The gift (of prophecy) shall cease to be necessary, and therefore shall not be continued."[17]Tongues ... shall cease ... This means that the TRUE gifts of tongues would cease. In many generations after those days, the gift of so-called "tongues" would flourish at intervals throughout the history of Christendom; but Paul's words here absolutely deny any authenticity whatever to the so-called charismatics of the present day. True, it is only said here that "tongues SHALL cease"; but there is no reason whatever to believe that this least of all supernatural gifts should have survived when supernatural knowledge, divine prophecy, and the gift of miracle-working faith perished; which, of course, they did. Any authentic speaking in tongues is here restricted by the apostle Paul to the age of miracles; and when that ceased, the tongues ceased, except for the affectations of those who indulge, from whatever motives, the counterfeit "tongues" of the present day. The very fact of Paul's showing "the more excellent way" declared that the supernatural gifts would soon pass away, otherwise that generation would not have needed the instruction. Those gifts at Corinth had a purpose. In that day in Corinth, no man had a copy of the New Testament; therefore it was necessary that supernaturally endowed men should teach and lead them; but today, "No preacher or teacher has any message from God unless he gets it from the Bible."[18]During the childhood age of the church, miracles authenticated the message of the inspired preachers (Mark 16:20). Miracles were to confirm the word of God. "No miracle today could confirm the word of God; it is already confirmed. Men need simply to believe and obey it."[19]The burden of proof must rest upon those who suppose the age of miracles is still upon us. If there are super-natural gifts, where are they? The contradicting claims of religious bodies pretending to work miracles are mutually destructive. This writer believes that there are no miracles being performed today by any persons whomsoever. Paul said they would cease; and they have ceased! That there are marvelous providences, so singular and astonishing as to startle people, is not surprising; for it may not be denied that God is still working in the world, and especially in his kingdom; but that quality of miracles bearing witness as a confirmation of God's word is not discernible in such merciful providences. What about the answer to prayer? Yes indeed God answers prayer, and sometimes in the most astonishing ways; but such a thing bears no likeness to the supernatural and visible wonders of the apostolic age. The character of people pretending to perform miracles in this generation refutes their claims. They get rich doing it; but the apostles never took money for healing anyone. As Foy E. Wallace stated it: The miraculous endowments designated gifts have FAILED, have CEASED, haveVANISHED AWAY and are therefore no longer in force. All such powers were temporary and provisional and cannot now be exercised.[20]There is a meaning in such words as "cease ... fail ... vanish away," not merely of continuing no longer, but of being superseded by something else. As Russell noted, "Tongues prophecies, and ... knowledge shall be superseded."[21] Despite the fact of Russell's taking a dispensational view of this passage, his idea of "superseded" is correct. And what was to supersede the tongues, etc.? It was the inspired writing of the New Testament. Thus, the fact of the appearance of that which was to do the superseding proved the near approach of the time for it to occur. In a sense, this Epistle superseded the tongues of Corinth. When that which is perfect is come ... The great problem before Paul was the instruction and guidance of the church in Corinth; and the most acceptable view of what might be called "perfect" in connection with that problem would be the completed canon on the New Testament. McGarvey understood it as "the recorded word."[22] Kelcy called it "The body of truth fully revealed."[23] DeHoff identified it as "The New Testament."[24] The comparison which Paul at once made contrasted the childhood age of the church with the church's maturity, not the present dispensation with the ultimate condition of the saints in heaven; and this demands that the expression "that which is perfect" must be associated, not with conditions in heaven, but with the maturity of the church; and that condition is met only by referring the words to God's completed revelation, the Bible. A great many commentators insist upon referring "that which is perfect" to conditions in heaven, as for example in the following: This anticipates the Parousia, the culmination of the age. To suggest that "the perfect" refers to the completion of the Canon of Scripture fails to find any support in the Biblical usage of perfect ... Such an interpretation exists to explain the absence of certain in many churches today.[25]Regarding the "Biblical usage" of "perfect," it should be noted that even of the Old Testament it was said, "The law of the Lord is perfect converting the soul" (Psalms 19:7); thus "perfect" most assuredly is applied to the revealed word of God; and such being true of the Old Testament makes it even more applicable to the New Testament. As for the absence of "certain [@charismata]" in present-day churches, it may be dogmatically affirmed that "ALL [@charismata]" is absent from all present-day churches, with the exception of counterfeit tongues affected by certain groups, the behavior of whom invariably demonstrates their so-called "manifestations" as being contrary to the orders of the Holy Spirit, unscriptural and thus bearing no resemblance whatever to the genuine gift which existed in the times of the apostles. That which is in part shall be done away ... Failure to see that " knowledge, tongues, prophecies, etc." called in these chapters "spiritual gifts," are to be identified with the things in part that shall be done away involves interpreters in an impossible position. Take ordinary "knowledge," is this to be done away with when we get to heaven? Certainly not. Later, at the end of the chapter, Paul gives a glimpse of eternity, but not here. The things in part which were soon to be done away were the supernatural gifts of the infancy age of the church. "Paul considered the days of spiritual gifts as the process by which the goal of maturity should be reached."[26] As Lipscomb said it: These gifts were to continue in the church to guide and instruct it until the completed will of God was made known. They were to serve a temporary purpose; then when their office was fulfilled, they were to pass away and give place to the revealed will of God.[27]The pattern of many commentators is like that of Macknight who paraphrased this thus: When the perfect gift of complete illumination is bestowed on all in heaven, then that which is partial, namely, the present gifts of knowledge and prophecy, shall be abolished as useless.[28]However, who can believe that Paul was trying to control the outrageous situation in Corinth by assuring them that all of those miraculous gifts would disappear when they all got to heaven? The perfect illustration of what he really means was childhood giving way to maturity, stated in the very next line. [17] Charles Hodge, op. cit., p. 271. [18] George W. DeHoff, Sermons on First Corinthians (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: The Christian Press, 1947), p. 96. [19] Ibid. [20] Foy E. Wallace, Jr., A Review of the New Versions (Fort Worth, Texas: Foy E. Wallace, Jr., Publications, 1973), p. 435. [21] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 426. [22] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 132. [23] Raymond C. Kelcy, First Corinthians (Austin, Texas: R. B. Sweet Co., Inc., 1967), p. 61. [24] George W. DeHoff, op. cit., p. 96. [25] Paul W. Marsh, A New Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1969), p. 404. [26] Raymond C. Kelcy, op. cit., p. 62. [27] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 200. [28] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 219. Verse 11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as s child; now, that I am become a man, I have put away childish things.Can this be anything if not a suggestion that the Corinthians should stop being children and grow up? In case any of them might have missed the point, he added a bit later, "Brethren, be not children in mind" (1 Corinthians 14:20). Furthermore, the admonition was given in the same breath with Paul's statement that five intelligible words were worth more than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue! Verse 12 For now, we see in a mirror, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know fully even as also I was fully known.In this there surely must be a glimpse of eternal things; and it evidently occurred to Paul in connection with what he had just said of the childhood age of the church giving way to maturity, applicable to the current era of that day; but like many other examples in the Bible, it has a secondary reference to something much more remote. (Other examples of this same type of thing are in Matthew 2:15 Matthew 2:18 ... See my comments in my Commentary on Matthew, pp. 18-19). We may therefore refer the words about seeing through a mirror darkly, and knowing "in part" to the present dispensation of God's grace, and the words about being "face to face" (presumably with the Lord) and knowing "fully" may be understood as descriptive of conditions in eternity. That there is, in fact, just such an emphasis in this 1 Corinthians 13:12, is proved by Paul's prompt return to the "now" in the final verse immediately after this. A failure to observe this limitation of 1 Corinthians 13:12 is fatal to any true interpretation of this passage. In a mirror darkly ... Ancient mirrors were of polished metal, easily tarnished, and any image was only dimly seen. Paul himself referred even to the Christ as "the image of God" (2 Corinthians 4:4; Colossians 1:15); and although it would be sinful and incorrect to suppose any deficiency in the blessed Saviour, mortal life is limited. Nothing is dim about Christ as God's image except the tarnished mirrors by which mortal men behold it. There shines in these words the essential need for people to walk by faith; because what they may "see" even under the best of circumstances must be described as seeing "darkly." See my Commentary on Hebrews, pp. 209-210. Then face to face ... In the resurrection, we shall behold the face of the Beloved. "We know that if he shall be manifested, we shall be like him; for we shall see him even as he is'" (1 John 3:2). Now I know in part ... Note the temporal "now"; and note also that Paul was not referring to the Corinthians who knew far less than he did; for it is of himself that this is said. What a shocking rebuke of intellectual arrogance is this! The greatest mind of the apostolic age, other than that of Christ himself, here stressed the partial and incomplete nature of that whole body of revelation which Paul, more than any other, delivered to mankind. "The permanent danger of intellectual eminence is intellectual snobbery,"[29] as Barclay said; but there is surely an antidote for it in such a passage as this. ENDNOTE: [29] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 131. Verse 13 But now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; and the greatest of these is love.But now ... This means "in this present state." "If we give it any other sense, as though Paul said, 'now to sum all things up,' then we have him saying that faith, hope and love are eternal."[30] As Barclay said, the stress in this verse regards "the supremacy of love,"[31] not its permanence which was treated in 1 Corinthians 13:8 in this paragraph. "Now" in this verse meant that Paul had returned to the present situation after the digression to speak of eternal things in 1 Corinthians 13:12, which should be treated, actually, as a parenthesis. Shore and many others insist that "NOW is not here temporal, but logical";[32] but this viewpoint should be rejected, as James Macknight declared: The clause "now abideth" implies that these graces (faith, hope and love) are not always to abide; at least the graces of faith and hope shall not abide; for seeing that faith is the persuasion of things hoped for (Hebrews 11:1), and hope that is seen is not hope (Romans 8:24); in heaven, where all the objects of our faith and hope are put in our possession, there can be no place for either.[33]By the above comment, Macknight clearly construed the "now" of this verse as temporal, that is, a reference to the time present. All of the clever arguments adduced to show how we shall still have faith and hope in heaven fall to the ground in the light of the truth that both faith and hope deal with uncertainties, and there shall be no uncertainties in the eternal world. Abideth ... here has the force of saying that the miraculous spiritual gifts shall not abide; and, of course, they did not; nor do they exist now. It is in this dispensation that faith, hope and love abide; but what is especially stressed, "Love is the greatest" of the trio. And the greatest of these is love ... It is an unqualified disaster for advocates of the "faith only" theory that love should here be ranked ahead of faith; and, consequently, it is usually interpreted as meaning "God's love of men," not men's love of God and of each other. Thus, Guthrie commented on this verse, "greater than these is the love (of God)."[34] Throughout the chapter, it has been made clear that love as a virtue of men, not as an attribute of God, is meant. It is true, of course, that the love in Christian hearts has been shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Spirit; but by the virtue of that very fact it becomes a Christian virtue. WHY LOVE IS THE THINGLove is the fulfillment of the law, which was never true of faith (Romans 13:10). Love outranks faith in the power to motivate people. Love includes obedience (John 14:15), which is not true of faith or hope. Love is the heart of the Great Commandment to love God and one's neighbor (Mark 12:28-31). Love shall abide eternally, whereas both faith and hope shall not, except in some exceptional sense. Love, if lacking in the heart, would be a sufficient deficiency to prevent one's salvation, even if he possessed "all faith" (1 Corinthians 13:2). Love works the greatest miracle of transformation in human hearts, distinguishing it from faith, which exists in some pretty cold fish! There is no wonder, then, that Paul extolled the virtue of love in his wonderful efforts to correct the puffed-up Corinthians. This chapter may be viewed as one of the most important in Scripture, not merely for the truly marvelous things said of love, but also for the firm word therein regarding the cessation of the miraculous age. For further comments on "miracles" and why they ceased, see my Commentary on Hebrews, pp. 42-44. Concerning the subject of love, there is none other that so fascinates and inspires the hearts of people; for this gift ranks first among the fruits of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22 ff). There is even a sense in which it is a continuing "miracle" throughout the church age, not any less than the "confirming miracles" of the apostolic period, merely different. It is the signature of God himself in the hearts of all the redeemed. GOD'S Love is God's imprimatur Upon the human heart, A glorious investiture, His image to impart. Love is chief of all the graces, The royal prothonotary, Assigning each and all their places In God's economy. It is the precious bridal song, The prothalamion hymn Of Jesus Bride, the ransomed throng Who have believed in him. Upon the entire human race, To prove them born above, The Father stooped His name to trace. The signature is Love. James Burton Coffman New York City November 27,1965 [30] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 133. [31] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 140. [32] T. Teignmouth Shore, op. cit., p. 339. [33] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 221. [34] Donald Guthrie, The New Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 1069. "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE " Chapter Thirteen IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To see the value of love in our service to the Lord 2) To understand the scriptural definition of "love" 3) To determine when spiritual gifts would cease SUMMARY In the middle of his discussion on spiritual gifts, Paul describes the "more excellent way" of love. After first emphasizing the importance of love (1 Corinthians 13:1-3), he then defines love by what it is and what it does (1 Corinthians 13:4-8 a). Ending with love's quality of "permanence", Paul contrasts it with the temporary nature of spiritual gifts. Though such gifts fulfilled an important function, the time would come when they would cease, while qualities like faith, hope, and love would remain (1 Corinthians 13:8-13). OUTLINE I. THE "" OF LOVE (1 Corinthians 13:1-3) A. IN REGARD TO IN TONGUES (1 Corinthians 13:1)1. Even if one spoke with tongues of men and of angels... 2. Without love, the person would be like sounding brass or a clanging cymbal B. IN REGARD TO THE GIFTS OF AND FAITH (1 Corinthians 13:2)1. Even if one had the gift of prophecy to understand all mysteries and all knowledge... 2. Even if one had the gift of faith sufficient to remove mountains... 3. Without love, such a person is nothing C. IN REGARD TO GREAT (1 Corinthians 13:3)1. Even if one gave all their goods to the poor... 2. Even if one were willing to be burned at the stake... 3. Without love, it profits the person nothing II. THE "" OF LOVE (1 Corinthians 13:4-8 a) A. LOVE'S "" (1 Corinthians 13:4 a)1. Suffers long 2. Is kind B. LOVE'S "" (1 Corinthians 13:4-6 a)1. Does not envy; does not parade itself, is not puffed up 2. Does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil 3. Does not rejoice in iniquity C. LOVE'S "" , (1 Corinthians 13:6-8 a)1. Rejoices in the truth 2. Bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things 3. Never fails III. THE "" OF LOVE (1 Corinthians 13:8-13) A. IN TO GIFTS (1 Corinthians 13:8-12)1. Love never fails, but spiritual gifts will cease (1 Corinthians 13:8) 2. Spiritual gifts to cease when that which is perfect is comes (1 Corinthians 13:9-10) 3. Spiritual gifts equated with "childish things", which are put away at maturity (1 Corinthians 13:11) 4. Spiritual gifts necessary when knowledge (revelation?) is partial (1 Corinthians 13:12) B. IN ITS ABIDING NATURE (1 Corinthians 13:13)1. What will abide (remain) is faith, hope, love 2. The greatest being love REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER 1) List the main points of this chapter- The "Importance" Of Love (1 Corinthians 13:1-3) - The "Definition" Of Love (1 Corinthians 13:4-8 a) - The "Permanency" Of Love (1 Corinthians 13:8-13) 2) What is necessary for any service that we may render to be of value? (1 Corinthians 13:1-3)- Love 3) What is the main difference between love and spiritual gifts? (1 Corinthians 13:8)- Love never fails, but spiritual gifts will cease 4) What does "that which is in part" refer to in verse ten? (1 Corinthians 13:9)- Knowing in part, prophesying in part (i.e., partial knowledge, partial revelation) 5) What does "that which is perfect" refer to in verse ten? (1 Corinthians 13:10)- Complete knowledge, complete revelation (see question nine below) 6) What two illustrations does Paul use to show the temporary nature of spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 13:11-12)- A man putting away childish things - Seeing clearly after a period of viewing in a dim mirror 7) In verse twelve, what word is being modified by the expressions "in part" and "fully"?- Know (or knowledge) 8) What will remain after spiritual gifts cease? (1 Corinthians 13:13)- Faith, hope, and love 9) Why is it unlikely that the expression "that which is perfect is come" in verse ten refers to Christ, or to heaven?- Paul speaks of faith, hope and love abiding (remaining) after spiritual gifts have ceased (1 Corinthians 13:13) - Because of the nature of faith (Hebrews 11:1) and hope (Romans 8:24-25), they will cease to exist when Christ or heaven comes - If "that which is perfect is come" refers to Christ or heaven, and spiritual gifts were to last till then, verse thirteen would be meaningless - For this reason it is more in keeping with the context to understand "that which is perfect is come" to refer to the complete knowledge or revelation of God's Will Questions by E.M. Zerr On 1st Corinthians 131. What kind of way was promised to he shown? 2. Where was this promise made ? 3. Could any one speak with tongues of angels ? 4. Give the other word for charity. 5. Explain comparison to sounding brass and tinkling symbol ? 6. In what action were these used? 7. Is prophecy a spiritual gift? 8. What could miraculous faith accomplish? 9. State what is gerater than this accomplishment. 10. Without this what does one amount to? 11. Can one be liberal and not have this charity? 12. What sacrifice is less than charity? 13. When are all these accomplishments unprofitable? 14. To what extent will charity suffer? 15. What sentiment does it also show? 16. Give your definition of envy. 17. What will prevent one from vaunting himself? 18. Is it wrong to be puffed up? 19. If one is so what does he lack? 20. What sort of behaviour will charity induce ? 21. Can it be provoked? 22. How is it modified? 23. State the manner of thinking it does. 24. Does this agree with Eph. 5: 11? 25. In what will charity rejoice ? 26. What is given as opposite to this quality here ? 27. It believes what? 28. Compare this with 1 John 4: 5. 29. What about the endurance of charity? 30. Compare this with 1 Peter 4: 15. 31. How about the lasting qualities? 32. Will prophecies continue indefinitely? 33. What will hapen to tongues? 34. Does this mean that language will be discarded? 35. State the fate coming to knowledge. 36. Will ignorance be the result of this? 37. What is lacking in this knowledge and prophecy ? State what Paul expects to come later. 38. What is the “ part” that is to be done away ? 39. When will this be done? 40. Explain this in light of Eph. 4: 15. 41. How does a child speak ? 42. When is it put away? 43. To what is the child compared here ? 44. When will the Church become the man? 45. What is the glass in 12th verse? 46. How shall they finally know? 47. Does this mean recognition in Heaven ? 48. Name the three graces mentioned here by Paul. Which is the geratest and why? 1 Corinthians 13:1. This chapter continues the same general subject that Paul has been considering, namely, the proper estimate to be placed on spiritual gifts. The Corinthians were so devoted to them that they had fallen to wrangling against each toher. This spirit of dissension had caused them to slight the "more excellent way," which is prompted by charity or love. The apostle will devote this chapter to showing the emptiness of all their boasted gifts without having this greatest of all virtues, love for each other. Sounding brass and tinkling cymbals were used in both religious and military exercises. Smith's Bible Dictionary says they were used "as an accompaniment to other instruments." They would therefore not express any distinct note or other useful term in themselves. Paul compares that fact with the use of spiritual gifts when not connected with love. 1 Corinthians 13:2. Some of the most outstanding spiritual gifts are named in this verse for specimens, and even they are nothing in the absence of love for the brethren. 1 Corinthians 13:3. Bestowing goods upon the poor is possible even in the absence of what the King James translation calls charity, which shows the word does not mean what is commonly called "liberality." The word is from AGAPE, and the common version renders it "love" in 86 places. For further information, see the comments at Matthew 5:43, volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary. 1 Corinthians 13:4. This and a number of verses following will show some things that charity (or love) will do, and also what it will not do. Suffereth tong means it will cause a man to be patient and kind. Envieth not denotes that one man will not be grieved because some other one has a gift that he does not have. This teaching especially was needed by many of the Corinthians, because they were contending over the respective gifts of each other. To vaunt means to make a vain display, and it would be caused by being puffed up. 1 Corinthians 13:5. Unseemly means unbecomingly, and the Corinthians had certainly been guilty of such behaviour. Seeketh not her own signifies that one is not selfish. Not easily provoked denotes one who does not become angered at every little provocation. Thinketh no evil. If a man loves his brother, he will not hold him guilty of any evil if he has only his personal opinion as an evidence. 1 Corinthians 13:6. Iniquity is placed as an opposite of truth, which shows that one does not have to commit some outward act of wrongdoing to be guilty of iniquity; his rejoicing in it makes him guilty. Paul taught the same principle in Romans 1:32. 1 Corinthians 13:7. Beareth means to cover or hide the faults of others as far as possible without encouraging sin. Believ- eth and hopeth must be understood in the light of other passages. Hebrews 11:1 tells us that hone is based on faith, and Romans 10:17 says that faith comes by hearing the word of God. The present phrase means that a man who has the love of God and the brethren in his heart, will believe all that God declares. Endureth denotes a willingness to remain faithful throughout all trials. 1 Corinthians 13:8. Charity (or love) never faileth. A part of Thayer's definition of the original for faileth is, "to perish," which means that it will cease to be. That is not true of love, for it will never cease to be, even after the spiritual gifts mentioned in this verse cease to be. 1 Corinthians 13:9. In part is said in view of the temporary use and purpose of the spiritual gifts. While the church had such helps only, the knowledge of spiritual things was but partial. 1 Corinthians 13:10. That which is perfect (complete) means the completed New Testament, called "the perfect law of liberty" in James 1:25. When that was given to the church, the temporary and partial information derived through the spiritual gifts was to be no longer necessary. 1 Corinthians 13:11. The illustrations in this and the next verse are to show the difference between the time when the church had to depend on spiritual gifts, and when it would have the complete New Testament. The contrast is likened to the immature activities of a child as against those of a man. 1 Corinthians 13:12. The glass means a mirror which was made of polished metal in old times. Seeing a thing as it is reflected against one of these plates is compared to the knowledge attained through spiritual gifts. Seeing the things directly or face to face, is compared to the full and direct knowledge to be attained through the New Testament. Know as I am known. This is the text usually cited by advocates of "future recognition," meaning that we shall "know each other in Heaven." Of course that has to mean knowing others as we know them now; and that requires that we will be "as" we are now, or the "recognition" will be impossible. The theory is Sadducean, infidel, and a debasing of Heaven. It is Sadducean in that it implies a continuance of marriage as the Sadducees contended. It is infidel in that it contradicts 1 Corinthians 15:50, which says flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, yet which must occur if we are going to be "as we are now." It debases Heaven in that it puts the joys of that eternal place on the basis of fleshly relationship. We know such is the motive for the theory, for its advocates will say, "I would not be happy in Heaven if I did not know my loved ones." Such remarks mean that human beings know better what will be necessary for happiness in that world than does the Lord. This passage has nothing to do with conditions after this world is ended. It is an item in the same argument Paul has been making since the beginning of chapter 12, namely, the use and comparative importance of spiritual gifts. Before the New Te-tament was completed, the church had to rely on the spiritually-gifted men and their gifts for information to a great extent. These men could not always be speaking, nor could they be in evidence in every place, due to the many handicaps of human life. As a consequence, some disciples would have knowledge of spiritual matters that others would not. "But when that which was perfect was come" (the complete New Testament), all would have equal chance for such knowledge. The words know and known are from , which Thayer defines, "to become thoroughly acquainted with, to know thoroughly; to know accurately, know well." Of course this knowledge pertains to our spiritual relationship in the church. On that subject we may "know as we are known," since all members of the body have equal access to the full information offered in the New Testament. Personal recognition is not being considered. 1 Corinthians 13:13. Now abideth signifies that after the complete New Testament has been produced after the spiritual gifts have ceased, there will still be faith, hope and charity (or love). That is because the Christian life will always need such graces. Faith (which is produced by hearing the word of God) will be necessary to guide the disciple of the Lord aright, and hope will be needed to urge him that through perseverance he may gain the reward at last. Charity is the greatest of these three, because faith will be changed to sight, and hope will give place to actual possession, after this life is ended. But love is eternal and will exist on into the life with God in Heaven. David Lipscomb Commentary On 1 Corinthians 14 OF TO THE GIFT OF TONGUES AS EVINCED BY THEIR UTILITY1 Corinthians 14:1-19 1 Follow after love;—With eager efforts they were to seek to realize this wonderful grace of love by resisting temptations to any course of conduct that would hinder it and by using every opportunity to further it. yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts,—He now shows that there is no incompatibility between seeking after love and the help of spiritual gifts while they remained. Indeed, they were given to help forward the attainment of love. but rather that ye may prophesy.—He exhorts them that they should earnestly desire these gifts of the Spirit, but rather that they might prophesy. Prophesying after the apostolic was the highest gift. It enabled them to foretell things to come, and to teach the word of God to the people. When they sought this gift, they qualified themselves to receive and practice its teachings. 2 For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God;—Speaking in unknown tongues was the most striking of these gifts, and from Paul’ s repeating its inferiority to other gifts, it must have been sought after to the exclusion of the higher and the more helpful gifts. for no man understandeth;—He that speaks in a tongue unknown to his hearers does not speak to them, since they do not understand him, but he speaks to God. but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.— He speaks mysteries, things unknown to the people who cannot understand him. 3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men edification, and exhortation, and consolation.—He who, by the gift of prophecy, makes known the will of God instructs, strengthens, builds up, and comforts Christians in their temptations, troubles, and distresses. 4 He that speaketh in a tongue edifieth himself;—He speaks the truths of God that will build up and strengthen himself. but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.—The church can understand him, and he instructs and strengthens it. 5 Now I would have you all speak with tongues,—Since it helps him who speaks in an unknown tongue, he would be glad for all to do so. but rather that ye should prophesy:—Prophesying helps both the prophet and the church, and for that reason he would rather they prophesied. and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues,—He who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, because he does more good than he who speaks in tongues. except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.— This is the only way to instruct and build up those who hear those who speak in an unknown tongue. 6 But now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, unless I speak to you either by way of revelation,—Paul now transfers the matter to himself— that if even he, though he was an apostle, came speaking with a tongue, they would receive no profit unless he interpreted the words of the tongue as conveying some revelation received from God. or of knowledge, or of prophesying, or of teaching?— Knowledge, as here conceived, is the matter ordinarily communicated by teaching. Some who spoke in tongues could not interpret what they spoke. 7 Even things without life, giving a voice, whether pipe or harp, if they give not a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?—[Even the lifeless instruments, if they are to speak in the language of music, and affect the feelings and passions of those who hear them, must give a distinction in sounds. That is, be subject to the laws of tone and rhythm, to the interval of scale and measure. This illustration is to show the uselessness of making sounds which are not understood. And it is plain from what follows, as well as from the whole context, that the point of analogy is that as we cannot know what is piped or harped, or be benefited by it unless we can discriminate the sounds emitted, so we cannot be benefited by listening to one who speaks in a language which we do not understand. The point is, not the folly of the gift, but the use made of it.] 8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain voice, who shall prepare himself for war?—Since in all ages the advance and retreat of armies have been directed by the sound of a trumpet, it is indispensable that the notes expressing each should be sufficiently distinct, the one from the other, and easily understood. Otherwise they would never know when to make ready for battle or for other duties. 9 So also ye, unless ye utter by the tongue speech easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye will be speaking into the air.—So also unless the teachers spoke in words easy to be understood, the hearers cannot know what is said, such will be speaking into the air [without conveying any meaning to any person. There will be noise, but nothing else. Gifts of that kind, used without interpretation, are good for nothing. It may well be observed that there is much of this same kind of speaking now, where unintelligible terms are used, or words are employed that are above the comprehension of the people. All preaching should be plain, simple, and adapted to the capacity of the hearers.] 10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and no kind is without signification.-—[All languages are significant, so the languages used by those who spoke with tongues were significant. The difficulty was not in the language used, but the ignorance of the hearers. The argument is that as all the languages that are in the world are for utility, and none are used for the sake of mere display, so it should be with those who had the power of speaking them in the church. They should speak them only when they would be understood.] 11 If then I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh a barbarian,—If he who hears does not know the meaning of the language spoken, the hearer will be a barbarian to the speaker. and he that speaketh will be a barbarian unto me.—The speaker will be a barbarian to the hearer. Neither will be profited by the other in speaking or hearing the language that is not understood. The Greeks used the word barbarian of any foreigner ignorant of the Greek language and the Greek culture. 12 So also ye, since ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may abound unto the edifying of the church.—Since they were zealous of spiritual things, let them seek above all else those who would abound to the edification of the church. 13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret.—Let him pray that he may have the gift of interpreting what he says in the tongue, else he will not profit those who hear. 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.—[If he uses words in a tongue unknown to the congregation in a prayer to God, he realizes in his own spirit what he says to God, but his understanding is not fruitful because he has not the benefit which he ought to have from every spiritual exercise.] 15 What is it then?— What shall I do then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.—Here the same thought is presented and the idioms of the Greek and the English languages require a change of expression to bring out the thought. Neither the Authorized Version nor the American Revised Version does this as the connections show. The thought evidently is : “ I will sing as the Spirit directs or inspires, and I will sing in a language that those who hear can understand.” This expression is often quoted in connection with song service in a sense in which it was not used. The following verse shows clearly that Paul’ s meaning is: “ I will pray and sing by the inspiration of the Spirit, and in a language that they will understand to their profit.” 16 Else if thou bless with the spirit, how shall he that filleth the place of the unlearned say the Amen at thy giving of thanks,—It was customary in prayer and thanksgiving for the hearer to approve and adopt the spoken prayer as his own, by saying, Amen. seeing he knoweth not what thou sayest?—But if it is not spoken in language that he can understand, how could he say, Amen ? 17 For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.—As it was expressed in a tongue which he did not understand, he was not edified. [It is impossible to join in prayers uttered in an unknown tongue. This proves that the speaker must have understood what he said. For if the unintelligible is useless, it must be so to the speaker as well as to the hearers. If it was necessary that they should understand in order to be edified, it was no less necessary that he should understand what he said in order to be benefited.] 18 I thank God, I speak with tongues more than you all:— Paul as an apostle spoke more languages than all the Corinthians. His travels and labors among so many different peoples made this necessary, and it was with him a subject of thanksgiving that this power had been bestowed upon him. 19 howbeit in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I might instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.—In the assembly of the church Paul would not speak in foreign languages, where its only use would have been display; but he chose to speak in such a way as to convey instruction that would benefit others. As the object of public worship is the edification of the church, five words spoken so as to edify were of far greater value than ten thousand, not being understood, which could convey none. No higher estimate than this was ever put on practical wisdom. The best and profoundest utilitarian is the man who advocates utility on this high ground. Paul argued so warmly in behalf of the understanding because he felt so deeply the importance of benefiting others. OF AND THE GIFT OF TONGUES IN THE LIGHT OF THE OBJECT OF EACH1 Corinthians 14:20-25 20 Brethren,—It seems that strife had arisen over these gifts, as to which was the greater and the more honorable. He pleads with them as brethren, insisting that it was the part of wisdom to desire to so speak that others would be profited, and that there should be no strife or bitterness over these questions. So he turns aside to reprove them. be not children in mind:—Be not weak and attracted by the sound and show of tongues like children who are pleased with anything that will amuse, and at little things that afford them play and pastime. The Corinthians had displayed a childish disposition in estimating the gift of tongues above the more useful and important gifts, and in using it when it could an¬swer no good purpose. yet in malice be ye babes,—In malice and bitterness, be free from all malicious thoughts and actions as little children who cannot cherish such. but in mind be men.—[As to judgment in approving those things which are excellent, be full-grown persons, by attaining of the maturity of the calling in Christ Jesus.] 21 In the law it is written,—The whole of the Old Testament Scripture is called the law, because it was written during the reign of the law, and was intended to uphold and enforce it. [This we might naturally expect from Paul’ s manner of regarding the whole Mosaic dispensation as a progressive order of things having its completion in Christ (Romans 3:19; Galatians 3:23-24.) John uses the word in the same manner. (John 10:34 John 12:34 John 15:25.)] By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers will I speak unto this people;—Here Paul shows that the gift of tongues had little or no value except as an evidence of unbelievers, and illustrates it by this quotation from Isaiah (Isaiah 28:11-12.) In that passage Isaiah tells the drunken priests, who scornfully imitated his style, that since they derided God’ s message so delivered to them, God would address them in a very different way by the Assyrians, whose language they did not understand. and not even thus will they hear me, saith the Lord.—Since the Jews had refused to hear the prophets speaking their own language, God threatened to bring upon them a people whose language they could not undertand. This was a mark of displeasure designed as a punishment, and not for their conversion. [From this it was intended to teach the Corinthians that it was no mark of the divine favor for them to have teachers whose language they could not understand. They were turning a blessing into a curse. The gift of tongues was designed, among other things, to aid Christians in proclaiming the gospel to the various peoples in their own language. When used for this purpose it was a blessing; but to employ it for the sake of vain display, in addressing those who could not understand the language employed, was to make it a curse.] 22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to the unbelieving:—Speaking in unknown languages was to reach the unbelieving nations and thus teach them the gospel. For people to hear strangers speak in their own tongue, never having learned it, as was done on Pentecost, attracted attention, convinced the people that the power of God was with them, and prepared them to hear and believe the truth. but prophesying is for a sign, not to the unbelieving, but to them that believe.—This was instructing them in the truths of the gospel, in a language they understood, which would help and profit the believers; but would not profit those who believed not. 23 If therefore the whole church be assembled together and all speak with tongues, and there come in men unlearned or unbelieving, will they not say that ye are mad?—If unbelievers who do not understand the languages come into the assembly, it will seem like senseless jargon. They will be as barbarians to each other (verse 11). The difference between these and those in the preceding verse is that the unbelievers understood the language spoken, in this they do not. 24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one unbelieving or unlearned, he is reproved by all,—If all prophesy or teach by the Spirit and use the gift in a language all understand, and one comes in that understands, but believes not, and by the spiritual gift his thoughts are laid bare, he is convinced that God is with them, he is convicted or condemned as a sinner. he is judged by all;— Some think this means that he was ex¬amined by those who discerned spirits and that the things he needed were taught him; but it is more in harmony with the context and scope of the passage to say that he was made to know his true condition. 25 the secrets of his heart are made manifest;—As he heard the prophets, one by one, he would be reproved by all, and his real character and moral state would be made known to him. His conscience would be awakened, and he would see that it was evil. And it is possible that he would suppose that the speakers were aiming directly at him, and revealing his feelings to others; for such an effect is often produced. Prophetic preaching must have had great power to make men feel that they stood face to face with God, for even faithful preaching today lays bare the sinner’ s heart, and often causes him to feel that the preacher particularly intends him, and wonders that he has such acquaintance with his feelings and his life.] and so he will fall down on his face and worship God, declaring that God is among you indeed.—Being thus smitten with their divine knowledge and mission, he would fall down and worship God, and report that God was in them enabling them to know the secrets of the heart. [This description of the effect of prophecy upon the unbeliever is in no way contrary to the assertion in verse 22. There the apostle is speak¬ing of a sign to attract the attention of the unbeliever; here his attention is already attracted. He has come to the assembly of the church, and is listening to the words spoken there in the name of Jesus Christ. And as faith comes by hearing there will be no need of signs to induce him to become a believer.] THE USE OF GIFTS AND THE CONDUCT OF PUBLIC WORSHIP1 Corinthians 14:26-40 26 What is it then, brethren? When ye come together,— [How are these gifts to be exercised? The principle governing their exercise is edification. This principle is now applied to the orderly exercise, particularly of the gift of tongues and prophecy. A graphic picture is given of the assembled church, eager to contribute, each his part, to the services.] each one hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a revelation, hath a tongue, hath an interpretation--The directions which follow, with the statements made in verses 32, 33, indicate that they attempted all these things at once and created discord and confusion in the services. Let all things be done unto edifying.—The edification of the church should be the object aimed at in the exercise of these gifts. It was not enough that a man felt himself a subject of spiritual influence; or that acting under it would be agreeable or even profitable to himself, he must remain silent unless the exercise of his gift would benefit the church as a worshiping assembly. 27 If any man speaketh in a tongue, let it be by two, or at the most three, and that in turn; and let one interpret:—To correct this confusion, he gives directions that if any should speak in an unknown tongue, that not more than two or three should speak at one meeting; these one at a time, and one should interpret. 28 but if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.—If there were none present who could interpret, those who spoke in tongues were to keep silent. It is useless to speak in an assembly in a language unknown to all. The profit of what is spoken depends on its being understood. He and God could understand, and so he might be profited to speak to God, not to others. 29 And let the prophets speak by two or three, and let the others discern.—The prophets or teachers likewise should speak not more than two or three at a meeting and the other inspired men including him who speaks in a tongue judge of what is spoken. 30 But if a revelation be made to another sitting by, let the first keep silence.—If while one is speaking an important truth is revealed to another, let him make it known, and let him that was speaking conclude his discourse, so that there be no confusion arising from two persons speaking at the same time. 31 For ye all can prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be exhorted;—All having gifts may prophesy, one at a time, so that all might know what had been revealed to each and all. The same things were not revealed to the different prophets. This was true of the apostles. Some things were revealed to one, other things revealed to another. A conference of all was needful that the full revelation of God might be known. So of these prophets or gifted persons, each should hear what was revealed to the others. So that each would learn all that was revealed to all and to be comforted thereby. 32 and the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets;—This no doubt was said in view of the claim frequently made that, as they were under the guidance of the Spirit, they could not restrain themselves; but the influence was not of such a nature as to destroy the self-control of those who were its subjects. The prophets of God were calm and self-possessed. This being the case there was no necessity why one should interrupt another, or why more than one should speak at the same time. The one speaking could stop when he pleased; and the one who had received the revelation could wait as long as he pleased. 33 for God is not a God of confusion, but of peace.—God does not give the gifts of the Spirit to produce confusion, but peace. Any feeling, impluse, or desire of the heart, however religious in its character, that leads man to disregard a com¬mand of God, is another spirit than the Spirit of God. As in all the churches of the saints.—The majority of the best critics, including the distinguished scholars who prepared the American Revised Version, decide that according to the sense, this clause should stand connected with verse 34. So it reads: “ As in all the churches of the saints, let the women keep silence in the churches.” It is therefore evident that at the time Paul wrote the propriety of the prohibition was recognized and practiced by all the churches. 34 let the women keep silence in the churches; for it is not permitted unto them to speak;—[No instruction in the New Testament is more positive than this; it is positive, explicit, and universal; and however plausible may be the reasons which are urged for disregarding it, and for suffering women to take an active part in conducting public worship, yet the authority of the inspired apostle remains positive and his meaning cannot be misunderstood. He looks at it from every viewpoint, forbids it altogether, and shows that from every consideration it was to be regarded as improper for them to take any active part in conducting the public service.] but let them be in subjection, as also saith the law.—This was ordained by God in the beginning when he said unto the woman: “ Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” (Genesis 3:16.) It was required all through the Pa¬triarchal and Jewish dispensations. Sarah was subject to Abraham calling him lord. (1 Peter 3:5-6.) Rebekah veiled her face when she approached Isaac, and during the whole ministry of Christ and the apostles, no record is given of a woman leading in public service, although some of them were spiritually endowed and required to teach in private. (Titus 2:3-4.) The following command to Timothy was given to guide him in setting in order the churches of Christ: “ Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection. But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness. For Adam was first formed, then Eve; and Adam was not beguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression.” (1 Timothy 2:11-14.) Here are two reasons given: (1) Adam was first created, and the prece¬dence, the right to rule and lead, was given him; (2) the woman was deceived and led into the transgression. Both reasons are universal in their bearing, showing clearly that the rule is universal. I do not see how God could have made it clearer and more certain than he has done. The reasons given for this command apply to every woman in the world alike. There is not the least difficulty in explaining all the passages in harmony with these, if we will recognize what is true— that God intended the great burden of praying, teach¬ing, exhorting, and admonishing to be done in private, not in public. Woman has free access to this great field. We have perverted this; we do our preaching, teaching, exhorting, and, I fear, praying often in public; so interpret the Scriptures by our practices, and not by the will of God. The truth of the whole matter is that many of the churches are infected more or less with a spirit of modernistic infidelity that does not hesitate to set aside any order of God when' it stands in the way of their fancies. The habit of women preaching originated in the same hotbed with easy divorce, free love, birth control, repugnance to childbearing and child rearing. 35 And if they would learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home:—She should not ask questions as leading to the teaching. She should ask her own husband concerning the things she would learn. for it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church.—It is shameful because it does not comport with propriety and her womanly modesty, which in all nations is her shield and power. It is contended that, since there is no specific law for¬bidding women taking public part in the service under the law of Moses, Paul is wrong in forbidding her doing so in the church. But to assign all duties to men and none to women is to prohibit their performing such duties. It shows that such a thing as their taking active part was never considered. This epistle was not addressed to the Corinthians exclusively, but “ unto the church of God which is at Corinth, even them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place, their Lord and ours” (1: 2), showing clearly that it was writ¬ten for the guidance of all Christians in every place and for all time. This cannot be interpreted as meaning that it is improper for women to speak or to pray in meetings of their own sex, assembled for prayer or Bible study. 36 What? was it from you that the word of God went forth? or came it unto you alone?—[They had acted in the matter of allowing women to preach as if they were the authors of Christianity—as if, because of their manifold spiritual gifts, the word of God had gone forth from Corinth, instead of from Jerusalem. He reminds them that instead of such being the case the word of God was brought to them by himself. They had received all from him.] 37 If any man thinketh himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him take knowledge of the things which I write unto you, that they are the commandment of the Lord.—Having given these rules regulating the use of the spiritual gifts showing that they were liable to be misused and abused, he lays down this rule by which all claims to prophetic or spiritual powers were to be tested. Doing this he will, of course, be regulated by these rules. If he refused to do this he might know, and others too, that he had no gift of the Spirit. To accept and obey the commandments of God as revealed in the Scriptures is the rule for all at this day by which to test their claims to spirituality. Men are probably more liable to deceive themselves as to whether they are spiritual in the sense of being led by the Spirit than they were in reference to miraculous gifts of the Spirit. The rule is good for all ages. 38 But if any man is ignorant, let him be ignorant.—Since Paul wrote under the direction of the Spirit, any one filled with the Spirit would be guided to recognize his words as of divine authority, for the Spirit would not say one thing to Paul and a different thing to another. Therefore if any one denies Paul’ s claims to inspiration, he does it willfully and let him remain in his ignorance and suffer the consequences. 39 Wherefore, my brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.—In consideration of all the matters written, let all earnestly desire to prophesy— teach, exhort, strengthen, and comfort one another. While recognizing this as the highest and best gift, do not despise the lower and humble gifts. 40 But let all things be done decently and in order.—Let all things be done in an appropriate and becoming manner; regularly, without confusion, discord, or tumult as becomes the worship of God. Verse 1 1 Corinthians 14 In this the third chapter of Paul's writings specifically related to tongue speaking and other spiritual gifts, the full thrust of his purpose is revealed. It is the conviction of this writer that nothing in the history of the church has been any more misunderstood than this chapter. One can only be amazed at the near-universal acceptance of the idea that what those Corinthians were doing was actually CAUSED by the Holy Spirit! This is viewed as totally wrong with regard to all of the conduct which demanded Paul's attention. THE GENUINE GIFT OF TONGUESIt may not be denied that there was a REAL gift of tongues belonging to some in Corinth, although this chapter does not give us much information on how that genuine gift operated. Many commentators believe that theL gift of tongues at Corinth was no different from what it was on Pentecost; and there is a considerable weight of evidence to support this. Paul and Luke were friends; and the use of the same word to describe God's gift is used here which is used in Acts 2; and, since Acts was written by Luke at a time after Paul wrote the Corinthians, "It would seem logical that Luke would have noted the distinction between the two phenomena, if any existed."[1]However, Paul taught that there was a genuine gift of "interpretation of tongues" (1 Corinthians 12:10): and this has the effect of denying the gift at Corinth any identity with the miracle of Pentecost, where no interpreter was needed. Furthermore, Paul allowed that when an interpreter was present, along with other prescribed conditions, the gift at Corinth might properly be used (1 Corinthians 14:27). From this, it seems mandatory to view the genuine gift at Corinth as different from that of Pentecost, and also of far less importance, even that genuine gift (at Corinth) being by Paul ranked last among spiritual gifts. The genuine gift (at Corinth) was never exercised by Paul, who surely had the gift (1 Corinthians 14:18), in public assemblies of the church, at least as far as the record goes, and based upon his stated refusal to use it at Corinth (1 Corinthians 14:6 ff). Paul's use of the gift, it is generally agreed, was either privately or in some missionary effort, there being utterly no word of either in the New Testament. Certainly, he didn't do it in church assemblies. The question persists regarding the authenticity of those Corinthian tongues. Can it be supposed that the Holy Spirit which led Paul to hide his gift and never use it publicly - can we suppose that the same Holy Spirit was moving in those Corinthians? No! Whatever the genuine gift was (at Corinth), there is simply no glimpse whatever of it in this chapter. The genuine gift had to be either identical with that of Pentecost, or a far lesser thing given for the encouragement of individuals and to be used privately (1 Corinthians 14:4). It is the conviction here that the genuine gift to the Corinthians was precisely that, a demonstration of tongues for personal edification, not in the sense of learning anything, but as proof that he who had it enjoyed possession of the Holy Spirit. The need for an interpreter of the true gift proves that the possessor of it would not have known what he said, unless, of course, he also had the gift of interpreting tongues. Does this true gift come into view in the Corinthian assemblies? Yes, but only to the extent that it had been perverted by dragging it into the public worship. However, the overwhelming certainty presses upon us that the visible tongues of Corinth were totally sinful and contrary to the will of God, being either: (1) a prostitution of a private gift for public glory in the case of the true gift, or (2) a sensational orgiastic counterfeit demonstration having no connection whatever with the Holy Spirit. This mingling of the true (even though perverted as to purpose and use) tongues with the false is evidently the reason for Paul's tenderness in dealing with this sin. He simply did not wish to say anything that would discourage those souls who had indeed received of God the private gift of tongues for their encouragement. Since we today are dealing with a far different situation, it is proper to speak much more plainly of those bastard tongues at Corinth. THE FALSE GIFT OF TONGUESBy the above title is meant the counterfeit, faked and pretended gift of tongues. As Billy Graham said of tongues in the United States at this present time (March 26,1976), "There is much that is counterfeit ... tongues are no evidence that a person has been baptized in the Holy Spirit."[2] It is clearly evident that the genuine gift of tongues, whether like those at Pentecost or at Corinth, perished with the age of miracles, and that all of the tongue-speaking of this generation is spurious. Graham was correct about the "counterfeit" aspect of it. Barclay also observed this and suggested how it comes about: It (the true gift) was a dangerous gift ... greatly admired, and the possessor was very liable to develop a certain spiritual pride in his gift ... The very desire to possess it produced, at least in some, a kind of self-hypnotism and a kind of deliberately induced hysteria which issued in a completely false and deluded and synthetic speaking in tongues.[3]The phenomenon called tongue-speaking can be faked; this writer has seen it faked; and the simple truth is that anybody can fake it. Such a thing, of course, can also be produced through the influence of a kind of mob psychology which is sometimes evidenced in religious groups. There is no understanding of this chapter without taking into account the falsity of those Corinthians tongues, but at the same time not denying a legitimate gift as then existing and having been prostituted to unholy ends. This indeed posed a delicate problem. How could the darnel be pulled up without rooting up the wheat? Paul's method of doing so was a marvel. He simply issued apostolic orders that would inevitably, if followed, diminish and destroy the bastard gift, while at the same time cautioning "not to forbid to speak in tongues" (1 Corinthians 14:39). Metz said, "It was difficult to distinguish the valid gift (of tongues) ... from an invalid expression of personal exultation."[4] It should be remembered, however, that the disappearance of apostolic miracles has removed the necessity of confusion with regard to tongue-speaking. The only kind that has ever existed since the age of the apostles has been the kind Billy Graham called "counterfeit." Why has the phenomenon of counterfeit tongues persisted? It has been produced by people who earnestly desire to do it, and who have been led to believe it is Scriptural because of the inaccurate and misleading words in many of the "translations" of the New Testament in vogue today. For the prime example of this, see under Mark 16:18 in the Gospel of Mark, and comment in my Commentary on Mark, pp. 363-367. Such persons are sincere, to be sure, but sincerely wrong. However, there is another force operative in the tongue-speakings of post-apostolic times, and that is satanic instigation. The pride, vainglory, envy, strife, factionalism, etc., which marked the original outbreak of counterfeit tongues was of Satan; and it may not be doubted that the evil one is still active in such things as the recurring appearance of tongue-speaking throughout Christian history. [1] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 634. [2] Billy Graham, as quoted in Christianity Today (Washington, D.C.: Today's Publications, Inc., 1976), Vol. XX, Number 13. [3] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1954), p. 142. [4] Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City, Missouri: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p. 447. Follow after love; yet desire earnestly spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. (1 Corinthians 14:1) Follow after love ... seems to connect with what was said in 1 Corinthians 13. "This clause belongs to the preceding chapter."[5]Desire spiritual gifts ... prophesy ... The spiritual gift of prophecy was largely a teaching gift (1 Corinthians 14:3), but also included, at least in some cases, the ability to foretell future events. It was the teaching phase Paul stressed here, indicating that teaching was a much more desirable activity than tongue-speaking. This gift, like all the infancy-age miracles, ceased. There are no miraculously endowed teachers today, despite Satan's having induced a few to fake even this. ENDNOTE: [5] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and Porter, 1831), Vol. VI, p. 273. Verse 2 For he that speaketh in a tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God; for no man understandeth; but in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.Speaketh not unto men ... This refers to the true gift of tongues as manifested in Corinth and has the information that it was utilized. Any other, besides the possessor, was never to hear it done. God of course could hear. No man understandeth ... This probably means that, even if another heard it, he would not be able to understand it; and it appears that the speaker also could not understand it, unless he had the gift of interpretation. If there was an interpreter, then others might be permitted to hear both the tongue and the interpretation. In view here is the almost total uselessness of this gift in the area of instructing the church, even the true gift. Verse 3 But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men edification, and exhortation, and consolation.Even the utility of the gift of prophecy was here said to perform the same services usually associated with ordinary teaching. This shows how unspectacular it was as compared with tongues. Verse 4 He that speaketh in a tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.Edifieth himself ... The true gift of tongues benefited not others but the tongue-speaker himself. Since not even he understood what was said ("no man understandeth"), the nature of that edification would appear to have been the confirmation to him (by the gift) of his having received the Holy Spirit. No man today could need any such confirmation because the New Testament makes it clear that all believers who repent and are baptized into Christ enjoy the promise of the sacred Scriptures that they will in consequence of their obedience and subsequently to their obedience receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38 ff); and that word is all the confirmation that any true believer really needs. He that prophesieth edifieth the church ... The word from which the Pauline expression "edifieth" is translated is related to the building up of an edifice; and Paul demanded that ("all things, 1 Corinthians 14:26) be done unto edification of the church. This requirement alone demanded the omission of tongues from all church services. Verse 5 Now I would have you all speak with tongues, but rather that ye should prophesy: and greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edification.I would have you all speak with tongues ... The true gift was referred to here; but even of it the apostle said that teaching and edifying the church constituted a far better thing. Except he interpret ... Despite Paul's mention of the interpretation of tongues as a genuine gift, the possibility in view here that even the tongue-speaker himself might possess it, it does not appear in this chapter that any of the Corinthians were said to have this gift. Only the possibility that they might have it is indicated. Greater is he that prophesieth ... The teacher did more good and was therefore greater than the tongue-speaker. Verse 6 But now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, unless I speak to you either by way of revelation, or of knowledge, or of prophesying, or of teaching.What shall I profit you ... means "I shall not profit you in any manner at all," if I come to you speaking in tongues. This was Paul's refusal to speak in tongues in the Christian assembly at Corinth; and it is safe to assume that he never did so anywhere else. The only way that even an apostle could benefit his hearers was by preaching to them. By way of revelation ... refers to what was revealed in Scripture. "Or of knowledge" refers to the spiritual gift of knowledge which Paul assuredly had. Or of prophesying ... refers to intelligible teachings given by the Holy Spirit to Paul as a spiritual gift. Or of teaching ... refers to ordinary teaching of what was learned from others, orally or through study of their writings. Here again the essentially private nature of the true gift of tongues is implicit and demanded by the context. Verse 7 Even things without life, giving a voice, whether pipe or harp, if they give not a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped?If such an illustration as this has any meaning, it has to be that uninterpreted tongues are as noisy, disagreeable, useless, cacophonous and worthless as a kitten on the keys of a piano. Paul, of course, made the comparison with instruments known in his day. Verse 8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain voice, who shall prepare himself for war?The meaning of this is exactly the same as in 1 Corinthians 14:7, the repetition of the thought using another illustration was for emphasis. Uninterpreted tongues were as disastrous as the efforts of a military bugler whose unintelligible blasts could not be distinguished either as a call to charge, a call to retreat, or a call to go to bed! Verse 9 So also ye, unless ye utter by the tongue speech easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye will be speaking into the air.The force of 1 Corinthians 14:7-9 is that the false tongues of Corinth were unintelligible nonsense, having no meaning whatever, being nothing more than jabberings of orgiastic demonstrators; and here was the delicate part of the whole situation, the manifestations of the genuine gift itself resembled the false tongues so perfectly that no one on earth could have told any difference! It was a master stroke of the devil that he had prevailed upon some who had the true gift to bring it into the public worship; and therefore, when Paul condemned the false, his care not to discourage the true variety of tongues resulted in an occasion of misunderstanding of this subject for centuries afterward. What Paul said here is applicable to both varieties of tongues, both kinds being forbidden in public worship, the true kind because it was not interpreted and had no business in the public worship to start with, and the false kind because it was nothing but pure nonsense anyway. The essential thing to see is the close likeness in appearance of the two kinds of tongues; and this is paramount as an indication that the true tongues of Corinth were unlike those of Pentecost. Verse 10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and no kind is without signification. If then I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh will be a barbarian unto me.These verses are a recapitulation of the argument in 1 Corinthians 14:7-9, the conclusion being that any kind of jargon or gobbledegook, such as tongues, which cannot be understood by the hearers, is condemned. Barbarian ... in ancient times meant merely one who did not speak Greek. Paul encountered some of these "barbarians" on his mission tours, namely, at Malta and at Lycaonia (Acts 14:11); and significantly Paul did not understand the dialect of the Lycaonians, this being another reason to suppose that Paul's gift of tongues did not include the gift of speaking in languages he had never learned, but was rather for private encouragement. Verse 12 So also ye, since ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may abound unto the edifying of the church.The teacher of the word of God is the true hero, not the tongue-speaker. It is simply incredible that the people affecting to speak in tongues could really imagine that they are doing any good. One humble teacher of the word of God does more good than a thousand tongue-speakers, even if their alleged "gift" should be accepted as genuine. Why then should intelligent people bother with it, or be impressed with it, or make any excuses whatever for it? This whole section of this chapter (1 Corinthians 14:1-12), if it had any purpose at all, was to get rid of tongue-speaking in the assemblies of the church in Corinth, with the delicate purpose of Paul, always in view, not to discourage any real gift that might have existed there. Verse 13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in a tongue pray that he may interpret.That he may interpret ... Again, no certainty that any interpreters existed at Corinth appears here. Paul's admonition that they should pray to be able to interpret is, on the contrary, a declaration that they could not interpret. Verse 14 For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.As Lipscomb said with reference to this and 1 Corinthians 14:15 : Neither the KJV nor the English Revised Version (1885) is correct here. The thought evidently is, "I will sing as the Spirit directs or inspires, and I will sing in a language that those who hear can understand."... The following verse shows clearly that Paul's meaning is: "I will pray and sing by the inspiration of the Spirit, and in a language that they will understand to their profit."[6]The inference that must be made from this and the next verses is that the tongue-speakers had even taken over the songs and prayers of the public worship! Of course, Paul would not countenance anything of that kind. The quotation of these verses in the sense of people singing and praying in the public services "with the spirit and the understanding" is based upon an incorrect discernment of their meaning. It is not the subjective understanding of the participant that is meant, but the objective purpose of conveying understanding to others. ENDNOTE: [6] David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 208. Verse 15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.What is it then? ... McGarvey understood this is idiomatic for "What is the conclusion of the argument?"[7]We might state the argument as this: "Therefore, let's have no more of this tongue business in the songs and prayers; let everything be done in a language everybody can understand." ENDNOTE: [7] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on First Corinthians (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 137. Verse 16 Else if thou bless with the spirit, how shall he that filleth the place of the unlearned say the Amen at the giving of thy thanks, seeing he knoweth not what thou sayest? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified.Say the Amen ... It was customary from the earliest times for Christians to say Amen to the public prayers and thanksgivings of the church. Any use of a tongue in such prayers contravened the purpose of congregational participation in the public prayers; and it is an error, therefore, to suppose that the Holy Spirit was guiding those tongue-speakers to do anything of that kind. The Blessed Spirit never operated against the will of God. Therefore, we view Paul's words, "Verily givest thanks well? as absolutely sarcastic, meaning that no matter how "well" they thought they were giving thanks, the Holy Spirit was opposed to what they were doing, on the simple grounds that the rest of the congregation would not know "what thou sayest." It is the failure to see the essential sin of that whole tongue-speaking outburst (of both kinds) which has blinded people to the teaching of this chapter. To suppose that the Holy Spirit was actually guiding those ostentatious leaders of the public prayers, or songs, so that they were doing so in tongues, is absolutely an impossibility. Verse 18 I thank God, I speak with tongues more than ye all.This is the verse, beyond all others, that is supposed to take the lid off tongue-speaking and to legitimatize it for all generations; but this cannot be. We have already noted that Paul never used the gift in the presence of others, or in church assemblies. Furthermore, Paul's speaking in tongues "more than ye all" is tremendously significant. His speaking in tongues was genuine, a true gift, to edify himself; the "gifts" he was correcting were (1) either the misused genuine gifts, or (2) the affectations of the tongue counterfeiters; well, actually both of these were condemned. What then was the apostle's purpose in bringing up the fact that he himself spoke in tongues? Bruce gave the probable explanation thus: His speaking with tongues belonged to the sphere of his private devotions. We should not have known of his possessing this gift (even in this passage) were it not that his possessing it in an exceptional degree gave him the undeniable right to put it in its place in relation to other spiritual gifts.[8]If Paul had not possessed the gift, some of his critics would have responded merely by saying, "Well, you know nothing about it." As it was, Paul's possession of the gift superlatively enabled him to pour a pitcher of ice water over the whole practice. Bruce further commented on what Paul did here, saying, "(This was) a master-touch which leaves the enthusiasts completely outclassed and out-maneuvered on their own ground."[9]The tongue-speaking fraternity cannot claim Paul as an advocate of their practices, there being no record whatever that he ever did it in the presence of another human being; and, besides, his gift was the real thing! [8] F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972), p. 99. [9] Ibid. Verse 19 Howbeit in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that I might instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.Well, there it is! Anyone in possession of God's Spirit would have exactly the same attitude; but no, the tongue-speakers would rather speak ten thousand words in tongues than five words that anybody could understand! In the church ... "This of course refers to the Christian assembly."[10] All of Paul's tongue-speaking was apparently done in private devotions. ENDNOTE: [10] Leon Morris, Tyndale Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958), p. 196. Verse 20 Brethren, be not children in mind: yet in malice be ye babes, but in mind be men.No new paragraph begins here, such a division being arbitrary and incorrect. There is a continuation of the thought of the foolishness of tongue-speaking. The three phases of mortal life: babies, children, and men were intended to explain the whole matter of spiritual gifts, belonging as they did to the infancy and childhood age of the church, and not to its maturity. This is therefore a call for the Corinthians to stop chasing after tongues and to grow up spiritually. As McGarvey said it: All Christians who mistakenly yearn for a renewal of those spiritual gifts, should note the clear import of these words of the apostle, which show that their presence in the church would be an evidence of weakness and immaturity, rather than of fully developed power and seasoned strength.[11]In this connection, see also 1 Corinthians 13:8-11, above. ENDNOTE: [11] J. W. McGarvey, op. cit., p. 132. Verse 21 In the law it is written, By men of strange tongues and by the lips of strangers will I speak unto this people; and not even thus will they hear me, saith the Lord.Paul here quoted Isaiah 28:11, where strange tongues were a chastisement for the unbelief of God's people, in that they were made to hear God's voice speaking to them in the unknown tongue uttering harsh commands given by the foreign invader. As Metz said: Paul now introduces an extremely sober note. Whereas the Corinthians regarded speaking in tongues as something to be desired, Paul pointed out that it might be a sign of God's displeasure and punishment.[12]ENDNOTE: [12] Donald S. Metz, op. cit., p. 450. Verse 22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to the unbelieving: but prophesying is for a sign, not to the unbelieving, but to them that believe.Tongues in a church are not a sign of God's blessing at all, any more than the foreign tongue of the invader was a blessing of God in Jerusalem, but just the opposite! Tongues in a church? Not as long as there is a single believer in it! The notion that speaking in tongues is to convert unbelievers is foreign to this text. It does just the opposite of converting unbelievers, with the result that they turn aside in disgust, as Paul stated in the very next verse. Prophesying a sign ... to them that believe ... The fact of Paul's calling it a "sign" for believers instead of saying that it was merely for the benefit of believers indicates that the miraculous endowment of certain teachers in the primitive church is in view. It must have been of great value to have such directly inspired teachers in that age of the church (the infancy age); and the foolishness of the Corinthians is seen in their astounding preference for the showy gift of tongues, instead of honoring and preferring a gift that could have blessed and benefited. Verse 23 If therefore the whole church be assembled together and all speak with tongues, and there come in men unlearned or unbelieving, will they not say that ye are mad?Far from being an instrument of converting unbelievers, or being some kind of sign that would help unbelievers to believe, tongues in a public assembly were a positive hindrance, resulting not in the conversion of any but in the judgment against Christians to the effect that they were all crazy. It should be carefully noted that what was true of the counterfeit tongues in this respect was also true of any genuine tongues exercised without an interpreter's presence to tell what was said. And if this was true in those days, how much more is it true today, generations and centuries after the true gift disappeared altogether. Incidentally, it is quite obvious that the assemblies of the early Christians were open meetings, free to be attended by any who might wish to do so. Verse 24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one unbelieving or unlearned, he is reproved by all, he is judged by all.If all prophesy ... This answers to "if all speak with tongues" in the preceding verse; but what is meant in both cases is a reference to "all who participate publicly," instead of being an affirmation that all were speaking at one time. However, despite the absence of that thought from this particular verse, it was true of the tongue-speakers that they were all speaking at once. This is a mandatory conclusion based on Paul's order that the speakers should speak "one at a time," or "in turn" (1 Corinthians 14:27). Reproved by all, ... judged by all ... has reference to the power of a decently ordered service featuring intelligible speakers to move the unregenerated to accept the gospel, as stated in the next verse. Verse 25 The secrets of his heart are made manifest; and so he will fall down on his face and worship God, declaring that God is among you.Many in all ages have prostrated themselves before God in worship and in prayers, and the admissibility of this as legitimate is plain enough in this verse. There is no rule, however, that this must always be done. Fall down on his face and worship God ... "Power to make unbelieving visitors fall down on their faces and worship God, O for such today, instead of dead formalism on one hand and irreverent monkey business on the other!"[13]ENDNOTE: [13] Henry H. Halley, Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1927), p. 549. Verse 26 What is it then, brethren? When ye come together, each one hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a revelation, hath a tongue, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.The spontaneous, informal nature of the early church services is clearly visible. There could have been no set program in advance, with even the words that people would say written down a week ahead. There cannot be any doubt that formalism, which is the current religious style, and which certainly corrected the shameful disorders like those at Corinth, has nevertheless left many a congregation in a state of abiosis. Psalm ... probably refers to a song, or hymn composed by the worshiper during the previous week, or at least one he had learned. There were no hymn books or congregational singing, except tunes sung in unison; and four-part harmony had not been invented. A very early description of Christian worship stated that "they sang by turns a hymn to Christ as God";[14] and there can hardly be any doubt that this was true. Teaching ... would refer to the instruction of ordinary, uninspired teachers; and in this, it corresponds roughly to preaching in the present time. Revelation ... is a reference to the words of an inspired, miraculously endowed teacher who had "the gift of prophecy" as used in this chapter. Tongue ... would mean, not the counterfeited non-sensical "utterings" of the fakers, but the real gift (with the great big IF stated in 1 Corinthians 14:29, IF there was an interpreter). The frequency in this chapter of that condition coming into view, always with the uncertainty of "may" or "if" connected with it, strongly suggests that there might not have been very many interpreters at Corinth. Interpretation ... This was mentioned along with "tongue" to bind the two inseparably together; and it seems plausible that by this inclusion Paul did not mean to certify the fact of there actually being interpreters of tongues in Corinth, but rather as a device of eliminating tongues altogether UNLESS this condition was fulfilled (having an interpreter). Certainly the fact is plain enough that there was a of no such interpreter being present; and therefore Paul gave the order that if none indeed was present, tongues were not to be used under any circumstances (1 Corinthians 14:28-28). Let all things be done unto edifying ... This has the weight of "no tongues in any case," except, of course, if such might have been duly interpreted by an inspired interpreter. ENDNOTE: [14] Henry Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church (New York and London: Oxford University Press, 1947), p. 6. Verse 27 If any man speaketh in a tongue, let it be by two, or at most three, and that in turn; and let one interpret: but if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.There are a number of rules in these two verses which must be observed whenever tongues may be used. These are: 1. No more than three may speak in a tongue on any given occasion. 2. All tongue-speaking must be done "in turn," that is, by persons speaking one at a time. 3. On no occasion may tongues be used unless an interpreter is standing by to tell the audience every word that was spoken. To these prohibitions, there must be added a number of others which are given in this chapter, including these: 4. Everything must be done unto edifying, and tongues do not edify. 5. Love is a better thing to practice than speaking in tongues. 6. Five intelligible words are to be preferred to ten thousand in an uninterpreted tongue. 7. Under no circumstances let the women do it (1 Corinthians 14:34), interpreter or no interpreter. 8. Greater is the teacher than the tongue-speaker. 9. Uninterpreted tongues will cause outsiders to say, "Ye are mad." An analysis of the above apostolic rules on tongue-speaking will emphasize the importance of the inspired interpreter, the gift of interpretation itself being one of the miraculous gifts; and Paul's statement in 1 Corinthians 14:28 that, "If there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church," still leaves the possibility that there were not any in Corinth who had that gift. This might very well have been Paul's way of putting the terminator on tongues without discouraging any who might really have had the genuine gift. Certainly, the lack of authentic interpretation in the present times raises the most serious questions and goes far to prove the invalid nature of that which passes for tongue-speaking today. Has any revelation been delivered to mankind since the days of the apostles by means of the gift of tongues duly interpreted? If so, where is it? Has there ever been preserved any of this supernatural wisdom that is said to be imparted to people by means of tongues? This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ 1 Corinthians 14:2. Speaking with tongues manifests miraculous power, but it does not contribute as much benefit to the brethren as does the gift of prophesying, when the latter is done after the manner described in the next verse. 1 Corinthians 14:3. This verse gives the practical form of prophesying, that w hich edifies, exhorts and comforts men. 1 Corinthians 14:4. Being the possessor of the gift of tongues, this man will be benefited by its use, but the church as a whole would not be benefited as it is by prophesying. 1 Corinthians 14:51 Co 14:5. Paul did not begrudge any man his possession of the gift of tongues, and he was not conducting the present discussion from that motive. He had a practical reason, however, for preferring the gift of prophesying, namely, it edifies the church (verse 4). Except he interpret. I believe this is correctly translated, and hence that at least some men were given two gifts, that of speaking in a foreign tongue, and also of interpreting it; otherwise he could not "edify himself" (verse 4). Verses 13, 14 also indicates that the same man may possess both gifts. 1 Corinthians 14:6. If I come. The apostle uses himself only as an example as if he said, "suppose I come," etc. To speak with tongues would not profit the church unless they were so used as to bestow upon it some of the following results. Revelation means a communication of some new truth; knowledge denotes the super natural kind that had not been previously recorded; prophesying refers to the kind described in verse 3; doctrine means teaching in general. 1 Corinthians 14:7. Without life, giving sound, means things that do not have life yet that give off sounds, such as the pipe or harp. Give a distinction. These instruments should be so used as to conform to some accepted code, else they would mean nothing to a hearer. The blasts of a locomotive would mean nothing to railroad men, if they were not made according to the code in use by the company. 1 Corinthians 14:8. The same illustration is used in Numbers 10:1-9, where a nonliving trumpet is used as a signal device. Certain blasts were to indicate a corresponding action. If the "code" was ignored, the soldier would not know whether to line up for action or remain in his tent. 1 Corinthians 14:9. Paul makes the application of his illustration in this verse. He means for them to make such a use of their gift of tongues as will contribute beneficial information to the hearers. 1 Corinthians 14:10. Voices is from the Greek word PHONE. and Thayer defines it at this place, "speech, 1. e., a language tongue." It is true that several different forms of language are in use in the world, and each has its own significance according to the vocabulary of the people speaking with it. 1 Corinthians 14:11. But unless the hearer knows the meaning of the word when it is spoken to him, he will receive no exchange of thought from the speaker. Barbarian is from , and Thayer's definition in this passage is as follows: "One who speaks a foreign or strange language which is not understood by another." Hence the word does not necessarily mean a term of reproach in the New Testament. But when used with regard to language between different people, it does always mean they are barbarians to each other, if there is not a mutual understanding of the speech that it uttered. 1 Corinthians 14:12. The desire to excel merely from the motive of rivalry over others is wrong. The word in this verse is in the intransitive form, and is defined by Thayer "to abound in." The thought is that each member of the congregation should wish to abound in that gift that would best edify the church. 1 Corinthians 14:13. Wherefore means a conclusion in line with the exhortation in the preceding verse. Pray that he may interpret is commented upon at verse 5, regarding the possession of two gifts by the same man. 1 Corinthians 14:14. My spirit refers to the spiritual gift possessed by the one who is praying, while my understanding pertains to the one hearing the prayer. If a man prays with an unknown tongue, the hearer who does not understand that tongue will not get any benefit from the prayer. 1 Corinthians 14:15. The first half of this verse is explained in the preceding one. The second half is generally misapplied today. A song leader will arise before the congregation and try to get it in condition for some good singing. He will probably tell the people to wake up and sing as if they meant it, then remind them that Paul said to "sing with the spirit and with the understanding," as if he was conducting a "pep meeting." He may continue his erroneous use of the passage by telling them to study the words of the song so as to understand what they are singing, else they could not "sing with the understanding as Paul commands." The passage as it reads and is quoted did not apply to congregational singing in Paul's day even, much less does it so apply today. It was a part of the exercise of miraculous gifts, and the spirit that is named is the Holy Spirit, given to Christians in such measure that they could speak and sing with words that had not yet been revealed to others. In selecting his words, the singer was instructed to use those that the audience (not himself only) could understand. The term "my understanding" has reference to the ability of the hearer to understand what he hears. 1 Corinthians 14:16. To bless means to praise the Lord for his blessings. One man may be expressing thanks in the audience of disciples, which is supposed to represent the sentiments of the hearers. Occupieth the room is a figurative expression that means one who is unlearned, or not educated in the various languages. It is also defined in the lexicons as a private person in contrast with one who is in public life. Say amen. The manner of Paul's question implies that it was taken for granted the audience would use this word after the public prayer of one speaker, thus making his sentiments their own. Doubtless the Lord expects the disciples to do the same thing after a public prayer today. No one can pray with a spiritual gift now, but all should express their prayers in such a manner that the congregation may hear and understand them. If a man mumbles a prayer in an undertone, or drops his chin upon his chest, it will make it impossible for others to know what he says, and hence an "amen" after such a prayer would be as unscriptural as the prayer. I never say amen to a prayer unless I have heard every word of it, and also believe it was a scriptural prayer. 1 Corinthians 14:17. A prayer uttered in a foreign tongue could be well formed, but it would not edify the unlearned man. 1 Corinthians 14:18. Being an apostle, Paul could speak in a multitude of tongues, which was a necessary qualification for one who was to preach the Gospel in various parts of the world. He was grateful for the gift, but also was considerate of the church in the exercise of it in any established congregation. 1 Corinthians 14:19. My understanding means the hearers could understand his words (verse 14). Paul's motive for preferring a few of these words to ten thousand of the others was an unselfish one; it was because it would give more teaching to others. 1 Corinthians 14:20. The brethren at Corinth had behaved so foolishly over their spiritual gifts, the apostle likened them to children. He was willing for them to be as free from malice as children, but in understanding (activities of the mind) he wished them to be as men. They certainly had shown malice toward each other, when they had be- come contentious among themselves over their spiritual gifts. It was like children quarrelling with each other over whose mechanical toy would do the best performances. No wonder Paul thought it necessary to give this subject three whole chapters, and parts of some others. 1 Corinthians 14:21. The quotation is from Isaiah 28:11-12, which shows that the term the law includes the prophetic writings of the Old Testament. The connection shows that Isaiah was writing about conditions just previous to the captivity of Israel by the heathen. Israel had refused to listen to the law of the Lord even when it was spoken to them in their own tongue. Hence He said he would cast them into the midst of a nation speaking a tongue foreign to the people of Israel. Therefore, the use of tongues was not primarily for the purpose of instruction to believers, but as an evidence to unbelievers, to convince them of the existence of supernatural power. In view of this truth, Paul makes the point that the brethren made a mistake in trying to impose their gift of tongues onto the whole church to the extent they were doing. 1 Corinthians 14:22. On the basis of the preceding verse, the brethren should give the use of tongues a comparatively small consideration in the assembly, and make greater use of prophesying since it would edify the church. 1 Corinthians 14:23. We are sure the Bible does not contradict itself; but when the language seems that it does so, there is always a reasonable explanation possible. Verse 22 says tongues are a sign for the benefit of unbelievers, while the present verse says that tongues will cause them to regard the church as a group of madmen. The word unlearned is from IDIOTES, and Thayer's definition in this verse is one who is "not a prophet; destitute of the gift of tongues." The key to the question is in the word all, for an unbeliever would not require that a whole group in an assembly be able to speak in a foreign tongue to be convinced of the presence of supernatural power; one or two would be sufficient. Therefore. if the whole group did so, it would naturally seem to this "outsider" that the crowd was beside itself. 1 Corinthians 14:24. All is the key word again, for it is applied to prophesying which was the gift that imparted the most edification or instruction. Convinced and judged are used in viritually the same sense, meaning that the informa tion imparted by this general display of the gift of prophecy, would have a beneficial influence upon this man who was previously an unbeliever. 1 Corinthians 14:25. Secrets of his heart are the thoughts produced by the edifying prophesying just heard. See the note at Matthew 2:2 for the meaning of worship. 1 Corinthians 14:26. How is it then is an introductory expression, as if the apostle had said, "How about it, brethren?" Every one of you means "each one of you has something to contribute to the services." The general program was approved, with the stipulation that it be so conducted as to edify the church. The items named were to be in the line of spiritual gifts. Psalm as used here is defined by Thayer, "a pious song." Doctrine is defined, "teaching, instruction." Tongue is from the Greek word GLOSSA, which occurs 50 times in the New Testament, and is always translated by this one word. It means the language of any people that is expressed by the natural tongue. Revelation is from a word that means a making known some truth that was hitherto not known. Interpretation denotes an explaining of a foreign word or sentence that has been spoken by some other person. 1 Corinthians 14:27. Man in this verse and the pronoun in the next being singular, indicates the terms two and three refer to the number of words or sentences that were to be spoken in any given assembling. By course means he should utter them in turn with the interpreter. That is, he should speak one of the words or sentences and then let the other man interpret it. Next speak another word and let the other interpret, and after the third word or sentence, he should cease his speaking. 1 Corinthians 14:28. The speaker in tongues was subject to a further restriction, namely, that there be an interpreter present. If none were in the assembly then he was to keep silence, and the word is from the very same Greek original as the one in verse 34. So here is an instance where even a man was to keep silence, a truth that is ignored by the extremists on the "woman question." 1 Corinthians 14:29. The prophets were a preference as to the gifted men (verses 1, 2), hence the apostle is not as specific in his restrictions on them as he is about the speaker with tongues, where he adds the words at the most (verse 27). Two or three would be sufficient for any one gathering, and others were to judge or discern the meaning of their words. 1 Corinthians 14:30. Verse 26 shows that certain ones might come into an assembly with a communication to be offered to the church. After coming together, however, the Lord might see fit to make a special revelation to another. In that case the first one was to give way to the one receiving the later revelation. 1 Corinthians 14:31. All of the men who had the gift of prophecy were to be given opportunity to speak in their turn, since prophesying was so highly esteemed (verses 1, 2), so that all might be comforted. 1 Corinthians 14:32. Spirits of the prophets means the spiritual gifts that they possessed. These men were not compelled to speak unless they so willed, hence there would be no excuse for their being disorderly in the exercise of the gift. 1 Corinthians 14:33. God is not the author of confusion. This is a reason for the foregoing instructions about the proper conduct of the prophets, as well as of other men wtih spin itual gifts. As in all churches of the saints. I see no importance in the question whether this phrase belongs with the present verse, or should be attached to verse 34. The point in both verses (as it has been throughout the chapter), is to have the exercises of the assembly so conducted as to edify the church in an orderly way. The Lord desired such a result in all of the congregations but the one in Corinth seemed to be in special need of the instruction. 1 Corinthians 14:34. If the reader has carefully followed the teaching that has been offered from chapter 12:1 down to this verse, he will see that it has nothing to do with the subject of "woman's duties and privileges in the church," as that is considered today. The extremists on that question will ignore all of the context, and settle upon this one passage, because they think it justifies their unholy restrictions against a part of the body of Christ. Such a use of the verse is as gross a perversion as any sectarian ever committed against Acts 2:38. This verse is just another item in the attempt of Paul to restore order in the public assembly when exercising the spiritual gifts. Notice it says your women, which shows it was not said to women in general, but to the wives of the gifted men. The perversionists try to dodge this by saying the pronoun refers to the church as a whole. That will not do for the next verse shows these women had husbands, so the attempt at perversion fails again. To say this verse is of general application and in force today, makes it contradict Ephesians 5:19, where the word "speak" is from the same Greek term as the one in our verse. Yet no one denies that the women have the right to sing, and when they do they are "speaking" according to the apostle's command. Obedience is from a word that denotes "subjection," and it does not always require that any specific command has been given. The wives of the gifted men were to be in subjection in that they remain quiet while their husbands were performing their spiritual gifts. 1 Corinthians 14:35. Since it is the wives of gifted men who were commanded to keep silence, it follows that the things they might wish to learn about are those pertaining to the gifts of their husbands; wish to know n.ore details about them. Otherwise they could not hope to obtain such information even at home. Furthermore, we know it does not pertain to information in general, for that was supposed to b€ obtained in the assembly (verses 3, 5 12, 19). 1 Corinthians 14:36. The Corinthians were so puffed up over their spiritual gifts, that it made them vain enough to regard themselves as a source cf divine knowledge. The key to this verse is in the words from and unto. The word of God had not come out from them--had not originated with them. Instead, all the knowledge they possessed had been bestowed by the Lord, hence they had no ground for boasting. 1 Corinthians 14:37. No spiritual gift is more important nor based on any more authority than the writings of an apostle. If the claimants for spiritual gifts were genuine, they would acknowledge the writings of Paul to be divine commandments. Furthermore, if they go that far, they will be required by the rule of consistency to bring. their conduct under the teaching of the same. 1 Corinthians 14:38. No one is ever asked to acknowledge anything that he does not profess to know. The evidences in support of Paul's claim for his writings were so weighty, that everyone should have been in position to recognize them. Therefore, if some man claimed that he knew noth:ng about what Paul was saying--had nothing to acknowledge, it would be prompted by stubborn indifference. In that case the apostle said let him be ignorant, which means that he was not worthy of further attention. 1 Corinthians 14:39. Covet is from ZELOO, and Thayer defines it, "to desire earnestly." Among the different spiritual gifts, that of prophesying was the one which Paul preferred because it was the more serviceable (verses 3, 19), hence he advised the brethren to desire it. At the same time he instructed them not to slight the other gifts. 1 Corinthians 14:40. This verse is the grand conclusion of the reasoning that Paul has been offering throughout the chapter. Decently is from a word that Thayer defines, "in a seemly [becoming] manner." In order means for the various items of their services to be done at the proper time, or in a systematic manner so as not to create confusion. (See verse 33.) David Lipscomb Commentary On 1st Corinthians 15 THE OF THE DEAD 1 Corinthians 15:1-58 GROUND OF THE 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 1 Now I make known unto you, brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you,—Paul now states the fundamentals of the gospel which he preached as a basis of the argument contained in this chapter. In the gospel the chief fact was the resurrection of Christ from the dead. On it Christ’ s claim to be the Son of God turns, and on it the resurrection of man and his eternal hopes rest. It was proper that he should state what he had taught them at first of the great elementary truths on which the church had been established, but from which their minds had been diverted. which also ye received,— [They had embraced it as true— that Christ rose from the dead, and that the saints would rise.] wherein also ye stand,—[On this truth the church was founded, and on it their hope rested. This doctrine was vital and fundamental.] 2 by which also ye are saved,-—By it they were brought into a saved state. if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you,—If they held fast or were steadfast to the end. except ye believed in vain.—To believe in vain is to believe and not act on the faith. Faith is intended to lead to obedience to God; and when it fails to do this, it is vain faith. Every one who claims to believe God, and does not continue faithful to the end, makes faith vain. When a man adds the inventions of men to the appointments of God, he makes faith vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all—First in importance, not in time; the doctrine of the resurrection is primary and cardinal, central and indispensable. that which also I received:—He received that which he had preached to them by direct revelation. (1 Corinthians 11:23; Galatians 1:11-12 Galatians 2:6.) He could therefore speak with infallible confidence, both as to what the gospel is and as to its truth. that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;— [Christ’ s death was a propitiatory sacrifice for sin; and the occurrence of such a statement in this place proves that Christ’ s death constituted an essential part of the gospel.] Man was under sentence of death, an outlaw in the court of heaven; but Jesus Christ purchased him “ with his own blood.” (Acts 20:28.) “ The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:28.) “ Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a people for his own possession, zealous of good works.” (Titus 2:14.) “ Who his own self bare our sins in his body upon the tree, that we, having died unto sins, might live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed.” (1 Peter 2:24.) “ He is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.” (1 John 2:2.) “ For ye were bought with a price: glorify God therefore in your body.” (1 Corinthians 6:20.) The idea of Jesus redeeming, purchasing man from under the sentence of condemnation is so interwoven with the whole of the Scriptures that it cannot be rejected without rejecting the truth of the Bible. He is the Redeemer and Savior of man. 4 and that he was buried;—[The inclusion of this detail in so brief a statement of facts is remarkable. But the burial is carefully recorded in all four Gospels, and was evidently regarded of great importance. The importance here and there is that the burial was the evidence of a bodily resurrection. The death of Jesus having been certified by the centurion (Mark 15:44-45), his body was committed to Joseph of Arimathea, who took it down from the cross, and laid it in a tomb that was hewn in stone (Luke 23:53), and rolled a great stone before the door of the tomb, and departed (Matthew 27:60). Then the chief priests and the Pharisees came before Pilate, saying; “ Sir, we remember that that deceiver said while he was yet alive, After three days I rise again. Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest haply his disciples come and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead; and the last error will be worse than the first. Pilate said unto them, Ye have a guard; go, make it as sure as ye can. So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, the guard being with them.” (Matthew 27:63-66.) ] and that he hath been raised on the third day—[Since the death and burial of Christ are historic facts, the effect of the resurrection is abiding. It is not said that Christ arose, but that he was raised. His resurrection is the work of God (1 Corinthians 15:15), the divine seal upon the work of Christ.] according to the scriptures;— These prophecies and their fulfillment are given to prove that the death and resurrection of Jesus were in accord with them. [The double appeal to Scripture in so brief a statement is deliberate and important; and the divine prediction of what would take place is appropriately placed before the apostolic testimony as to what did take place. The agreement of what did take place with what was foretold in Scripture is pointed out with special frequency in the New Testament. (Luke 22:37 Luke 24:25-27 Luke 24:44-46; Acts 2:25-32; Acts 3:24-26 Acts 17:3 Acts 18:28 Acts 26:22-23.) ] 5 and that he appeared to Cephas;—Having presented the prophecies, he introduces as witnesses those to whom he appeared after his resurrection. [The resurrection of Christ was a fact to be proved, like other facts, by competent witnesses. Paul, therefore, appeals to the witnesses who attested the truth of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and shows that it was not possible that so many witnesses should have been deceived. The appearance to Peter is nowhere directly mentioned in the Gospels, but is implied in the exclamation of the apostles on the return of the disciples from Emmaus, “ Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.” (Luke 24:34.)] then to the twelve;—[The apostles were called “ The Twelve” by a figure of speech common to all languages, where any body of persons who act as colleagues are called by the number of which the body is properly composed though it may not be completed. It is most likely that Paul refers to the appearance mentioned by Luke (Luke 24:36-43), and John (John 20:19 John 20:24), when Thomas was absent.] 6 then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, — [The place of this appearance is not designated, but there are two circumstances mentioned which throw light on the subject. Just before his death he told his disciples: “ After I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee” (Matthew 26:32) ; and after his resurrection, the angel said to the women who had gone to the sepulchre: “ Go quickly, and tell his disci-ples, He is risen from the dead; and lo, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you. And they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to bring his disciples word. And behold, Jesus met them, saying, . . . Fear not: go tell my brethren that they depart into Galilee, and there shall they see me,” and “ the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them.” (Matthew 28:7-16.) Jesus had spent most of his public life in Galilee, and made most of his disciples there. It was proper, therefore, that those disciples, who would hear of his death, should have some public confirmation of the fact that he had risen.] of whom the greater part remain until now,—[The strength of this witness lies in the fact that the majority of them were still living when Paul wrote this epistle, making it possible still to get full evidence at first hand. What more conclusive argument for the truth of his resurrection could there be than that five hundred had seen him, who had been intimately acquainted with him in his life, and who had become his followers.] but some are fallen asleep;—This is the usual expression employed in the Scripture to describe the death of the saints. 7 then he appeared to James;—Of this appearance we have no other mention. [There can be little doubt that this James was “ the Lord’ s brother” (Galatians 1:19), who became so prominent in the church in Jerusalem (Galatians 2:9), and is placed here among the chief witnesses because of his prominent position. He was not a believer during the Lord’ s personal ministry (John 7:5); but he was united with the apostles, and with “ the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus” in “ the upper chamber,” immediately after the ascension (Acts 1:14.)] then to all the apostles;—This appearance was on the day of the ascension. (Acts 1:4-11; Luke 24:44-51.) [From the expressions—“ being assembled together with them,” and “ they therefore, when they were come together”— it is evident that this gathering was the result of a convocation on the part of Jesus. It was to be his final appearance to the apostles. They must all be present, and Jesus had provided that none of them should be wanting.] 8 and last of all, as to the child untimely born, he appeared to me also.—This last appearance was after his ascension as Paul was on his way to Damascus. (Acts 9:5 Acts 22:14 Acts 26:16.) Because of his late appearance to him, he was as “ the child untimely born.” [This denotes the violent and unnatu¬ral mode of his call to the apostleship, especially at the moment when he was recalling the appearing of the Lord on the way to Damascus. The other apostles were called when they were already believers; and which the Lord’ s hands gathered without effort, whereas Paul was torn, as by a violent operation. from that Phariseeism to which he was yet clinging with all the fibers of his heart and will.] 9 Now if Christ is preached that he hath been raised from the dead,—The resurrection of Christ was the vital truth in their faith. It had been preached and believed by all Christians. On it their acceptance of Christ turned. It was the foundation stone of their faith. To deny this was to deny the faith and become an infidel. how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?—Since all admit that Christ was raised from the dead, how can it be that there can be no resurrection ? It was probably held by some that resurrection was impossible. To which Paul answered by demonstrating a fact, and showing that such an event had occurred, and that consequently all the difficulties were met. Facts are unanswerable demonstrations; and when a fact is established, all obstacles and diffi-culties in the way must be admitted to be overcome. He had established the fact that one had been raised, and thus met at once all the objections which could be arrayed against the doctrine. 10 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle,—Paul keenly felt his guilt in persecuting the church, often spoke of it, always confessing his sinfulness, and on account of it he felt that he was the least of all the apostles, and was not worthy to be called an apostle. because I persecuted the church of God.—This sense of wrong done the church of God became a spur to increased sacrifice for Christ. 11 But by the grace of God I am what I am:—While Paul was sinful, God’ s grace opened the way for his forgiveness and made him what he was. The Lord saw his earnestness, zeal, self-sacrificing spirit, fidelity to his convictions, and his fitness to preach the gospel, so appeared unto him, brought him to believe, and started him upon his work of self-sacrificing service. and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not found vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all:—The favor bestowed on him was not fruitless, for he labored more abundantly than all the apostles. with unfaltering confidence and the utmost composure. They were not credulous dupes blindly led by “ cunningly devised fables.” ] yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.—God’ s goodness and mercy to him constrained him to labor and suf¬fer as he had done more than all the other apostles. THE BETWEEN CHRIST’ S AND THE OF THE DEAD IN GENERAL1 Corinthians 15:12-19 12 Whether then it be I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.—He and the other apostles preached the same gos¬pel of the resurrection and the Corinthians became Christians by accepting Christ’ s resurrection as the fundamental truth of the gospel which they received. [The resurrection of Christ was attested by a plurality of occasions, a plurality of witnesses, and a plurality of the senses. Hence the apostles gave their testimony to the world without a shadow of doubt upon their souls as to its truthful¬ness and encountered every form of persecution in its behalf 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath Christ been raised:—The two stand or fall together. The resurrection of Christ is only the beginning of the general resurrection. Jesus said to the Jews: “ Marvel not at this: for the hour cometh, in which all that are in the tombs shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:28-29.) When Jesus died on the cross: “ The earth did quake; and the rocks were rent; and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised; and coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many.” (Matthew 27:51-53.) That was the beginning of the resurrection, to be completed only when “ the Lord himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17.) 14 and if Christ hath not been raised, then is our preaching vain,—The central truth and fundamental fact of their preaching was that Christ was raised from the dead; but if he had not been raised, their preaching was false. your faith also is vain.—Their faith in Christ as the Son of God was based on the belief that God raised him from the dead. When the Jews asked a sign of Jesus he said unto them: “ An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet; for as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” (Matthew 12:39-40.) That is, he should be buried and rise again; and Paul says he “ was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” (Romans 1:4.) His resurrection was the foundation on which their faith rested, and if that was not true their faith was vain. The system could not be true unless Christ had been raised from the dead, as he said he would be; and to believe a falsehood could be of no use to any man.' 15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we witnessed of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead are not raised.—If there be no resurrection, then Christ was not raised; and if Christ was not raised, the apostles bore false witness when they claimed to have seen him alive after his burial. They told a falsehood when it could bring no present good, but bring much suffer¬ing, and finally death; and if false, there could be no hope of anything but infamy and shame. Yet if Christ was not raised the apostles bore false witness of God. To bear witness of God, or his words and deeds, so as to mislead men in their faith in and duty to God is a more heinous offense than to bear false witness of men. It is a grievous sin to bear false witness of men. It is a terrible sin against God and man to bear false witness of what God does and says, for it misleads men where eternal interests are at stake. Peter said to Ana¬nias : “ Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God” (Acts 5 Acts 4), showing that it is a greater crime to lie to and of God than of man. 16 For if the dead are not raised, neither hath Christ been raised:—[This verse is repetition of verse 13, to emphasize the argument that faith in the resurrection rests on historic fact.] He insists that unless the dead do rise, then Christ did not rise. To raise him when no others would arise would be meaningless. If he did rise, then the dead must rise. 17 and if Christ hath not been raised, your faith is vain;—If Christ had not been raised from the dead, their faith in a risen Lord was false and vain. ye are yet in your sins.— Without the resurrection of Christ, there is no forgiveness of sins. The resurrection is inter¬woven with the whole scheme of redemption. It lies at the foundation of faith and forgiveness of sins, and without it a confession of faith in Christ is meaningless. 18 Then they also that are fallen asleep in Christ have perished.—Many had suffered and died with a living faith in Christ. Many had yielded up their life in testimony of their faith in Christ Jesus. All these had perished, suffered, and died, and are without hope or reward in the world to come; indeed, there is no world to come if Christ be not raised. His resurrection is the guarantee and hope of the future life. 19 If we have only hoped in Christ in this life, we are of all men most pitiable.— -If all we have done is merely having hoped in Christ in this life, if it is there to end, we are of all men most pitiable. We may gain an idea of what Paul suffered for Christ from his own account: “ Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as one beside himself) I more; in labors more abundantly, in prisons more abundantly, in stripes above measure, in deaths oft. Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day have I been in the deep; in journeyings often, in perils of rivers, in perils of robbers, in perils from my countrymen, in perils from the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren; in labor and travail, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. Besides those things that are without, there is that which presseth upon me daily, anxiety for all the churches.” (2 Corinthians 11:23-28.) [It is not the fulfillment of the moral law which is here in question; no natural duty imposed on Paul a life of labors, privations, and sufferings of all kinds such as he accepted, and which should be accepted by all Christians in the service of Christ. The free choice of such a life can only be justified by the hope of the most excellent blessings and these blessings consist by no means of certain external pleasures granted by way of reward, but in the satisfaction of the noblest and most elevated wants of human nature, of the aspiration after holiness and life eternal. To see these blessings escape, where all inferior ones have been sacrificed to gain them—to have renounced earth for heaven, and instead of heaven to find perdition, like sinners— would not this still be a sadder condition than that of worldly men who at least allow themselves on earth a comfortable life and the lawful pleasures which were in their reach? To the sufferings accumulated during this life there would come to be added the most cruel disappoint-ment after this life— no eternal life.] RESULTS OF CHRIST’ S IN WITH THE OF 1 Corinthians 15:20-28 20 But now hath Christ been raised from the dead,—None really denied the resurrection of Christ, but how meaningless and fruitless his resurrection would be without the resurrec¬tion of others. His resurrection is not a solitary occurrence affecting only himself. [It is the resurrection of the head of a new humanity and pledge, therefore, of the resurrection of all the dead.] the firstfruits of them that are asleep.—First fruits denotes the beginning of anything, regarded as a pledge of the rest; and so Christ’ s resurrection is the beginning, and the pledge of all the rest. [There is marked suggestiveness in the term first fruits. It is taken from the ancient ceremony in Israel of waving the sheaf of first fruits of the ripening grain before the Lord. (Leviticus 23:9-11.) The sheaf was at once the pledge and the sample of the entire harvest; it was a part of the harvest to be gathered. Christ is the first fruits of all the sleeping saints in his resurrection. As certainly as he is risen, so certainly shall they rise, for he is the pledge and assured part of their resurrection. Our faith in the resurrection rests on the proved fact of Christ’ s resurrection.] 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the res¬urrection of the dead.—The resurrection of all as naturally follows the resurrection of Jesus Christ as the death of all fol¬lows the sin and death of Adam. By Adam’ s sin death came upon him; so all inherited his mortal, dying body. So as Christ by his obedience triumphed over death and was raised from the dead to die no more, so all the world through Christ will be raised from the dead. The world of mankind will be raised, no more to live a fleshly life or to die a fleshly death— “ they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:28.) 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.—What man lost through the disobedience of Adam he gained through the obedience of Jesus Christ. He lost the fleshly or physical life in Adam. That life is restored to all men through Christ. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; then they that are Christ’ s, at his coming.—They will not all be raised at one time. Christ came forth as the first fruits. When Christ died on the cross, many of the graves were opened, and “ many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised; and coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many.” (Matthew 27:52.) Those who accept Christ, put him on, live in him, “ shall rise first; then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17.) The wicked shall afterward be raised: “ Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” (Daniel 12:2.) “ And death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death, even the lake of fire. And if any was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire.” (Revelation 20:14-15.) 24 Then cometh the end,—The consummation of the gospel dispensation or state of things, which will open the new and eternal period. when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father;— The mission of Jesus Christ on earth was to redeem and rescue the world from the rule of the evil one, to whom it had been surrendered by the first Adam, and deliver it up to God, even the Father. when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power.—Everything that is in the world, that exercises rule, authority, or power, save as it comes directly from God, and is used under his direction, to promote his rule and dominion, is an enemy of God and of his Son Jesus Christ, and must be destroyed by the rule and dominion of the Son before the king¬dom and dominion of the world can be delivered up to the Father. Jesus Christ came into the world to rescue it from the evil one, and to destroy everything that exerts power or authority or dominion on the earth, and to establish the kingdom of God on earth. When that work is done every one will render homage and obedience to God. Then, and only then, will peace and harmony and good will dwell among men, and every being in the universe will realize that his happiness will be promoted, by promoting the happiness of every other being, and all guided by one law will work in unison and har¬mony to the promotion of the glory of God and the good of men. Before the consummation can come every plant not planted of God shall be rooted up. (Matthew 15:13.) Every in¬stitution or organization of earth that exerts rule or authority or power must be destroyed. This earth in the material, moral and spiritual world must become again a garden of God’ s own planting. Not a brier, or thistle, or thorn can grow in the material, moral, or spiritual world. Only those plants planted by the Father’ s hand and nurtured by his love will grow in that redeemed and rescued Eden of God. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet.—Jesus Christ must rule and reign here on earth till he has put down and destroyed all powers and dominions of earth. Everything exercising rule and authority and dominion under the evil one is an enemy of God, and Jesus Christ must reign until all have been destroyed. He reigns in his church ; and his church is his kingdom established by God, which “ shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.” (Daniel 2:44.) All the kingdoms, and institutions on earth shall be broken in pieces and destroyed, then shall he deliver up to God his redeemed kingdom, out of which everything built up under the dominion of the devil has been destroyed. Since Christ’ s mission—the mission of his kingdom— is to put down and destroy all these kingdoms, and to destroy everything that exercises rule, authority, or power on earth, how can the servants of Christ and the subjects of his kingdom enter into, strengthen, and build up that which Christ and his kingdom are commissioned to destroy? 26 The last enemy that shall be abolished is death.—Death came as a result of sin and is an enemy of God and man. While resulting from sin, it serves as a boundary line for sin, beyond which no active rebellion can go. So long as man sins he must die; but when all sin and rebellion shall have been destroyed, then death as the last enemy shall be abolished. While Jesus conquered death, he still permits it to reign as a punishment and restrainer of sin. But when sin and rebellion shall have ceased, and all the institutions that have grown up out of the rebellion of man shall have been destroyed, then death itself, the last surviving enemy, will be destroyed, and the kingdom will be delivered up to the Father, with no enemy to oppose his rule and reign. 27 For, He put all things in subjection under his feet.— These words are found in Psalms 8:6, and relate to man in general at the time of his creation (Genesis 1:28-30) ; but as the destiny of man thus declared is not realized, because of his fall, in any one save in the person of the Son of man, it is here applied to him as representative of man in his highest state. (See also Ephesians 1:22; Hebrews 2:5-9.) But when he saith, All things are put in subjection, it is evident that he is excepted who did subject all things unto him. —God did not place himself under Jesus. He is excepted when he said he put all things under him. 28 And when all things have been subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subjected to him that did subject all things unto him, that God may be all in all.—Jesus came to bring all things under subjection to himself. He established a kingdom and put in operation forces that will break down all rebellion against God and will bring all things into subjection unto himself as ruler. This he is doing through his kingdom. When the work of bringing them into subjection has been completed, he will be subject to God who put all things under his feet, that God may be the only ruler in the universe. All things in all places will honor and obey him. OF THE BY SHOWING THE CONDUCT OF CHRIST’ S TO BE , IF THERE IS NO 1 Corinthians 15:29-34 29 Else what shall they do that are baptized for the dead?—As is apparent to every thoughtful person, this is an earnest argument to prove that Christians will rise from the dead. The purpose, scope, and connection will admit of but one meaning— If the dead rise not, what shall they do who are baptized in the hope of the resurrection? Men are “ baptized into Christ,” that they may live in him, die in him, and finally be justified and saved in him. If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?—In view of their dying they are baptized in order to their well-being after death. If they are not to be raised from the dead, why are they baptized to fit them for the resurrection? [There is no doubt that the allusion is to some act performed in expectation of future benefit to themselves, which would be lost if the dead did not rise. And the view given here suits the argument and agrees with the context. Foreseeing that faith would cost them the loss of all things, perhaps of life itself, not a few persons, in being baptized, did so, virtually saying with the apostle, “ We who live are al¬ways delivered unto death for Jesus’ sake.” (2 Corinthians 4:11.) The meaning then is: What is to become of those who on being baptized do so knowing that it may prove their death warrant, if the dead rise not ?] 30 why do we also stand in jeopardy every hour?—It was in view of this condition after death that made Paul stand in jeopardy of life every hour. [He had no other object in encountering so many dangers than to make known the gospel which looked forward to the glorious future state; but if there is no resurrection, and therefore no life beyond death, his ex-posure of himself to so great danger in proclaiming it was infinite folly. For he thus risked at the same moment both the present life and the life to come. The best comment on this passage is found in 2 Corinthians 11:23-28. ] 31 I protest by that glorying in you, brethren, which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord,—He gloried in them as his children in Christ, and, in spite of their many defects, they were very precious to him. The very joy and gratitude worked by his thought of them recalls the peril he had endured for their salvation. I die daily.—To die daily incurred the danger of death. [This is a vivid picture of his constant danger. Not that each day he actually dies, but that the process of death is ever going on; as though the executioner was already at work putting him to death.] 32 If after the manner of men I fought with beasts at Ephesus,—[These words describe the deadly enemies encountered by Paul during his long sojourn in Ephesus. They are a terri¬ble picture of the perils which culminated not only in Ephesus but in every place where he proclaimed the gospel. He was surrounded by men thirsty for his blood, men against whose fury he was as powerless to defend himself as were the captives thrown to the wild beasts in the amphitheatre. (Acts 13:50 Acts 14:19 Acts 16:22 Acts 17:5 Acts 18:23; 2 Timothy 4:17.)] what doth it profit me?—If this voluntary exposure to deadly peril be from worldly motives common to men, what is the worldly gain to be derived from it? No such gain can be conceived. Consequently, his self-exposure was because he believed in a life beyond death. If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.—[The conclusion given here is a quotation from Isaiah 22:13, where it is given as the sensualistic cry of the people of Jerusalem under the judgment of Jehovah, which moved them to recklessness instead of repentance. These words are not quoted as having any original reference to the subject of the resurrection, but as language appropriately expressing the idea that, if there is no future state, it is vain and foolish to subject ourselves to trials and privations here. We should the rather make the most of this life; enjoy all the comforts we can; and make pleasure our chief good rather than look for happiness in the future state. This is the language of the great mass of mankind today. They look to no future state; they, therefore, give themselves up to unrestained enjoyment in this life.] 33 Be not deceived:—[Do not be led astray by such spe¬cious maxims. They can only arise from that too great familiarity with the heathen against whom he had already put them on guard.] Evil companionships corrupt good morals.—It is contact, association with evil, that is declared to be corrupting. This is a fact of common experience. [It is only when Christians associate with the wicked with the express desire and purpose to do them good that they can rely on the protection of God to preserve them from contamination.] 34 Awake to soberness righteously,—These words imply that the denial of the resurrection was already producing im¬moral results; and the appeal is to arouse them, as from a state of drunkenness, to prompt action to shake off the delusion under which they were lying as to their security. [The denial of such a doctrine as the resurrection was in Christians not only a matter of opinion but of unrighteousness. Righteousness embraces not only our duty to men but to God ; and since he has revealed to us certain unspeakably great benefits which he intends to confer upon us, it is our duty to meet his loving offers with grateful acknowledgment. If we do not we are ungrateful and unrighteous.] and sin not;—[The awakening to righteousness must be followed up by a continous effort to live a righteous life.] for some have no knowledge of God: I speak this to move you to shame.—[Their culpable ignorance of Paul was at the root of their disbelief of the resurrection; and Paul assigns this as the strongest reason for awakening out of spiritual lethargy which led them to associate with those who denied that God would raise the dead. And the object of all that he was saying was to excite them to shame for having some in their fellowship who denied the resurrection.] OF BY THE OF THE BODY1 Corinthians 15:35 - 35 But some one will say, How are the dead raised?—Some troubled themselves to know how the dead are raised. [The objection was urged that, though the historical testimony and natural fitness are in favor of believing that Christ rose from the dead as an earnest that we shall be raised, is our bodily resurrection possible, can we conceive such a thing? We cannot be expected to believe what is impossible and inconceiv¬able.] and with what manner of body do they come?—Are they raised up in the same bodies as those in which they lived here, or, if not, what are the properties of the bodies in which they are raised ? 36 Thou foolish one,—The one who involves himself in such needless difficulties he calls a foolish one. that which thou thyself sowest is not quickened except it die:—He illustrates the resurrection by the analogy of the grain. As long as the grain remains in the bin, it is a dead thing— there is a germ of life in it, but that is to all appearance as if it did not exist. It can only start into life by being buried in the earth, and the whole body of the seed thus buried decays and becomes food for the life germ which cannot be seen till it has attained some size by having received nourishment from the decayed seed, and by this principle of life gathers the matter in a body as suits its wants; so that here is the great mystery of nature, patent on all sides of us, and the beginning of a new life from a dead seed. [This, of course, is only an analogy, and an analogy is not a proof; for the proof of the resurrection is historical. It is the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who during his life displayed supernatural power and wisdom, and whose resurrection was proclaimed by men who lost every worldly advantage and exposed themselves to death daily, because they asserted its truth. This, in the apostle’ s view, was the proof of the resurrection, but when men asked, How are the dead raised up? as if it were an impossible thing, then he used the analogy of the seed and the plant. How the plant is actually developed from the seed is as great a mystery as the resurrection— not, of course, as great a thing— but as great a mystery, as inexplicable, as unsearchable. And the unbeliever who says that it is produced by a law of nature only introduces a still greater mystery— the mystery of laws not imposed by any intelligent being, but acting no one knows how— blindly, unintelligently, though they require the brightest intellects of the human family to describe or measure their action.] 37 and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not the body that shall be, but a bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other kind;—The naked grain is sown, not the body that shall be. 38 but God giveth it a body even as it pleased him, and to each seed a body of its own.—Neither the seed itself, nor the sower, provides the new body; but it is God who gives it a body as it pleases him. He does not deal with each case separately, just as he pleases at the moment, but according to fixed laws, just as it pleased him when the world was created and regulated. (Genesis 1 Genesis 11, 12.) [The development of any plant from a seed is a deep mystery, and still more mysterious is that uniform action of God, by which each seed develops not into any plant, but into the plant which God has appointed from the first; so that, as far as we can see, not only is there an infinite variety of seeds, but an infinite variety of prin-ciples of life. There is a particular character of life in the grain of wheat, and a different one in the grain of barley, and they never interchange. This is introduced because he meant not merely life out of the dead seed, but a particular form of life from each seed. Therefore to every human being God will give a proper resurrection body. There shall be a fitness or appropriateness of the new body of the character of him who is raised.] 39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one flesh of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh of birds, and another of fishes.—All flesh is no more the same flesh than all grains are the same grain. Man, beasts, birds, and fish are all different kinds of flesh. [The beast has a body which fits it for life on the earth, the bird for life in the air, and the fish for life in the water. If God from animal tissue can produce such a variety of forms of life, he certainly can, with his wisdom and inexhaustible resources, raise a body for the saints, perfectly adapted to the faculties of their minds, and to the new world in which they are to live.] 40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial:— [The principle is now further extended to the heavenly bodies, and another argument is thus drawn from the close analogy which subsists between the kingdom of nature and kingdom of grace.] but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.—Earthly and heavenly bodies have dif¬ferent glories. [The words “ one” and “ another” here denote difference, as well as distinction. This statement carries the thought farther in the analogy and completes it, showing that there is a difference, not only in character, but in glory between bodies on earth and bodies in heaven.] 41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differeth from another star in glory.—There is no reference here to the different degrees of glory among the saints in heaven, ft is the amazing variety observable in the heavens above us, suggesting the reasonableness of expecting that the resurrection body will differ greatly from the mortal body, consistent with essential identity. 42 So also is the resurrection of the dead.—He applies the truths illustrated in verses 36-38, where the seed is sown to die, and is laid in the earth, in order that it may spring up a plant wholly different in form and beauty from the seed sown, to the resurrection. It is sown in corruption;—It is now a corruptible body, con¬stantly tending to decay, subject to disease and death, and destined to entire dissolution. “ Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” (Genesis 3:19.) it is raised in incorruption:—The resurrection body will not be subjected to earthly conditions; it will be imperishable, free from all impurity, and incapable of decay. 43 it is sown in dishonor;—The body here is dishonored with sin, with weakness, with suffering; it goes down to the grave because of its weak, perishing, and sinful state. [A dead body becomes so repulsive that one would say, with Abraham, of the dearest object of this life, “ that I should bury my dead out of my sight.” (Genesis 23:8.) ] it is raised in glory:—The Lord said that those who attain to this glory “ are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.” (Luke 20:36.) Paul said: “ For our citizenship is in heaven; whence also we wait for a Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of his glory.” (Philippians 3:20-21.) And Daniel said: “ They that are wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.” (Daniel 12:3.) it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:—Weakness is the characteristic of the lifeless body, which is relaxed and powerless. [The resurrection body is ever fresh and fair and strong. Not only can it never be subject to the same weak¬ness again, but it will be endowed with new facilities superior to the former body.] 44 it is sown a natural body;—A natural body is a body of which animal life is the animating principle. It consists of flesh and blood; is susceptible of pain and decay; and needs air, food, and rest. It is adapted to the conditions of an earthly existence. it is raised a spiritual body.—[What a spiritual body is, we know from Paul’ s description, and from the manifestation of Christ in his glorified body. It is incorruptible, glorious, and powerful, adapted to the high state of existence in heaven, and therefore not adapted to an earthly condition.] If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.— [If it is right to speak of a body adapted to the principle of animal life, it is right to speak of a body adapted to the spirit. Just as certainly as we have a body adapted to our lower na¬ture, we shall have one adapted to our higher nature.] 45 So also it is written,—[It is only the first part of the verse (Genesis 2:7) that is quoted. The words “ First” and “ Adam” are added by Paul as an inspired comment to give prominence to the fact that Adam was the beginning of the human race.] The first man Adam became a living soul.—[The Scriptures teach that Adam was created with an animal nature, and that therefore he had an animal body. The proof with regard to the nature of Adam does not rest exclusively on the words quoted, but on the whole account of his creation, of which these words form a part. It is evident from the entire history that Adam was formed for an existence on this earth, and therefore with a body adapted to the present state of being; in its essential attributes not differing from those which we have inherited from him. But God personally inbreathing the principle of life into a lifeless, but organized body, the man, who before was only a lifeless body, became a living soul. The soul was the result of the entrance of the life principle into a mortal body.] The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.—The second Adam gives spiritual and immortal life to those who are his. [Christ is called the last Adam in reference to the first Adam, whose antitype he is as the head of the new humanity, justi¬fied and redeemed through him. Hence it is said: “ Wherefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature: the old things are passed away; behold, they are become new.” (2 Corinthians 5:17.) But at the same time in reference also to the fact that after him no other is to follow as the head of the new race.] 46 Howbeit that is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; then that which is spiritual.—Adam, as an inhabitant of earth, came before Jesus; so the earthly body comes to all before the spiritual body. [This does not mean perfection in general, but one kind only of perfection, that which has been revealed in Christ as the second head of hu¬manity.] 47 The first man is of the earth, earthy:—Our first body, or the man in his first body, is of the earth; like Adam, earthly. the second man is of heaven.—The second, or resurrection body, will be spiritual like the body of Christ after his resurrection. 48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy:—All bodies in the mortal state are like Adam subject to corruption and decay. and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.— -All the spiritual bodies of Christians are like the second Adam, Jesus Christ, in his ascended state. (1 Thessalonians 4:16; 2 Thessalonians 1:7; Philippians 3:20-21.) 49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.—All men born into the world bear the image, the nature of Adam’ s body, so all counted worthy of the resurrection of the just shall bear the image of the heavenly, of Jesus Christ in his heavenly state. The apostle says: “ Beloved, now are we children of God, and it is not yet made manifest what we shall be. We know that, if he shall be manifested, we shall be like him; for we shall see him even as he is.” (1 John 3:2.) FURTHER OF FUTURE BY THE CHANGE TO BE IN THE BODIES OF THE LIVING SAINTS AT THE END OF TIME 1 Corinthians 15:50-58 50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot in¬herit the kingdom of God;—Our fleshly, mortal bodies cannot inherit the immortal kingdom; neither doth the fleshly body, subject to decay and corruption, inherit the incorruptible state in heaven. neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.— The natural body must undergo a change and become incorruptible before it can enter the immortal state. 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery;—The mystery is how this change is to take place, for it had not hitherto been made known. The disclosure to which reference was made, and the corresponding one in 1 Thessalonians 4:15, was made through Paul. We all shall not sleep,—[This refers to the death of the body, but only of such as are Christ’ s; yet never of Christ himself, though he is said to be “ the firstfruits of them that are asleep.” (1 Corinthians 15:20.) It is used of saints who departed before Christ came (Matthew 27:52; Acts 13:26); of Lazarus while Christ was yet upon the earth (John 11:11) ; and of believers since the ascension (1 Thessalonians 4:14-15; Acts 7:60; 2 Peter 3:4.)] but we shall all be changed,—Those who die before the coming of the Lord will not fail of the blessings of Christ’ s eternal kingdom, and those who are alive when he comes again will not be left in their corruptible bodies. Both shall be changed, and thus prepared for the heavenly state. 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump:—This change will be instantaneous and at that sol¬emn final moment when the last trump shall sound and the dead Christians shall be raised incorruptible and those who are alive shall be changed. for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised in¬corruptible, and we shall be changed.—[These words were likely added to give the order in which the three great acts of the last day will follow one another. The first will be the sud¬den signal of the Lord’ s presence. Then the dead in Christ will rise in immortal bodies. Last of all, the living will be changed. He declares: “ For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we that are alive, that are left unto the coming of the Lord, shall in no wise precede them that are fallen asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17.)] 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.— The fleshly, mortal, must be immortalized. [This confirms the preceding statement in regard to the raising of the dead, and the change of the living by showing the necessity of putting off the mortality common to them both. If the present bodies are to become incorrupt¬ible and immortal they must indeed be changed, so that that decay which is inherent in all nature must be done away, and they will then become as incapable of dying as they are now incapable of living beyond their alloted time.] 54 But when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, —When this is done death loses its power. [The striking parallelism of the two propositions marks the ascending movement of the thought as well as the growing exultation of feeling. Perhaps this applies to the resurrection of the bodies which have already passed through the dissolution of death.] and this mortal shall have put on immortality,—The immor¬tal will be no longer subject to death. Death will be swallowed up and destroyed. [This refers most likely to the transformation of bodies constantly threatened with death during their earthly life.] then shall come to pass the saying that is written,— This is added to denote the certainty of the fulfillment. God cannot lie. Death is swallowed up in victory.—[The state of perfect in¬ward vigor which excludes all possibility of outward decay. Such a life is victory gained forever over death its enemy. The deathless change is called a swallowing up, an absorption, of the mortal by the principle of life in Christ.] 55 O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?—These are the different forms of expressing the fact that death has been completely conquered. 56 The sting of death is sin;— Sin inflicts on the sinner a wound that is mortal, “ For the wages of sin is death.” (Romans 6:23.) and the power of sin is the law:— Sin exerts its power to bring about death through the law when it is violated. [The best comment on this expression is found in Romans 5:12-15 Romans 7:7-12. Paul was confronted with the horror of a broken law, which reminds him of a being infinitely holy, and of his own self-condemnation. ] 57 but thanks be to God, who giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.—For this blessed consummation of victory over sin and death, he breaks out into thanksgiving to God who has so wonderfully provided the great salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. 58 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, immovable,—In view of these riches and glories, he admonishes his brethren to be firm, steadfast, unmovable in the faith of the gospel. always abounding in the work of the Lord,—The work of the Lord is the work in which God has ordained that his chil¬dren shall walk. Their labor, doing his work in Christ’ s name, as his servants, ransomed and redeemed by the precious blood of Christ, is not in vain. God watches over, guards, and preserves that work as the work of his own Son whose redeemed servants we are. “ It is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good pleasure.” (Philippians 2 :13.) God’ s servants do the work of God. All work not in the Lord is vain and fruitless and must perish. If not in the Lord, it will go down to ruin. forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not vain in the Lord.—This applies to the whole sentence and its several clauses. They knew by this time, from the apostle’ s argument, that the living and the dead will appear before Christ, and that faithfulness will be rewarded with participation in Christ's glory; for every man’ s work will be tested. (1 Corinthians 3:13 1 Corinthians 4:5.) Paul began the discussion by declaring that, if there is no resurrection of the dead, his preaching and their faith are equally vain. He closes this argument with an appeal to their conviction that, because there will be a resurrection, their humble toil (1 Corinthians 3:8), from day to day in the work of the Lord, will be no more in vain than their faith in Christ, no more in vain than the ministry of the apostles, no more vain than Christ’ s death and resurrection. [Thus, with beautiful calmness and ease, does the apostle come down, in this closing verse, from the height to which he had risen in the verses immediately preceding, to the everyday work and warfare of life. Nor is this wonderful; for the spring of all Christian activity, energy, and progress lies in such soul-stirring themes as are handled in this chapter, whose practical outcome is expressed in this closing verse.] This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/zerrcbc/ 1 Corinthians 15:2. The mere believing of the Gospel will not save a person, but he must also keep in memory the truths concerning it. The phrase is from KATECHO, which Thayer defines, "to hold fast, keep secure, keep firm possession of." But all of these considerations would be in vain, according to the teaching of some persons at Corinth. (See verses 13, 14.) It is the purpose of the apostle to show them the logical conclusion that must follow if such a proposition is established, namely, that there is no resurrection of the dead (verse 12). By this they meant there would be no future resurrection of the body. They tried to teach some vague kind of theory that would make the word "resurrection" mean only a spiritual event, and that all of the facts concerning a raising of the body had already occurred--that it was "past already" (2 Timothy 2:18). In that passage Paul declares that such a doctrine was overthrowing the faith of some, which is equivalent to the phrase in our present verse, namely, believed in vain. Having advanced the serious conclusion necessarily following their false teaching, Paul repeats the facts of the Gospel to which he referred in verse 1. 1 Corinthians 15:3. Paul did not originate the story of the Gospel; in Galatians 1:12 he says he was taught it by the revelation of Jesus Christ. The mere death of Christ was not sufficient, for other men had died and even been resurrected. But Jesus is the only man who ever died for our sins. Accord, ing to the scriptures means the Old Testament. One outstanding portion is Isaiah 53, particularly verses 4, 5, 8 and 10. 1 Corinthians 15:4. The burial of Christ was not directly connected with our salvation, for had He not revived, whether in a grave or outside, no one would have been saved. But Jesus had predicted that he would spend three days and there nights in the heart of the earth, and his burial made that prediction true. Third day according to the scriptures. Psalms 16:10 is quoted by Peter in Acts 2:27 Acts 2:31, and Paul quotes it in Acts 13:35. This is the only passage in the Old Testament that directly predicts the resurrection of Christ, and yet it says nothing of the "third day," although Paul so applies it. The conclusion is to be seen by considering John 11:39 which shows that by the fourth day a body would begin to "see corruption." Jesus must not remain dead that long for his body was not to undergo that change. And yet it must remain the three days in order to fulfill the prediction in comparison with the three days and three nights that Jonah was in the body of a whale. 1 Corinthians 15:5. A few verses are given to cite the evidences of the bodily resurrection of Christ. Cephas was another name for Peter (John 1:40-42). He was one of the twelve, but is mentioned separately because he saw Jesus at a time when he was not with the rest of the apostles. 1 Corinthians 15:6. There is no other direct mention of these five hundred brethren, but Matthew 26:32 Matthew 28:7 Matthew 28:10 Matthew 28:16 indicates that Jesus saw many of his disciples in Galilee after his resurrection. For additional comments on this subject, see those at Acts 1:15 in volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary. 1 Corinthians 15:7. This James was not one of the twelve apostles, but was the one named in Acts 15:13 and Galatians 2:9, and is the author of the epistle of James. All the apostles means the eleven (Judas having killed himself), and Luke 24:33-36 gives the account of their seeing Him. 1 Corinthians 15:8. Last of all. From the time of Paul's journey to Damascus (Acts 9:3-5 Acts 26:16), no human being has seen Jesus that we know of. One born out of due time is from the Greek word EKTROMA, and Thayer defines It, "an abortion, abortive birth; an untimely birth." Paul uses the term to illustrate his feeling of unworthi ness to be called an apostle. Thayer's explanation of the word as the apostle uses it at this place is as follows: "Paul likens himself to an EKTROMA, and in verse 9 explains in what sense: that he is as inferior to the rest of the apostles as an immature birth comes short of a mature one, and is no more worthy of the name of an apostle than an abortion is of the name of a child." 1 Corinthians 15:9. This verse explains the feeling of inferiority that Paul expresses in the preceding verse. He specifices it to mean his record as a persecutor of the church of God. The extent of his persecution is indicated by the relief that his conversion brought to the churches throughout Palestine (Acts 9:31). 1 Corinthians 15:10. The grace of God is his unmerited favor, and Paul attributed all of his good lot to that source. To show his appreciation for the favor, he labored more than any of the other apostles. But even then he considered the labor as the work of God, using the apostle as an instrument for the work. 1 Corinthians 15:11-12. Having given proper credit for the work done under God, the apostle settles down upon the argument that is indicated in the beginning of the chapter. He will proceed to show the inconsistency between the professed faith of the Corinthians in the bodily resurrection of Christ, and their denial of a like event for those who die in Him. 1 Corinthians 15:13. This short verse states the major premise for the great argument that Paul intends to present. But the mere assertion of a basis for argument is not sufficient for the support of it, because that would be assuming the very point under discussion. The statement must be either self-evident, or be supported by vital facts or truths. In 1 Thessalonians 4:14 Paul makes virtually the same statement as the one in this verse. The death and rising again of Jesus is there coupled with the assurance of the bringing of the dead in Christ "with him" from their state of death. Since the body of Jesus (as to its material) was like that of all other men, it follows that it would be as impossible or unreasonable to believe in the resurrection of His body as to expect the same thing of the bodies of other men. Such a proposition is self-evident and needs no further evidence. Reasoning the other direction, therefore, if philosophy denies the bodily resurrection of men in general, then it must deny that of Christ, and hence the professed basis of the faith of the Corinthians, namely, the bodily resurrection of Christ, is disproved, and the major premise of Paul's great argument is established. 1 Corinthians 15:14. Having presented an unquestionable basis regarding the question in dispute, Paul will devote a number of verses showing some of the logical conclusions that must follow, thereby proving to the brethren that their whole program of religious activities and hope is fundamentally wrong. One conclusion is that the preaching of the apostles was in vain or of no avail. That necessarily would mean that their faith was vain, since it was based on the facts that had been preached to them. Reference is made to this "vain" belief in verse 2. 1 Corinthians 15:15. The Corinthian brethren would not intend to accuse the apostles of fraud, yet their theory about the resurrection implied that the preachers were guilty of it. They had preached that Christ was raised from the dead, but Paul has shown that it was false according to the teaching held at Corinth. 1 Corinthians 15:16-17. This paragraph is covered by comments over verses 2, 3, 13, 14. 1 Corinthians 15:18. The Corinthians had never been taught that eternal salvation was to be actually possessed before the end of the world. But if the dead were never to be raised, then their bodies would be destroyed along with that of the earth. That is why Paul says that those who had died in the Lord were perished, which means they had come to their end. 1 Corinthians 15:19. Another conclusion following this false theory advocated by some people at Corinth, is that all benefits to be had from being in Christ must be had in this life--nothing to be received after death. In that case Christians are the most miserable of all men, because they must be denied the pleasures of the world and also undergo many persecutions in behalf of their faith, with no prospect of any joys beyond the grave. While this was true especially of the apostles because of their direct contact with the enemy, it was and is still true of all faithful disciples of Christ. It is true that Christians should be the happiest people on earth, but that is because of their hope of endless bliss in the life to come. 1 Corinthians 15:20. Taking for granted he has proved his point, Paul reaffirms the third fact of the Gospel, namely, that Christ arose from the dead. The italicized words are significant in that they specify from what Jesus arose. He previously arose to the cross (John 12:32-33), and arose from earth to Heaven, but those facts were not in dispute; that from the dead was. The body is the only part of Christ or any other man that dies, hence if the body is not to be raised from the grave, then there will be no resurrection at. all. Paul has shown the awful conclusions made necessary by the theory that there is to be no resurrection of the dead. He will next show the glorious conclusions made possible by the truth of the resurrection. The first one is that Christ has become the firstfruits of them that slept; that is, he was the first person to rise from the dead to die no more. For detailed comments on this subject, see those on Romans 8:29, in volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary. 1 Corinthians 15:21. Adam was the first man, and after joining with his wife in eating of the forbidden fruit, they were both driven out of the garden and permanently prevented from reentering it. That cut them and all of their descendants off from the tree of life, so that all had to die whenever their bodies failed through disease or other causes. But none of Adam's descendants were to blame for that condition, hence God arranged it so that through another man's resurrection they could all be raised from the dead without any conditions on their part. 1 Corinthians 15:22. This verse specifices the two men of the preceding verse to be Adam and Christ. The lattter is called a man because he was given a body (Hebrews 10:5) that was like that of other men, in that It was fleshly and was subject to death. That made it possible for Him to die and be raised again, thereby opening the gates of death to all men to come therefrom. 1 Corinthians 15:23. The literal resurrection from the grave will come to all men whether they are good or bad, since they are not responsible for their bodily death. However, that experience is all that mankind in general will receive unconditionally from the resurrection of Christ. What will come to them after the resurrection depends on how they lived on earth (Daniel 12:2; John 5:28-29). This is why Paul makes the assertion of the words every man in his own order; that is, every man means of those who are the Lord's own. Some of them were raised immediately after the resurrection of Chirst among whom he was the firstfruits, then at His coming the others who are dead in Him will also be raised. While all mankind will be raised whether good or bad (verses 21, 22), yet from now on through the chapter the apostle will be writing only of those who are His and who have been "asleep in Jesus" (1 Thessalonians 4:14). 1 Corinthians 15:24. Then is an adverb of time, and refers to the words "at his coming" in the preceding verse. This verse gives the information as to what is to come to end at the coming of Christ, namely, the kingdom or rule of Christ. Paul directly says that the kingdom with Christ as its head will end when He comes, and he will deliver it up to his Father. From this inspired prediction come two other important truths, namely, that the kingdom of Christ will have been in existence before His second coming, and also that he will not be a king after that coming. Therefore, the doctrine that the kingdom is still a thing of the future, and that He will set up a thousand year reign when he comes is false. 1 Corinthians 15:25-26. When Jesus came from the dead to die no more, he annulled death or gave it the "death stroke" (2 Timothy 1:10). However, not until every human being has been brought back to life, will it be a fact that death is destroyed; Jesus must, be king until the great event is accomplished. This does not contradict the statement that He will give up his kingdom "at his coming," for all of the mentioned events, the coming of Jesus. the resurrection of the dead and the transfer of the kingdom to his Father, will take place "in a moment" (verse 52). After the dead have all been raised to die no more (as to bodily death), the triumph will be complete, and Jesus will then be qualified to relinquish the kingdom to God who shall continue to reign endlessly, thus putting the final fulfillment to the prediction that the kingdom of "the God of Heaven" shall "stand for ever" (Daniel 2:44). 1 Corinthians 15:27. The pronouns stand for God and his Son. God has put all things under the feet of Christ except himself. Jesus declared this fact in Matthew 28:18, and it was on that basis that He gave to his apostles the Great Commission. 1 Corinthians 15:28. Eliminating the pronouns, this verse means that after the Son has brought all things under subjection, then that Son will become subject unto God the Father. The grand motive for this consumation is that God may be all in all. 1 Corinthians 15:29. What shall they do. The pronoun is in the third person, while Paul is writing to the church in general as in the second person. This shows that not all persons in the Corinthian church were practicing this baptism, even as not all were denying the resurrection, as is indicated by the words "how say some among you" (verse 12). This item must not be overlooked in considering this verse, for any professed explanation of it that would apply to all Christians in general would necessarily be wrong. The word for is from HUPER and Thayer defines it at this place, "in the place of, instead of." I shall quote Moffatt's translation of this verse: "Otherwise, if there is no such thing as a resurrection, what is the meaning of people getting baptized on behalf of their dead? If dead men do not rise at all, why do people get baptized on their behalf?" Not all of the brethren in Corinth were practicing this inconsistency of being baptized on behalf of their dead, neither were all of them denying the resurrection (verse 12). But Paul considered it necessary to notice them in his epistle to the whole church, even as he deemed it worth while to notice the group that was practicing this "proxy" baptism. The apostle does not endorse the foolish practice, but brings it up to expose their inconsistency. 1 Corinthians 15:30. Stand in jeopardy means to be in danger of death from the enemies of Christ. All Christians and especially the apostles were constantly being persecuted (verse 19), some of them even unto death. How foolish, then, to cling to a profession that threatens one with death if there is to be no resurrection. 1 Corinthians 15:31. I die daily is figurative, meaning that Paul was daily exposed to the danger of death because of his service to Christ. 1 Corinthians 15:32. I have fought with beasts. These words are all from the one Greek word , and Thaver defines it, "to fight with wild beasts." I believe this was a literal experience of Paul and shall state my reasons. We know it was an action that endangered the physical life of the participant, else Paul would not have connected it with the resurrection in his reasoning. It is certain that he has the same event in mind in 2 Corinthians 1:8-10, where he relates that he had "despaired even of life." He did not know whether the Lord was ready to release his faithful apostle from his labors through this event, hence he was willing to do his part in the combat with the beasts, trusting in God to help him overcome the beasts if He so willed. Or, if that was not the case, he would meet his fate with his trust in God "which raiseth the dead." Furthermore, had it been vicious men who attacked him, he would not have "resisted the evil" (Matthew 5:39), but would have submitted to his fate as he did when he was subjected to other threatening brutalities. Let us eat and drink is said as representing all the fleshly pleasures of this life. If there is no life beyond the grave, there would be no reason for denying ourselves any of the fleshly pleasures of this world. 1 Corinthians 15:33. The original for evil communications is translated "bad company" by James Macknight, and Thayer's lexicon agrees with it. Thayer defines the original of manners, "custom, usage, morals, character." We have seen that not all of the brethren at Corinth were advocating this evil doctrine concerning the resurrection. This verse is a warning against others having company with such bad teachers, lest they also be drawn into the heresy. If a man does not believe that he will live again, it is logical that he would be tempted to engage in that which would give him fleshly pleasure, and hence his otherwise good practices would become corrupted. 1 Corinthians 15:34. This is a further warning against being led into the sin of these false teachers. Paul attributes their evil doctrine to ignorance of God, Just as Christ charged the Sadducees on the same subject, that of the resurrection (Matthew 22:23-29). The apostle considers it a shame that some of the Corinthians were so ignorant of the wisdom and power of God. 1 Corinthians 15:35. When advocates of error cannot offer a just defense of their own position, nor show an honest objection to that of their opponent, it is often a trick of theirs to pose a quibbling question which they think will puzzle him. As if a man is required logically to account for all the apparent difficulties that his position may suggest. Nothing could be farther from the truth, nor from the universal practice of reasonable men in accepting a conclusion that has been shown to be fundamentally sound, notwithstanding any incidental items that cannot be explained. Such a subterfuge as herein described was resorted to by the promoters of the heresy that Paul was exposing, when they asked with what body do they [the dead] comet Even if Paul could not have answered such a question, that would not have proved that the dead could not come to life again. 1 Corinthians 15:36. Fool is from APHEON, and Thayer defines it, "senseless, foolish, stupid; without reflection or intelligence, acting rashly." It does not mean that the person does not have natural mental ability, for then he could not justly be censured. But he is one so devoted to his notion that he will not use his mind to consider other matters with which he is familiar, and which would meet his own quibble in the question at hand. Such a matter is the well known truth that a vegetable grain will never reproduce its kind unless it dies and mingles with the earth in which it was placed. 1 Corinthians 15:37. Bare is from GUMNOS, which literally means "naked." The Englishman's Greek New Testament uses the indefinite article "a" in connection with it, making the phrase read, "a bare grain." The verse means that a man puts a mere grain of any kind in the ground from which he expects a crop; not the grain just as he placed it in the soil. And when it dies and decomposes, it partakes of the materials around it and from them a new body Is formed with added parts. And while it is another body in one sense, in another it is the same, for the new growth is produced out of the old seed or body. Paul uses this circumstance to illustrate the death and resurrection of the body of a faithful servant of Christ. According to the theory of the ones in Corinth whose heresy Paul was exposing, and of all others today who say that our bodies will never come from the grave at the last day--accord-ing to them, the grain should just all remain in the ground, and in another spot of the earth the farmer would dig up some other grain and consider it as his new crop. No, the bodies of the saints will all come forth, but they will be in another form which will be like that of Christ at his coming (Philippians 3:21). It may chance of wheat, etc. Paul uses the wheat for his illustration, but the same reasoning would be true of any other grain. 1 Corinthians 15:38. The stock with its roots, leaves and fruit, is the new body that God is pleased to give to the original grain. Likewise, He will give to the body of the dead in Christ another form, that will be like the immortal body of his Son, possessed with the new harvest of eternal glory. 1 Corinthians 15:39. To show that it is in keeping with the works of God to have the body of a saint take on another form (although it Is the same body), Paul refers his readers to other conditions in the creation, such as the different kinds of flesh. 1 Corinthians 15:40. He uses this as still another illustration of God's wisdom and power. Celestial means of the air or sky, terrestrial means pertaining to the earth. 1 Corinthians 15:41. The sun and other bodies in the universe all have their own peculiar form and glory, showing that the Creator is not limited in the number and kinds of bodies that He may create. 1 Corinthians 15:42. God's ability to create and change and otherwise manage all of His works has been shown by the preceding verses. The apostle now comes directly to the subject under discussion, the possibility and character of the resurrection. The dead is the antecedent of the pronoun it, which certainly proves beyond all question that it is the body that is to be resurrected, since it is the only part of man that ever dies literally. Corruption means to be subject to decay, and incorruption means the opposite. 1 Corinthians 15:43. Dishonor is not used in any moral sense, for the same kind of body was possessed by Jesus that Paul is writing about here. It means the state that would be subject to decomposition, which the body of Jesus had which was the reason he must not have remained dead more than three days and nights. Raised in glory means more than an existence that is never to end (the wicked will have that; Mark 9:44 Mark 9:46 Mark 9:48). but a state in which the body will be given the same glorious form as that of Jesus in his present condition (Philippians 3:21; 1 John 3:2). Weakness and power are used for the same purpose as the preceding terms because they are opposites. 1 Corinthians 15:44. Natural and spiritual bodies are applied to the same thing, namely, the human body. But the first applies to it when it is sawn (is placed in the grave), the second applies to it when it will be resurrected. The false teachers in Corinth, and all others today who deny the resurrection of the body, are disposed to ignore this verse. They say it is impossible for a material thing to be changed into an immaterial one, thus limiting the power of the Creator. Yet in the realm of nature as they must recognize it, there is an indisputable proof of changes virtually as great. For instance; the universe is divided into three distinct classes, namely, the mineral, the vegetable and the animal. The first is inorganic and the others are organic. Notwithstanding these independent and different existences, the inorganic mineral is absorbed into the vegetable, the vegetable is next absorbed and converted into the animal. If there is a Creator who can establish such laws of change within our own knowledge, why doubt His power to lift the animal to one more stage and convert it into a spiritual state? With God all things are possible that are right (Genesis 18:14). 1 Corinthians 15:45. This statement is written In Genesis 2:7, and Paul calls Adam the first man. This refutes a theory of some visionary followers of a visionary false teacher, that a prior creation of man occurred to that recorded in Genesis. The last Adam is Christ according to Romans 5:14, considered in connection with verse 22 here. 1 Corinthians 15:46. The first Adam did not give us a spiritual body, but instead it is one that was made subject to death and decay by being separated from the tree of life. After that came Christ who has the power to give a spiritual body to all His faithful followers. 1 Corinthians 15:47. This is virtually the same as the preceding verse. 1 Corinthians 15:48. This offers the same thought as that in verse 45. 1 Corinthians 15:49. All men whether good or bad receive their fleshly bodies from Adam. Likewise, all will be brought from the dead through the second Adam, whether good or bad as taught in verse 23. But in addition to this, those who die in Christ will come from the dead with a heavenly body. To avoid a misunderstanding, let it be said that every human being regardless of conduct will be raised from the dead, and will continue to exist consciously without end. But only the righteous have been promised a body like that of Jesus. This should not confuse any person, for God is able to preserve the bodies of men continuously in whatever form He sees fit. Hence we read that the bodies of the unsaved will be cast into the lake of unquenchable fire, where their worm dieth not (Mark 9:44 Mark 9:46 Mark 9:48). Those who say that the wicked will have immortal bodies are making an assertion without showing any proof. 1 Corinthians 15:50 Inherit is from KLERONO-MEO, and Thayer defines it at this passage, "to partake of eternal salvation in the Messiah's kingdom." That is why those to be admitted into the eternal home in the next life must be changed from a body of flesh and blood, to one that is spiritual and like that of the Saviour. But such a change of body is not necessary with the unsaved, for there is no restriction as to what kind of beings can enter into the lake of fire and brimstone, since God is able to preserve all creatures cast therein in whatever state He sees fit. 1 Corinthians 15:51. Mystery is from MU-STERION, and Thayer's second definition is, "a hidden purpose or counsel; secret will." It does not necessarily mean something that is complicated or technical in its nature, but only that it has not been hitherto made known. Sleep is a figurative term that is defined in the lexicon, "to die." The same truth is stated in 1 Thessalonians 4:14-15. In each of these passages the connection shows Paul is sneaking only of faithful disciples of Christ. We thus have the precious information that as long as the earth exists there will be those who are true to the Lord, and hence that saving faith "shall not perish from the earth." But though Christians living at the coming of Christ will not die, they will have to be changed, as the preceding verse states that a fleshly body cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Here Is another point against the heresy that our bodies will not rise nor go to Heaven. These Christians will not die, hence their soul and body will never separate. Yet they are to be taken to be ever with the Lord as Paul asserts in the pas sage cited in 1 Thessalonians. And if God can and will convert the flesh and blood bodies of these living Christians into a spiritual form that will be fit to "ever be with the Lord," it is foolish to deny His power to effect the same change in the bodies of those who are "dead in Christ." 1 Corinthians 15:52. This verse is virtually the same as the preceding one, except that it adds the information that the resurrection of these saints and the changing of the living ones, will all take place at one instant. 1 Corinthians 15:53. The body is the only part of man that is corruptible and mortal, hence it is the body that is to be changed into an incorruptible and immortal form. This applies necessarily to both dead and living in Christ when he comes. 1 Corinthians 15:54. When the change just mentioned has occurred, a prediction in Isaiah 25:8 will be fulfilled, namely, death is swallowed up in victory. 1 Corinthians 15:55. Where is thy sting?, etc., is a shout of triumph by the saints, as they rejoice in their victory over death. 1 Corinthians 15:56. Sting of death means that because of sin death threatened the human race with the sting of God's eternal wrath. The strength or effect of sin in bringing about this sting, is through the law against sin, which makes mankind responsible for their conduct. 1 Corinthians 15:57. The victory does not mean only the rising from the dead, for all mankind will have that regardless of conduct. But Paul has been writing about the faithful in Christ only from verse 23. Hence this victory means that one over the eternal results of individual sin, which is to be accomplished by faithful service to our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 15:58. The grand conclusion to the argument of the chapter is stated in this verse. Since death does not "end it all," but the faithful shall enjoy endless bliss in the world to come, even though death from whatever cause may intervene, they have great reason to press on in their service to Him. There is not much difference between stedfast and unmoveable. The first means to have a fixed purpose in life. the second means to be determined not to be moved from that purpose. Abounding is from , which Thayer defines, "to be pre-eminent, to excel." Of course it means for each Christian to excel himself-never to be satisfied with present attainments in the Lord's work, but ever striving to "grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" (2 Peter 3:18). David Lipscomb Commentary On 1 Corinthians 16 OF THE EPISTLE WITH VARIOUS , AND , AND 1 Corinthians 16:1-24 1 Now concerning the collection—The occasion of this collection was the “ great famine over all the world,” predicted by Agabus, “ which came to pass in the days of Claudius.” (Acts 11:27-28.) This fell with great severity upon Judea and Jerusalem, and the poor Christians who were despised by their Jewish brethren as traitors to the faith, so that their lot was especially hard. In prospect of the coming calamity, the Gen¬tile Christians of Antioch at once “ determined to send relief unto the brethren that dwelt in Judaea: which also they did, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul.” (Acts 11:29-30.) Paul, intent on soothing the prejudices of his Jewish brethren against the Gentile Christians seems to have resolved on utilizing the example of the Antioch Christians by gathering funds from other Gentile churches for the relief of the Christians in Judea. It is likely that he broached the proposal first at Corinth where it was taken up with great zeal. (2 Corinthians 9:1-2 2 Corinthians 8:10.) He then laid the matter before Macedonia and Achaia (Romans 15:26), and the churches of Galatia. The great object in view, over and above the tempo¬ral relief which the contribution would give, being to soften the prejudices of the Jewish Christians against their Gentile brethren. for the saints,—The saints were the poor Christians in Judea. (Romans 15:26.) This would remind the Corinthians that, in giving, it was to the Lord’ s people, their own brethren in the Lord. as I gave order to the churches of Galatia, so also do ye.—This no doubt points to the detailed and explicit character of the directions given to the churches df Galatia as to the manner of raising the contribution. And the order is pointed out in the following verse. This order seems to have been universal. 2 Upon the first day of the week—Unto the apostles and early disciples the first day of the week was very significant and important. Christ was raised from the dead on the first day of the week. He met with his disciples on three succeeding first days of the week after his resurrection, and there is no evidence that he met with them at any other time. The Holy Spirit descended on Pentecost, the first day of the week, The disciples met together on the first day of the week, under apostolic teaching, “ to break bread.” (Acts 20:7.) Paul said: “ Not forsaking our own assembling together, as the custom of some is.” (Hebrews 10:25.) That the assembly on the first day of the week was to engage in “ the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers” (Acts 2:42), is clearly set forth. It is the only regular service for which there is precept or example in the New Testament. let each one of you lay by him in store,—On the first day of the week, each should separate or lay by itself something, casting it into the treasury. Some contend that the storing was to be at home, but that would be incompatible with the idea “ that no collections be made when I come,” for if stored at home, it would have to be gathered when he came. It was to be separated at home from the amount not given, then cast into the treasury. [The collection was directed to be made weekly, because it is easier to contribute in small amounts than all at once; and on the Lord’ s day when the thought of the Lord’ s resurrection should touch every man’ s heart to peculiar gratitude. Each one was to esteem it his duty and privilege to give to the Lord’ s work. It was not to be confined to the rich only, but was the common duty of all.] as he may prosper,—[The amount is to be fixed by each one in proportion to his weekly gains, remembering that “ he that soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Let each man do according as he hath purposed in his heart: not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.” (2 Corinthians 9:6-7.) The words do not imply that only in case of exceptional prosperity was a man to contribute, but every one was to give out of whatever fruits he had from his labors.] that no collections be made when I come.—[The object of this measure is that the collection may be ready when Paul comes, and that there may be nothing to do except to lift it, which will be done quickly and easily, and will give an am¬pler sum than if the gift were all bestowed at one time.] 3 And when I arrive, whomsoever ye shall approve, them will I send with letters to carry your bounty unto Jerusalem: —Paul was not to receive the money himself. It was to be given to men selected and approved by the church, whom Paul would send, furnished with letters from himself, to the church in Jerusalem. There were no facilities for commercial exchange, the money was bulky and heavy, and a company would be a protection against robbers. So a number was selected to carry this fund to Jerusalem. A list of those who accompanied Paul to Jerusalem is given in Acts 20:4. He went through Asia where it is likely that this number was increased, as there were contributions from Asia for the same purpose, and some brethren from Asia were with him after he reached Jerusalem. [If Paul deemed it wise to place himself above suspicion, and to avoid giving even the most malicious the opportunity of calling his integrity and honesty in question, as is intimated here, and expressly stated in 2 Corinthians 8:19-21, it must be wise for other men to act with equal caution. If called upon to disburse the money of others, or of the church, let that money, if possible, be disbursed in cooperation with others,, that they may know that it is handled honestly and used as directed.] 4 and if it be meet for me to go also, they shall go with me.—He wrote the church that, if it was best, he would accompany their messengers. This was to be determined after he reached Corinth and consulted with them. He went, and it was his last trip to Jerusalem. In his defense before Felix, he said: “ Now after some years I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings.” (Acts 24:17.) TO A VISIT TO THE SOON TO BE MADE BY THE APOSTLE 1 Corinthians 16:5-9 5 But I will come unto you, when I shall have passed through Macedonia; for I pass through Macedonia;—His previous intention was to go direct to Corinth (2 Corinthians 1:15-16), and proceed from there to Macedonia, then return from Mace¬donia to Corinth, and thence on to Jerusalem. This plan, however, he had altered. (2 Corinthians 1:15 2 Corinthians 1:23.) [He now intends to journey first through Macedonia and then to Corinth. In the Second Epistle we see him actually engaged on this journey in Macedonia (1 Corinthians 2:13 1 Corinthians 8:1 1 Corinthians 9:2-4) ; and upon the way to Corinth (1 Corinthians 2:1 1 Corinthians 12:14 1 Corinthians 13:1). The account given in Acts (Acts 20:1-2) agrees with this. This change was made in order to spare them. (2 Corinthians 1:23.) He wishes to give them time, while he would be in Macedonia, to heal their divisions, to deliver to Satan the incestuous man, and amend their conduct in the assemblies of the church.] 6 but with you it may be that I shall abide, or even winter, —He expresses the probability of remaining with them through the winter. From Acts (Acts 20:2-3) we learn that he came into Greece (Corinth), and abode there three months, [which were winter months. The summer months of that year he had spent in Macedonia, and he “ was hastening, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost” (Acts 20:16) ; but as the Aegean Sea was not favorable for navigation till spring, he spent the intervening winter at Corinth.] that ye may set me forward on my journey—Whether this means help forward with money, conveyance, or merely en¬courage him with their company, is not certain. [This accompanying forward the teachers of the gospel was an established custom in the early days of the church. (Acts 15:3 Acts 20:38 Acts 21:5; Romans 15:24; 2 Corinthians 1:16; Titus 3:13; 3 John 1:6.)] whithersoever I go.—[Paul well knew that some uncer¬tainty must attach to his plans. As it was, he had to change his plans at the last moment. His intention was to sail from Corinth, but, owing to a plot to assassinate him, he changed his plan and went the overland route through Macedonia. (Acts 20:3.)] 7 For I do not wish to see you now by the way;—He did not expect to see them on his trip to Macedonia, but would see them as he returned. [It seems that the information which Paul received in Ephesus concerning the disorders in the Corinthian church caused him to write this letter, instead of making them a passing visit, and to defer his visit for some months in order that this letter might have time to produce its effect. The same reason caused him, when he did go to Cor¬inth, to remain there some time, that he might correct the abuses which had sprung up in his absence. The Second Epis¬tle shows how anxious he was about the effects of this letter, and how overjoyed he was when Titus brought him word that it had brought them to repentance.] for I hope to tarry a while with you,—[As things were between them and him time was necessary to make everything clear, and consequently he defers his future visit until he shall be able to prolong the visit as much as necessary.] if the Lord permit.— [Paul regarded the entering on a jour¬ney as dependent on the will of the Lord, and felt that he had all in his hands. Christians ought to follow up all their plans and deliberations with this thought in mind; for it is rashness to undertake and determine things of the future while we have not even a moment in our power. The main thing indeed is that, in the affection of the heart, we submit to the Lord and his providence in everything that we undertake and resolve upon— that whenever we have to do with what is future we should make everything dependent upon the divine will.] 8 But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost;—This was before the Pentecost in the year preceding his last journey to Jerusalem. Pentecost was fifty days after the Passover. The Passover of the next year, he was in Jerusalem. This letter was written between the Passover and Pentecost the year previous to this last trip to Jerusalem. 9 for a great door and effectual is opened unto me,—The reason given for remaining was that there was a good opening for preaching the gospel, and many ready to hear and obey. [The metaphor of an open door to represent the access of the preacher to the hearts of the people was a favorite with Paul. When he and Barnabas returned to Antioch from the first mission ever sent to the heathen world, “ they rehearsed all things that God had done with them, and that he had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles” (Acts 14:27) ; reporting the favorable outlook at Troas, he said: “ When I came to Troas for the gospel of Christ, and when a door was opened unto me in the Lord, I had no relief for my spirit” (2 Corinthians 2:12-13) ; unto the Colossians he said “ Continue steadfastly in prayer, watching therein with thanksgiving; withal praying for us also, that God may open unto us a door for the word, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in bonds” (Colossians 4:2-3) ; and of the Thessalonians he requested: “ Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may run and be glorified” (2 Thessalonians 3:1). The account of the great and effectual opening for the gospel, and the virulence of the adversaries, is given in Acts 19:8-20. and there are many adversaries.—It was necessary for him to stay and refute them. The much opposition made him leave a place when none would obey; but when many obeyed, it was needful that he should stay and reap the harvest and meet the adversaries. [But Satan would not suffer the great success of the gospel without great opposition. There was no small stir which ended in the dangerous riot in the theatre, and Paul’ s departure to Macedonia.] TO TIMOTHY AND APOLLOS1 Corinthians 16:10-12 10 Now if Timothy come,—[We learn from Acts 19:22) that Paul had dispatched Timothy, accompanied by Erastus, to Macedonia, and desired him to continue his journey to Corinth; but as his time was limited, he did not feel sure that he would reach there. His route took him through the churches which he had assisted in founding. It is probable that, after accomplishing the special work assigned to him, he was intercepted by Titus who prevented his reaching Corinth, and this seems to have happened, for Titus and Timothy returning, met Paul, possibly at Thessalonica where Paul wrote the Sec¬ond Epistle to the Corinthians, and join him in the greeting to the church; but only Titus is spoken of as having brought any report from Corinth. (2 Corinthians 7:6-7 2 Corinthians 7:13.) ] see that he be with you without fear;—Timothy was young and an ardent friend of Paul, who had some strong enemies in Corinth. These were liable to mistreat Timothy. for he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do:—If they put difficulties in Timothy’ s way, they will be hindering the work which God has given Paul to do. (1 Corinthians 4:17; Philemon 1:19-21.)] 11 let no man therefore despise him.—Paul exhorted Timothy to “ let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an ensample to them that believe, in word, in manner of life, in love, in faith, in purity.” (1 Timothy 4:12.) The admonition here is that the Corinthians should not despise him or lightly esteem him on account of his youth, or hinder his work. But set him forward on his journey in peace, that he may come unto me:—Set him on his way with every mark of respect, and with whatever he needs. for I expect him with the brethren.— [Erastus is mentioned by Luke as being with Timothy (Acts 19:22) ; but this by no means excludes the possibility of others having gone with them, or of expecting that Timothy be joined by Titus and others on his return fulfilling his mission.] 12 But as touching Apollos the brother,—Apollos is presented to us at Ephesus as a man, mighty in the Old Testament Scriptures, knowing only John’ s baptism, whom Priscilla and Aquila took to themselves, “ and expounded unto him the way of God more accurately. And when he was minded to pass over into Achaia, the brethren encouraged him, and wrote to the disciples to receive him: and when he was come, he helped them much that had believed through grace; for he powerfully confuted the Jews, and that publicly, showing by the scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.” (Acts 18:24-28.) One of the parties at Corinth claimed him as their leader. For this and some other reasons, it has been claimed that he was the opponent of Paul at Corinth mentioned in this letter. (1: 12; 3: 4-6.) I besought him much to come unto you with the brethren: —Paul besought Apollos to go to Corinth to use his influence to correct the evils at work there, and this shows the close relation that existed between them and the unreasonableness of regarding them as representatives of rival parties. and it was not at all his will to come now; but he will come when he shall have opportunity.— He declined going at that time, but promised that he would go at a convenient time. Paul always spoke of Apollos with brotherly love. There was no conflict between them. GENERAL 1 Corinthians 16:13-14 13 Watch ye,—Be watchful and careful in deportment. [They were to watch or be vigilant, against the evils of which they had been admonished— of dissensions, of erroneous teaching, and of disorders. They were to watch lest their souls should be ruined, and their salvation endangered; lest the enemy of the truth and of holiness should steal silently upon them, and surprise them.] stand fast in the faith,—[“ The faith” is a synonym for the gospel. They were to surrender themselves in mind and heart in obedience to the gospel, and abide in it in their daily life. So many are the impulses within, so many are the forces with¬out, opposing the work, that nothing but an invincible determination could carry them through. They must be strong enough to bend and subordinate everything to the fruit. Paul said; “ One thing I do, forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before, I press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let us, therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus minded: . . . only, whereunto we have attained, by that same rule let us walk.” (Philippians 3:13-16.)] quit you like men,—Discharge the duties like true men. [Be not cowards, or timid, or alarmed at enemies, but be bold and brave.] be strong.—Trust God, and go forth doing his will, and his strength will be with you. 14 Let all that ye do be done in love.—All their affairs were to be conducted in a spirit of love to God and man. SPECIAL AND OTHERS 1 Corinthians 16:15-18 15 Now I beseech you, brethren (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits—The house of Stephanas was among the first who became Christians in Achaia. They were among the few baptized by the hands of Paul, probably before Silas and Timothy reached Corinth. of Achaia,—[Originally Achaia was a state of Greece situated in the northern part of the Peloponnesus, and comprehended Corinth and its isthmus. After Greece had been conquered by the Romans, the emperor Augustus Caesar divided the country, with the adjacent regions into two regions, Macedonia and Achaia. The latter comprehended the whole of the Peloponnesus, with continental Greece south of Illyricum, Epirus, and Thessaly. Corinth was the capital, and was the residence of the proconsul by whom the province was ruled. It is in the second or comprehensive sense that the word Achaia is used in the New Testament. (Acts 18:12 Acts 18:27 Acts 19:21; Romans 15:26; 2 Corinthians 1:1 2 Corinthians 9:2; 1 Thessalonians 1:7-8.)] and that they have set themselves to minister unto the saints),—They gave themselves to ministering to the poor, afflicted saints, and helping those who preached the gospel. 16 that ye also be in subjection unto such,—The church should pay deference to such as were the oldest of the members and who gave themselves to the service of the Lord as well as to all who were helpers and laborers with the apostles. and to every one that helpeth in the work and laboreth.— Experience and association with the apostles made them able to advise wisely. [To every faithful toiler for Christ the Christian should give earnest and hearty support.] 17 And I rejoice at the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus:—Of Fortunatus and Achaicus nothing is known further than that which is here given. for that which was lacking on your part they supplied.— The deficiency felt by Paul from the absence of the Corinthians, and the impossibility of communicating directly with them, had been supplied by their messengers, because it seemed to him as if in these three men he had the whole church with him. 18 For they refreshed my spirit—They had refreshed him by the help rendered. [They had dispelled the uneasiness which filled Paul’ s heart in regard to them, by telling him of the church, and perhaps, by showing him many things in a less distressing light than he had supposed, they had given him real comfort.] and yours:—The information carried back to Corinth was encouraging to the church, for it would be a great comfort to them to learn what a comfort their messengers had been to Paul. acknowledge ye therefore them that are such.—They should acknowledge and show the regard due them for their valuable work. 1 Corinthians 16:19-24 19 The churches of Asia salute you.—The Roman province of Asia embraced Mysia, Lydia, Phrygia, and Caria, with Ephesus as its capital. In the New Testament, Asia always de¬notes the Roman province. To salute any one in the Lord is to salute him as a Christian. The salutations were, “ God be with and bless you.” It seems that the writing of this letter was discussed in his meeting with the churches wherever he was and they desired that their greetings should be sent to the Corinthian church. Aquila and Prisca salute you much in the Lord,—Aquila and Prisca were born in Pontus, lived in Rome for a time, but were compelled to leave that city when Emperor Claudius commanded all its Jewish inhabitants to depart. He removed to Corinth, where he worked at his craft of tentmaking. Paul, who was of the same occupation, lodged with them, and formed strong attachments to them. They were his fellow passengers from Corinth as far as Ephesus, on his way to Syria. At Ephesus they met Apollos, “ and expounded unto him the way of God more accurately.” (Acts 18:1-4 Acts 18:18-19 Acts 18:26.) Now they have a church meeting in their house. Soon after this they are in Rome again where they also have a church in their house. Paul calls them his “ fellow-workers in Christ Jesus, who for my life laid down their own necks; unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles.” (Romans 16:3-5.) They had rendered great service in spreading the gospel among the Gentiles. with the church that is in their house.—They, as old laborers at Corinth, with the church in their house, join in sending salutations of love to the Corinthian brethren. 20 All the brethren salute you.—All the Christians with whom Paul was connected in Ephesus. They felt deep interest in the Christians at Corinth, and sent to them Christian salutations. Salute one another with a holy kiss.—Some regard this as ordaining a manner of salutation that was to be perpetual and universal among the disciples; but no ordinance of God was so treated. All the commands and ordinances were commanded by Jesus Christ, repeated by the apostles, and recorded in his life and teachings as part of his work; not left simply to the salutations and greetings at the close of the epistles to the churches. Take baptism: it was introduced by John, approved by Jesus during his personal ministry, commanded in the commission (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:16), and in the first sermon by the Holy Spirit on Pentecost, is constantly presented in Acts of Apostles, then through the episties to the churches. Or, take the Lord’ s Supper : it was solemnly instituted by Jesus, with the command to the disciples to do it in remembrance of him. Then the Holy Spirit presents it (Acts 2:42) ; it is observed by the disciples, with apostolic approval (Acts 20:7) ; then it was commanded, in the main body of the epistles, to be observed by the disciples. On the other hand, Jesus did not practice or command kissing, so far as recorded. We have no example of the apostles practicing it. It is mentioned only when the apostles were sending salutations to others, being thereby reminded of their method of salutation. If it was intended as an ordinance of God, I do not see why it was treated so differently from his other ordinances and commands. 21 The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand.—Some one wrote the body of the epistle for the apostle, but this closing salutation was done by his own hand, which was an en¬dorsement of the epistle as his own. 22 If any man loveth not the Lord, let him be anathema.— The refusal to love Christ on the part of a professed Christian deserves anathema, “ for this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” (1 John 5:3.) [The word anathema solemnly pronounces that which the Lord at his coming will confirm and ratify. This sentence is a stern epitome of the whole epistle: If any one by profligacy, by contentiousness, by covetousness, by idolatry, by arrogance, by heresy, evinces an utter lack of the love of the Lord Jesus Christ, he must abide the consequences of his moral status— there is no outlook in the future for such a man, he “ shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (2 Thessalonians 1:9), hence the words that follow.] Maranatha.—[This is an Aramaic expression on which scholars are not agreed as to whether it means “ the Lord has come,” or “ our Lord has come,” or “ our Lord cometh,” or “ our Lord, come.” With “ our Lord cometh” compare James 5:8; Revelation 1:7 Revelation 3:11; and this agrees with the context and the substance of the epistle. If this be right, the saying is admonitory. It warns them that at any moment they may have to answer for their shortcomings. Why this warning is given in Aramaic rather than in Greek is unknown.] 23 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you.—[Paul calmly passes to the closing prayer that the grace of Christ should abide with them. The risen Christ is the source of all spiritual blessings. (2 Corinthians 12:9.) The prayer is for the ever-abiding intercourse, which is the strongest possible contrast to the utter rejection implied in the anathema, and the anticipation by faith of the coming of the Lord. It is the grace of Jesus Christ, inasmuch as the love of God becomes an actual gift to man through Christ.] 24 My love be with you all in Christ Jesus.—He assures them of the continuance of his love towards them. [Though he had much occasion to rebuke, and even threaten, he sends his love to all, even to those who caused division, who called themselves by the names of men, who had abetted the fornicator, and who had denied the resurrection. They had none of them sinned so far as to be out of reach of the love of God, and so he sends to them his love. His love would be the love of one who had them ever in his heart, his prayers, and his sympathy. This is a suitable conclusion to an epistle containing so much reproof and ending with so tremendous a curse. For every word had been prompted by genuine love for every one of them. Thus Paul himself is an example of that which he prescribes for others (verse 14). His affection goes out after, and rests upon, and remains with, all of them. It is well to note that the epistle begins and ends with Jesus Christ.] Amen.—[So be it, may it be as has been asked, said, promised, or threatened. (Deuteronomy 27:15-26; 2 Corinthians 1:20.) To render it more emphatic, it is sometimes repeated. (Numbers 5:22.) Jesus begins many of his sayings with this word, which is then translated “ verily.” This idiom is peculiar to him. The proper signification of it here is to confirm the words of this epistle and invoke the fulfillment of them.] Verse 1 1 Corinthians 16Paul abruptly left off speaking of the glorious resurrection and plunged into practical matters, giving instruction with regard to the projected contribution for the poor in Jerusalem (1 Corinthians 16:1-8), recommending their acceptance of Timothy, and writing a five-point summary of the whole epistle (1 Corinthians 16:9-13). He concluded with various greetings (1 Corinthians 16:14-20), and his personal salutation and signature (1 Corinthians 16:21-24). Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I gave order to the churches of Galatia, so also do ye. (1 Corinthians 16:1) The proposed beneficiaries of this collection were the poor Christians in Jerusalem; and Paul had busied himself extensively in the advocacy and promotion of this gathering of funds for their relief. A number of very important considerations are suggested by this. The reasons behind Paul's engagement in the fund-raising were as follows: (a) It had been strongly recommended at the so-called council in Jerusalem (Galatians 2:10). (b) It was drastically necessary from a humanitarian viewpoint. The persecutions that arose around the martyrdom of Stephen had left many in a state of dire need. As Adam Clarke said, "The enmity of their countrymen to the gospel of Christ led them to treat those who professed it with cruelty, and spoil them of their goods."[1] Furthermore, the excessive generosity of many during the days of that so-called communism (Acts 2:45) had brought practically the whole church to a state of destitution. Communism, even of the benevolent and non-violent kind practiced in the primitive church, has never been capable of producing anything except poverty, as attested this very day by the economic conditions of the whole Communist world. (c) As Lipscomb noted, "There was also Paul's effort to soften the prejudices of the Jewish Christians against their Gentile brethren."[2] (d) It was a way of demonstrating the unity of the Church. As Barclay put it, "It was a way of teaching the scattered Christians that they were not (merely) members of a congregation, but members of the church."[3] (e) It was a way of stressing giving as a vital doctrine of Christianity. (f) It was an implementation of the principle that Christians are saved to serve. (g) It was a way of strengthening the givers in the faith of Christ. One reason for that collection, as alleged by some, is not valid. Farrar said, "It was the only way the Gentile churches could show their gratitude to the mother church!"[4] It was not Jerusalem, however, but Antioch, which was, in a sense, the mother church of the Gentile congregations; and in the light of Paul's statement that the real "mother" church is "the Jerusalem which is above" (Galatians 4:26), it is apparent that the Mother Church virus which has plagued humanity had not been any particular motivation of Paul's collection. There could be another thing in the stress of this operation. as revealed in the New Testament, and that is the need for ministers of the very highest rank (Paul was an apostle) to engage at times in fund raising, a thing many of the so-called elite are stubbornly prone not to do! The churches of Galatia ... Paul's similar admonition to the Galatians is not found in the New Testament book of that name: and therefore it had been conveyed "either by messenger, or by a letter not preserved."[5] Any thoughtful student must allow that Paul's known letters must be only a fraction of all that he wrote, but, nevertheless, a fraction preserved to us by the infallible power of the Holy Spirit. The Galatian churches here mentioned were "those of Pisidia, Antioch, Iconium, Derbe, and Lystra (Acts 13:14 Acts 14:13)"[6][1] Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: Carlton and Porter, 1831), Vol. VI, p. 296. [2] David Lipscomb, Commentary on First Corinthians (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1935), p. 248. [3] William Barclay, The Letters to the Corinthians (Philadelphia:. Westminster Press, 1954), p. 181. [4] F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 549. [5] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 921. [6] Ibid. Verse 2 Upon the first day of the week let each one of you lay by him in store, as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come.Upon the first day of the week ... The astounding remark by Farrar that "This verse can hardly imply any religious observance of the Sunday"[7] is to be rejected. That is exactly what it does imply. Macknight translated this clause, "On the first day of every week";[8] Grosheide declared the meaning to be "On every Sunday";[9] and Hodge said it means, "The collection was to be made every Lord's day."[10] Pliny's letter to Trajan bears testimony to the fact that the Christians of his day (prior to his death in 113 A.D.) were accustomed to meet on "an appointed day";[11] and here that appointed day is somewhat inadvertently identified by the apostle Paul as every Sunday. There is no fact connected with Christianity any more certain than the apostolic custom of worship services every Lord's day. Beginning with the very day of our Lord's resurrection, and continuing upon successive Sundays thereafter (John 20:18 John 20:24 John 20:26), worship was observed by the apostles. A careful study of Act 20:6-7; Acts 21:4 and Acts 28:14 discloses not merely that the worship and observance of the Lord's supper took place on Sundays, but also that the Lord's supper was never observed by the apostolic church on any other day. See my Commentary on Luke, p. 517. Added to that testimony is the undeniable meaning of the verse before us. Let each one of you lay by him in store ... It is generally admitted that every Christian was to participate in the giving, but "by him" has given the commentators a lot of trouble. Thus Johnson thought it was "a reference to the home-giving was to be private giving."[12] The word "home" is not in the Greek text, nor is such an idea to be found there. As Lipscomb and many others have noted, "The idea that the storing was to be at home is incompatible with the idea that `no collections be made when I come.'"[13] "The words do not mean "to lay by at home," but "to lay by himself.""[14] This indicates that the amount of giving was to be determined by the man HIMSELF, not by any tax or suggestion from others. The word rendered "in store" means "putting in the treasury ... the common treasury, not every man's own house."[15]As one studies some of the so-called modern translations of this place, it is clear that they are not translations in any sense, but human commentary substituted for the word of God. Even the RSV is seriously at fault in handling this passage. As Wallace said, "They changed Paul's words from `lay by him in store' to `put something aside and save'; but in 1952 they revised their own rendition to `store up'"[16]For its hermeneutical value, the following list of Greek words translated "giving" or its equivalent are compiled from William Barclay: [@Logeia] (1 Corinthians 16:1) means "a special collection" (Churches which do not like special appeals, take note). [@Charis] (1 Corinthians 16:3) means bounty or "free gift freely given." [@Koinonia] (2 Corinthians 8:4 2 Corinthians 9:13; Romans 15:6) means "fellowship." [@Diakonia] (2 Corinthians 8:4 2 Corinthians 9:1 2 Corinthians 9:12-13) means practical Christian service." Our word "deacon" is related to it. [@Hadrotes] (2 Corinthians 8:20) means "abundance." [@Eulogia] (2 Corinthians 9:5) means "bounty" in the sense of what is given joyfully [@Leitourgia] (2 Corinthians 9:12) means giving of money or services voluntarily, especially some large gift. [@Eleemosune] (Acts 24:17) is the Greek word for "alms." Our word "eleemosynary" as applied to charitable institutions comes from this. [@Prosfora] (Acts 24:17) means "offering or sacrifice." Thus what is given to the needy, or to the church, is a sacrifice or offering to God. This impressive list is a testimony to the importance of giving as laid down in the New Testament; and any preacher will find such a catalogue as this helpful and stimulating. A concluding line on this verse is from Hodge:. The only reason that can be assigned for requiring the thing to be done on the first day of the week, is that on that day the Christians were accustomed to meet, and what each one had laid aside from his weekly gains could be treasured up, put into the common treasury of the church.[17]As he may prosper ... This does not mean that only the prosperous should give, but that every man, in the extent of his prosperity, should give to the proposed collection. In the whole matter of Christian giving, these verses indicate that: (1) all should participate, (2) according to the ability of each, and (3) that it should be done regularly and continually. [7] F. W. Farrar, op. cit., p 549 [8] James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles and Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1969), p. 291. [9] F. W. Grosheide, The New International Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953), p. 398. [10] Charles Hodge, First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, Publishing Company, 1974), p. 363. [11] Henry Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church (New York and London: Oxford University Press, 1947), p. 6. [12] S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), p. 646. [13] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 249. [14] Charles Hodge, op., cit., p 364 [15] Ibid. [16] Foy E. Wallace, Jr., A Review of the New Versions (Fort Worth, Texas: The Foy E. Wallace, Jr., Publications, 1973), p. 436. [17] Ibid. Verse 3 And when I arrive, whomsoever ye shall approve, them will I send with letters to carry your bounty unto Jerusalem.Paul did not propose to take charge of the contribution himself, suggesting here that men duly appointed by the congregations should with proper screening and recommendation be dispatched with the money to its destination. The care of the apostle to avoid all appearance of improper conduct in such a thing should be noted. He avoided all such suspicion of misappropriation of the funds. A list of the seven faithful men appointed to carry the money is found in Acts 20:4, along with a list of the various congregations they represented. Verse 4 And if it be meet for me to go also, they shall go with me.Macknight thought that Paul here "insinuated his inclination"[18] to favor an invitation to be in the group conveying the funds; and, of course, as it turned out, he was included. The notion that Paul meant that "if the amount was large enough"[19] he would be willing to go seems to be unjustified. [18] James Macknight, op. cit., p. 293. [19] Charles Hodge, op. cit., p. 365. Verse 5 But I will come unto you, when I shall have passed through Macedonia; for I pass through Macedonia.This evidently indicates a change in Paul's plans to visit Corinth; because in 2 Corinthians 1:15 ff, there seems to be a critical attitude accusing the apostle of vacillating; but his postponement of his visit was founded in the highest wisdom. He would give them a little time to get their house in order before he came. Verse 6 But with you it may be that I shall abide, or even winter, that ye may set me forward on my journey whithersoever I go.The intention of spending some time at Corinth was fulfilled. "This he afterward found himself able to do" (Acts 20:2-3).[20]Set me forward on my journey ... This is not a hint that he would expect to receive traveling expenses, rather having reference to the custom of the Christians accompanying departing guests for some distance at the time of their leaving, as in Acts 15:3 Acts 17:15, and Romans 15:24. ENDNOTE: [20] John William Russell, Compact Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964), p. 434. Verse 7 For I do not wish to see you now by the way; for I hope to tarry a while with you, if the Lord permit. But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost; for a great and effectual door is opened unto me, and there are many adversaries.I do not wish to see you ... The reason given was that he desired a longer visit than was possible at present; but this was also related to the deplorable conditions at Corinth. A short visit would not give sufficient time for working out all of the problems; besides, given time for the letter he was writing to have its effect, there might be fewer problems to solve at a later time. If the Lord permit ... Paul's plans were made like those of any other Christian, subject to the sovereign will of God; and this was fittingly recognized by the apostle. The notion that the Holy Spirit was directing on a day-to-day basis every move that Paul made is surely denied by these words. At Ephesus until Pentecost ... Pentecost was one of the three great national feasts of the Jews which fell in the May-June period. For full discussion of Pentecost, see my Commentary on Acts, pp. 31-35. A great and effectual door ... The marvelous opportunity for Paul at Ephesus was one of the reasons assigned for his intention of staying longer. And there are many adversaries ... To some people, this hardly would have appeared as a reason for staying; but Paul reasoned that where Satan had stirred up great opposition to the truth, there must also be great opportunities for saving people. The bold and dauntless courage of Paul shines in a remark like this. There are many New Testament accounts of the enemies he encountered and vanquished (Acts 20:19; Acts 19:23, etc.). Verse 10 Now if Timothy comes see that he be with you without fear; for he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do.Without fear ... Paul's concern that Timothy might encounter some cause of fear at Corinth might have sprung from the fierce partisanship in the church there, or from the youth, inexperience and timidity of Timothy, or even from a combination of both. The work of the Lord, as I also do ... No higher recommendation could have been written for anyone than this. The noble Timothy was a loyal and able helper of the apostle throughout his ministry. Verse 11 Let no man therefore despise him. But set him forward on his journey in peace, that he may come unto me: for I expect him with the brethren.This was a command that the Corinthians should accord full honors to the apostle's helper, a duty that probably needed to be brought to their attention. Factionalism always results in the neglect of obvious duties. Paul expected Timothy to rejoin him at Ephesus within a short time. Verse 12 But as touching Apollos the brother, I besought him much to come unto you with the brethren: and it was not at all his will to come now; but he will come when he shall have opportunity.This verse is significant in showing that Paul and Apollos were on friendly terms with each other and that neither Paul nor Apollos was in any manner responsible for the ugly factions that had grown up around their names at Corinth. Paul's desire that Apollos should go to Corinth might have been prompted by the thought that he could give valuable aid in correcting the Corinthian disorders. Also, as some believe, it is possible that communications to Paul from Corinth had requested Apollos to come. Despite their love and affection for each other, however, Apollos was not a pupil of Paul's and felt justified in denying the apostle's request, but promising to go later. Verse 13 Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love.As McGarvey declared, "In these brief ... phrases, Paul sums up the burden of this entire epistle."[21]Watch ye ... Although originally directed as an admonition to Corinth, this is a timeless duty of all Christians. The things they were to watch against were: (1) the danger of division, (2) the deception of false teachers, (3) the atheistic denials of the resurrection, (4) the failure of love of the brethren, etc. Stand fast in the faith ... It is deplorable that the RSV renders this "Stand firm in your faith"; for what Paul plainly meant was that they should not depart from the Christian faith. This is the marching order for every Christian of all ties and places. Paul himself gave this the highest priority, saying near the end of life that "I have kept the faith" (2 Timothy 4:7). Quit you like men ... This carries the weight of "Stop acting like spiritual infants, quarreling, boasting and indulging yourselves without discipline!" Many church problems are due to pure infantilism on the part of members who do not grow up spiritually. Be strong ... Strength is manifested by courageous and unwavering loyalty to the word of God, by the resistance of temptation, by fleeing from it, by regular and faithful attendance at worship service, by constant and liberal giving, by loving consideration of the rights, opinions and needs of others, and by the repudiation of the world's value judgments. Let all that ye do be done in love ... This summarizes the teaching of the whole 13th chapter. A constant and unfeigned love of the Lord, of his church as a whole, and of its individual members is the mark of a strong Christian. Love is "the greatest" because it is always marked by obedience. See under 1 Corinthians 13:13. ENDNOTE: [21] J. W. McGarvey, Commentary on First Corinthians (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 164. Verse 15 Now I beseech you, brethren (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have set themselves to minister unto the saints).Evidently, Stephanas had been baptized while traveling at Athens; for Paul's first visit to Achaia (at Athens) resulted in the baptism of Dionysius, Damaris, "certain men" and "others"; thus the name of Stephanas must be added to those. Here it appears that later his entire house (as many as were adults) had also obeyed the gospel. The position advocated by some to the effect that Paul depreciated the results at Athens (Acts 17:34) is rejected. It is far more likely that Stephanas was among the "certain men" mentioned by Luke. Have set themselves to minister ... Farrar recorded a curious opinion that Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus were "perhaps slaves of the household of Chloe";[22] and that this paragraph might have been written to protect them against the wrath of the Corinthians due to their having delivered to Paul an account of disorders in Corinth (1 Corinthians 1:11). The origin of that supposition is not known. In any case, the men mentioned (especially the household of Stephanas) were giving diligent service to the church; and Paul ordered them respected. ENDNOTE: [22] F W. Farrar, op. cit., p. 551. Verse 16 That ye also be in subjection unto such, and to every one that helpeth in the work and laboreth.Evidently there was some basis for fearing that this advice was needful; and the surmise that they might have been slaves could be correct, as there were many slaves among the churches of that era. Verse 17 And I rejoice at the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus: for that which was lacking on your part they supplied.Fortunatus ... This man is nowhere else mentioned in the New Testament; but Clement of Rome (30-100 A.D.) credited him with having been one of the messengers by whom Clement sent a letter (The First Epistle of Clement) to the Christians at Corinth.[23]They supplied ... Dummelow paraphrased the thought as "Their visit has made up for your absence."[24][23] Clement of Rome in the Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company), Vol. I, p. 21. [24] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 921. Verse 18 For they refreshed my spirit and yours: acknowledge ye therefore them that are such.It is not clear, exactly, what Paul meant by the statement that these men "refreshed" (past tense) the spirit of the Corinthians in the same manner of his own refreshment by their visit; but the interpretation of Meyer as quoted by Hodge may be correct: "You owe (to them) whatever in my letter serves to refresh you."[25]Them that are such ... has reference to all persons of good will and Christian character who, by their very presence on earth, serve to refresh and encourage the followers of Christ the Lord. ENDNOTE: [25] Charles Hodge, op. cit., p. 371. Verse 19 The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Prisca salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house.Aquila and Prisca ... See my Commentary on Romans, pp. 511-513 for comment on this distinguished couple. The whole world of Gentile Christians were under a debt of thanks to them for having saved Paul's life, an event of which absolutely nothing is known; but the New Testament affords several splendid glimpses of this remarkable Christian couple. And the church that is in their house ... Prisca and Aquila, to follow the order Paul himself sometimes used, were of sufficient wealth and generosity to provide a meeting place for Christians in their residence, a thing they did both in Rome and at Ephesus. Russell said that "It is probably that there were as yet no special buildings for Christians";[26] in fact, Barclay went much further, declaring that "It is, in fact, not until the third century that we hear about a church building at all!"[27]The churches of Asia salute you ... This is a reference to the proconsular province of Asia, and not to the continent. [26] John William Russell, op. cit., p. 435. [27] William Barclay, op. cit. p. 187. Verse 20 All the brethren salute you. Salute one another with a holy kiss.A holy kiss ... Why did this lovely custom, which certainly prevailed in those times, disappear? As Barclay said: "(1) It was liable to abuse, and (2) it was liable to misinterpretation by heathen slanders, and (3) the church itself became less and less of a fellowship."[28]This custom is mentioned in 2 Corinthians 13:12; Romans 16:16, and in 1 Peter 5:14; and the feeling persists that the third reason cited by Barclay, above, is the principal cause of its disappearance. Christians do not always love one another as they should. Yet it must also be allowed that the apostolic order of such a thing was related to the customs of the times and should not be construed as binding in times and cultures as diverse from theirs as is ours. ENDNOTE: [28] Ibid., p. 188. Verse 21 The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand.This was Paul's authentication of the epistle, his signature. Paul's letters were usually written by a secretary, an amanuensis, probably Sosthenes in the case of this epistle (1 Corinthians 1:1). Tertius wrote Romans (Romans 16:22); and Paul also wrote the salutation and signature of 2Thessalonians (2 Thessalonians 3:17), indicating that an unnamed amanuensis wrote that epistle also. Verse 22 If any man loveth not the Lord, let him be anathema. Marana tha. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you.Anathema ... means a thing accursed, leading to the necessary deduction that a refusal to love the Lord makes one an enemy of God. Marana tha ... The comment of F. F. Bruce on this expression is as follows: If this word is divided as Marana tha, it means "Our Lord come"; but if we divide it Maran atha, it means "Our Lord has come." It is an Aramaic phrase which found its way into the liturgy of the church from its earliest days.[29]The point to be emphasized is that this expression just as easily means "Our Lord has come" as it does the other proposition, "Our Lord come." There is no need whatever, then, to accept as binding the latter meaning as indicated in English Revised Version, the Revise Standard Version, and other versions, leading to the hurtful and erroneous idea that the apostles believed the Second Advent was at hand. Phillips translated this, "May the Lord come soon." It is far preferable to divide the word Maran atha, as in the King James Version, giving the true meaning that "Our Lord has come in his incarnation." The scholars who prefer the other division are influenced by some of the literature (unbiblical) of ancient times in which the other division is the usual one; but Bruce explained that, by early post-apostolic times, these verses had become a kind of liturgy used at the Lord's table; and in that usage, it had reference to the Lord's coming to be with his followers in the assembly, as he had promised (Matthew 18:20). Thus, upon examination of this, it is certain that there is no reference whatever in this word to the Second Advent. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you ... For a discussion of this characteristically Pauline greeting, see my Commentary on Romans, p. 13. This beautiful greeting, which Paul so frequently used, was not enough in this first epistle to Corinth. Paul had written some of the sternest rebukes in the holy Scriptures, and he had borne down upon them with all of his apostolic power to force a correction of their shameful abuses; therefore, he would not close with the usual greeting, adding to it an affirmation of his love for every one of them. ENDNOTE: [29] F. F. Bruce, Answers to Questions (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972), p. 100. Verse 24 My love be with you all in Christ Jesus. Amen.In Christ Jesus ... This phrase beyond all others is the badge and signature of the gospel Paul preached. The whole book of Ephesians, practically, is founded upon the conception inherent in this phrase which so abounds in his writings. If one is "in Christ" and if one is "found in him" (Philippians 3:9), salvation is assured and heaven is certain! It was that relationship to the Corinthians as his fellow-members of Christ's spiritual body to which Paul appealed in this final loving word. Amen. "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE " Chapter Sixteen IN THIS CHAPTER 1) To understand the basis and purpose underlying the collection taken on the first day of the week 2) To note the love accompanying the writing of this epistle which is filled with so much correction of error SUMMARY In this final chapter, Paul discusses one last subject before making his concluding remarks. It concerns the collection for the saints, for which Paul gives instructions as to the manner in which the funds are to be gathered and then sent to Jerusalem (1 Corinthians 16:1-4). He then writes briefly of his plans to see them and makes a few comments concerning Timothy and Apollos (1 Corinthians 16:5-12). His final exhortations, greetings and solemn warning are marked with a tone of love: the need to love one another, a warning to love the Lord, and a declaration of his love for them (1 Corinthians 16:13-24). OUTLINE I. THE FOR THE SAINTS (1 Corinthians 16:1-4) A. TAKING UP THE (1 Corinthians 16:1-2)1. The same as those given the churches of Galatia (1 Corinthians 16:1) 2. To be gathered each first day of the week, people giving as they have been prospered, to avoid last minute collections (1 Corinthians 16:2) B. SENDING THE (1 Corinthians 16:3-4)1. To be sent along with an approved representative of the church of Corinth (1 Corinthians 16:3) 2. If deemed appropriate, Paul will join them in going to Jerusalem (1 Corinthians 16:4) II. PLANS AND RELATED (1 Corinthians 16:5-12) A. PAUL'S PLANS (1 Corinthians 16:5-9)1. To see them after passing through Macedonia (1 Corinthians 16:5-7) 2. To remain in Ephesus until Pentecost, for a door of opportunity has been opened for him (1 Corinthians 16:8-9) B. TIMOTHY (1 Corinthians 16:10-11)1. Allow him to come without fear (1 Corinthians 16:10) 2. Do not despise him, but send him to Paul in peace (1 Corinthians 16:11) C. APOLLOS (1 Corinthians 16:12)1. Though urged by Paul, he chose not to go to Corinth at the present time (1 Corinthians 16:12 a) 2. But he will at a more convenient time (1 Corinthians 16:12 b) III. , , AND A SOLEMN (1 Corinthians 16:13-24) A. FINAL (1 Corinthians 16:13-18)1. Exhortation to steadfastness and love (1 Corinthians 16:13-14) 2. Exhortation to submit to the household of Stephanus and others like them, who refresh the spirits of those who know them (1 Corinthians 16:15-18) B. (1 Corinthians 16:19-21)1. From the churches of Asia, Aquila and Priscilla, and others (1 Corinthians 16:19-20 a) 2. Greet one another with a holy kiss (1 Corinthians 16:20 b) 3. Paul's own personal salutation in his own handwriting (1 Corinthians 16:21) C. A SOLEMN (1 Corinthians 16:22-24)1. A grave warning about not loving the Lord Jesus , with a plea for His coming (1 Corinthians 16:22) 2. A prayer for grace and an expression of love for those in Christ Jesus (1 Corinthians 16:23) REVIEW FOR THE CHAPTER 1) List the main points of this chapter- The Collection For The Saints (1 Corinthians 16:1-4) - Personal Plans And Related Comments (1 Corinthians 16:5-12) - Concluding Exhortations, Greetings, And A Solemn Farewell (1 Corinthians 16:13-24) 2) What was the purpose of the collection? (1 Corinthians 16:1)- For the needy saints in Jerusalem (Romans 15:26) 3) When was the collection to be taken? (1 Corinthians 16:2)- On the first day of the week 4) What was the purpose of doing it this way? (1 Corinthians 16:2)- To avoid a last minute collection 5) What principle concerning giving is taught in verse two?- To give as one may prosper 6) When did Paul plan to go to Corinth? (1 Corinthians 16:5-8)- After staying in Ephesus till Pentecost, and then after passing through Macedonia 7) Who would likely see them in the meantime? (1 Corinthians 16:10-11)- Timothy 8) What noble comments are made concerning Stephanus, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (1 Corinthians 16:15-18)- They devoted themselves to the ministry of the saints - They refreshed the spirits of Paul and those at Corinth 9) What husband and wife team joined Paul in greeting the church at Corinth? (1 Corinthians 16:19)- Aquila and Priscilla 10) What grave warning does Paul give in this chapter? (1 Corinthians 16:22)- If anyone does not love the Lord Jesus, let him be accursed 11) What earnest wish does Paul express in this chapter? (1 Corinthians 16:22)- That the Lord might come 12) How does Paul close this epistle which is filled with so much rebuke for the error that existed in the church at Corinth? (1 Corinthians 16:24)- My love be with you all in Christ Jesus Questions by E.M. Zerr On 1st Corinthians 161. For whom was collection to be made? 2. On what day was this collection to be made? 3. Was meeting called for such work exclusively? 4. On what principle was each one to give ? 5. What indicates this is not a private collection ? 6. Why was this done in advance of Paul’ s coming? 7. Who was to take this money to Jerusalem? 8. Did he expect to have sole charge? 9. Point out a good business principle here stated. 10. Compare this with Romans 12: 17. 11. Through what country did Paul expect to go ? 12. Had he ever been there before? 13. What did he propose might occur with them ? 14. Also what assistance did he expect from them? 15. On what "if” would he tarry with them? 16. What other writer gives this as a condition? 17. At what place did he plan to tarry? 18. What was the occasion of this? 19. State what nation had charge of this occasion. 20. On what ground could Paul be interested? 21. What was the “ door” of verse 9? 22. Did he expect “ smooth sailing” ? 23. Who is mentioned favorably? 24. What instructions were given concerning him? 25. What commendation did Paul give of him ? 26. How were they to conduct him? 27. To whom did Paul expect the man to come? 28. Was he to come alone? 29. What brother is next introduced ? 30. Tell what Paul desired him to do. 31. Why did he not do it? 32. Did he show disobedience by this? 33. In what must they stand fast ? 34. Acquit themselves as what? 35. In doing so how must they be? 36. Does this agree with Romans 14: 1 ? 37. How must all things be done? 38. What credit is given the house of Stephanas ? 39. Where is Achaia? 40. To what had they addicted themselves? 41. What request does Paul make here? 42. Does this mean to use men as authority? 43. Why was he glad of coming of certain men? 44. Was this lack necessarily a fault of theirs? 45. State what good they had done. 46. What churches joined in the salute? 47. In whose house was there a church? 48. State the greeting commanded. 49. Who signed this epistle? 50. What if a man loves not the Lord? 51. At what great event will this be done? 1 Corinthians 16:1. A great dearth was predicted in Acts 11:27-30, which came with such force that the disciples in Judea were thrown into a state of want. The condition lasted for some years and it is referred to in Romans 15:26; 2 Corinthians 8:1-2 2 Corinthians 9:1-2. Collections were made at various times and from different communities for the relief of the saints. It is concerning this matter that Paul is writing in this chapter. We have no record elsewhere of this order given to the churches in Galatia. As I have given order indicates that Paul gave those churches the same instructions on the subject that he wrote to the church in Corinth. Such a plan, therefore, should be regarded as the Lord's way for churches to raise money for carrying on His work. 1 Corinthians 16:2. The Englishman's Greek New Testament translates the first clause as follows: "Every first day of the week," and Thayer's explanation of the passage agrees with such a rendering. It was on this day the money was to be contributed for relief of the dearth-stricken saints, and since the disciples came together on that day for the Lord's supper (Acts 20:7), it was a consideration of convenience on that part of Him to ordain this public collection to come at the same gathering. Lay by him has been an occasion for controversy as to where the members were to put their contribution. The pronoun him is not necessarily in the masculine gender in the original, but may properly be rendered "itself." In store is from , and James Mac-knight defines it, "putting it in the treasury." This critical information agrees with the reasoning Paul makes, namely, that there be no gatherings when I come. Gatherings is from the same Greek word as "collection" In the first verse. If the brethren were to put this contribution some place in their homes, then it would have to be collected when Paul came, and that is what he wished to avoid. Besides, the fact that they were told to do this on the same day the disciples came together, indicates it was to be a public collection. As God liath prospered him means each one was to give according to his financial ability. 1 Corinthians 16:3. This advice is on the principle of Rom 12:17 and 2 Corinthians 8:18-21. A man who is entrusted with the property of another should wish to protect himself from any suspicions of dishonesty. I have known of cases where brethren who handled the money of a congregation, would resent all inquiries about the amount of funds in their hands. They would probably make some peevish remark such as, "If you think I am not honest, I will just turn the job over to someone else." There is something wrong with a brother who takes such an attitude, to say the least, and he lays himself open to just suspicion. 1 Corinthians 16:4. When Paul wrote this verse he did not know whether he would go to Jerusalem on this mission; Romans 15:25-27 shows that he did. 1 Corinthians 16:5. Acts 20:1-3 records this work of Paul in those Greek countries, in which he was threatened with bodily harm from the Jews. 1 Corinthians 16:6. Bring me on my journey. The first word is from , which Thayer defines, "To send before. To bring on the way, accompany or escort." He then explains the word to mean, "To set one forward, fit him out with the requisites [things required] for his journey." Hence when a church furnishes a preacher the things he needs to take him to his "field of labor," it is bringing that preacher on his journey to the Lord's work. 1 Corinthians 16:7. The apostle did not count on seeing the Corinthian brethren in the immediate future, but he was expecting to see them later, subject to the will of the Lord. 1 Corinthians 16:8. The Mosaic system was both religious and secular as a govern.. ment. When Christ gave his institution to the world it was intended to supplant the old one for religious purposes (Romans 10:4), but the Jews were still left the privilege of observing their national institutions, as long as they did not try to obtain spiritual benefits from them. That is why Paul Planned to continue his work at Ephesus until Pentecost. That being one of the Jewish national feasts, the apostle wished to go to Jerusalem to attend it. 1 Corinthians 16:9. The first part of this verse is somewhat awkwardly constructed by the translators. The words great and effectual are adjectives, modifying door, which means as if it said "a great and effectual [efficient] door." The fact of there being many adversaries was the reason Paul wished to remain at Ephesus as long as he could. 1 Corinthians 16:10. Chapter 4:17 mentions the fact that Timotheus (Timothy) was told to go to Corinth. Paul asks the brethren to give him a friendly reception; as a recommendation in support of the request, the apostle tells them of the work of the Lord in which Timothy was engaged. 1 Corinthians 16:11. To despise means to belittle or treat with improper regard. Timothy was supposed to spend some time at Corinth and then return to Paul. He did this, for 2 Corinthians 1:1 shows him joining in the salutation of that epistle. 1 Corinthians 16:12. Paul was an apostle while Apollos was only an unofficial preacher, yet he was not bound to make the journey to Corinth, for the apostle only greatly desired him to go. This indicates that Paul was not inclined to abuse his position by commanding another brother in matters where the legislation of God was not involved. 1 Corinthians 16:13. Watch ye, stand last contains a twofold exhortation. To watch means to be alert for any challenge to their faith, and if it appears it should not be suffered to shake them from their faithfulness. Quit you like men is all from one Greek word which Thayer defines, "to show one's self a man, be brave." Such an attitude was necessary to meet the attacks of enemies. 1 Corinthians 16:14. Charity is from one of the Greek words that are usually translated "love." For a complete explanation of the word, see the notes on Matthew 5:43 in volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary. 1 Corinthians 16:15. Achaia is another name for Greece, the country in which Corinth was located. The baptism of Stephanas and his household is recorded in Chapter 1:16. (See the notes on Romans 16:5.) Addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints denotes they were devoted to the service in behalf of the saints or disciples. 1 Corinthians 16:16. Thayer explains the original for submit to mean, "to yield to one's admonition or advice." Hence it is not used in the sense of an authoritative command, for even a righteous household like that of Stephanas would have no such authority. The statement of Paul is more in the nature of an advisory exhortation. It is always well to listen to the instructions or exhortations of faithful disciples of Christ. If they are scriptural they should be accepted on the principle of chapter 11:1. 1 Corinthians 16:17. The lack on the part of the Corinthians, which was supplied by the coming of these brethren, was not in regard to material things as the next verse shows. 1 Corinthians 16:18. These brethren refreshed Paul by their coming to him, and by the message which they evidently brought from the Corinthian church (chapter 7:1). Paul reasons that such brethren were a blessing wherever they dwelt, and therefore must have been so among the brethren at Corinth; he commends them to the favor of the church. 1 Corinthians 16:19. Revelation 1:11 names seven churches in Asia, and Ephesus was one of them, where Paul was when he wrote this epistle (verse 8). Salute is from , and in the King James Version it is translated by embrace 2 times, greet 15, salute 42, take leave of 1. Thayer defines it, "to salute one, greet, bid welcome, wish well to; pay one's respects to." He explains that it can be done either in person or by letter, and of course it was done by the latter method in the present case. Special mention is made of Aquila and Priscilla because they were outstanding disciples and had been closely associated with the apostle in the Lord's work (Acts 18:1-3). They were at Corinth at the same time that Paul labored there, but later went to Ephesus and hence gave their salutation to the Corinthian church through the epistle that Paul was writing. Church that is in their house. In the first years of the church the brethren did not have regular church buildings in many places. That was due either to their financial limitations, or to the fact that the group in the community was too few in numbers to require it. In such cases the church had its meetings in private homes, and Aquila and Priscilla used their home for that purpose. 1 Corinthians 16:20. All the brethren would necessarily mean those in contact with Paul as he was writing the epistle, especially those engaged in public work for the church. Holy kiss. I have examined a number of clic- tionaries and histories, as well as four lexicons, and they all represent the kiss to have been a form of salute between persons of both sexes, the custom dating back to ancient times. The instruction of the apostle, then, was not to start any new form of salutation, for that of the kiss was in existence centuries before he was born. The point is in the word holy, and it means for the salutation to be sincere and not hypocritical as was that of Judas. 1 Corinthians 16:21. Paul wrote some of his epistles with his own hand (Galatians 6:11), others he dictated and then signed them to show that they were genuine. 1 Corinthians 16:22. Anathema means a curse, and it is pronounced upon a man who does not love Jesus. Maranatha is transferred into the King James Version without being translated. Thayer defines it, "our Lord cometh or will come." It denotes, therefore, that such a person will be accursed when the Lord comes. (See 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9). 1 Corinthians 16:23-24. Paul wishes that the grace (favor) of Jesus may be with the brethren at Corinth. As a secondary favor upon the church, the apostle assures it of his love for all in Christ Jesus. Amen is explained in the notes on Romans 16:24, volume 1 of the New Testament Commentary.