Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary
1 Corinthians 1:11

Clarke's Commentary

Verse 1 Corinthians 1:11. By them which are of the house of Chloe — This was doubtless some very religious matron at Corinth, whose family were converted to the Lord; some of whom were probably sent to the apostle to inform him of the dissensions which then prevailed in the Church at that place. Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, mentioned 1 Corinthians 16:17, were probably the sons of this Chloe.

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

Bridgeway Bible Commentary

1:10-4:21 DIVISIONS IN THE CHURCH

No blame upon Paul (1:10-17)

Paul urges the Corinthian Christians to stop their quarrelling and be united (10). He has heard from people from Chloe’s household that the Christians have divided themselves into factions. Some called themselves Paul’s party. Others, who were impressed with the preaching of Apollos (cf. Acts 18:24-28), formed the Apollos party. Perhaps it was the Jewish group who claimed to be followers of Peter; while a fourth group claimed even higher leadership than that of Paul, Apollos or Peter, by calling themselves Christ’s special party (11-12).

With a few ironical questions, Paul rebukes all the parties. He is thankful that he baptized only a few people in Corinth, namely, Crispus, Gaius and the household of Stephanus (cf. Acts 18:8; Romans 16:23; 1 Corinthians 16:15; 1 Corinthians 16:15,1 Corinthians 16:17). No one can now accuse him of baptizing people with the aim of gaining a personal following. Nor did he make any attempt to attract followers by displaying much wisdom or ability in his preaching. His sole aim was to preach the gospel of Christ crucified, so that people might be saved (13-17).

Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible

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.

The household of Chloe … It is generally assumed by commentators that Chloe was a respected member of the church, and Metz expressed confidence that she was "a woman of character and good standing"; Donald S. Metz, Beacon Bible Commentary (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), Vol. VIII, p. 314. but it should be noted that it was not Chloe who gave Paul the information regarding Corinth, but her "household," a term usually applied in the New Testament to the "familia" (household slaves), as in the case of "the household of Aristobulus" (Romans 16:10). Guthrie pointed out that

Chloe was the popular name of the goddess Demeter, who had 56 temples in Greece, including one at Corinth; and CHLOE'S PEOPLE appear as disinterested critics outside the church parties mentioned. Donald Guthrie, op. cit., p. 1053.

This is the only mention of Chloe in the New Testament, making it impossible to solve the question of who she might have been. The principal point, perhaps, is this: Paul named the source of the evil report he had received, not relying at all upon mere gossip or rumor.

Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible

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

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

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

Living By Faith: Commentary on Romans & 1st Corinthians

1:11-12: 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. 12 Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos: and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

Though the church at Corinth was divided, Paul still felt the need to refer to these Christians as his “brethren.” Paul was still spiritually related to these people and this relationship justified his becoming involved in their problems. Choosing to help the Corinthians was a very courageous act because division is often an explosive issue. Some problems cannot be left unattended, and this is certainly true for issues that affect local congregations (compare Philippians 4:2).

Paul wanted these Christians to know he was very aware of what was happening in Corinth so he told them about a report from the “household of Chloe.” The ASV says this had been “signified” unto the apostle and the KJV says “declared.” Outside the New Testament this word (deloo) was associated with “official, legal evidence. Thus, Paul has been given solid proof of the Corinthian divisive spirit which doubtless was confirmed by the church messengers (16:17)” (Gromacki, pp. 10-11). In this verse this term means “matters that come to light publicly” (Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, 1:294). Paul chose to identify the source of his information, and his decision offers an important point for our time. When someone says to us something like, “I have been told that people are upset,” it is usually wise to identify the source of the information or who is involved in the matter. Identifying the source of information or the parties involved often lends or increases credibility when dealing with problems. Paul did not specifically name those who provided this report to him, but he did give enough information to prove the report was credible. We can and should do the same.

When Paul spoke of Chloe’s household he used a definite article that is plural. This means more than one person in Chloe’s household had told Paul about the division (these household members could have been her children, slaves or both). Paul did not act on the word of one person. He had a good foundation before he discussed this subject, and this fact provides another helpful lesson for people and especially Christian people: We must ensure we have all the facts before making allegations or taking action (for some additional information on this thought see the commentary on “sober-minds” in the exposition of Titus 2:6). It is interesting to note that the Corinthians had written to Paul and asked some questions (1 Corinthians 7:1), but apparently nothing in their letter discussed the division within the congregation-that information apparently had to come from another source. It is always good to remember that as we deal with people important points and facts are sometimes omitted. Another “report” about this congregation is described in 1 Corinthians 5:1.

We do not know anything about the woman named “Chloe.” Perhaps she was a resident of Corinth. Maybe she lived elsewhere. This is the only reference to her in the New Testament. At the end of this letter (1 Corinthians 16:17) we encounter three names; some have thought these three men were Chloe’s sons. We have no assurance she was a Christian, but it is not hard to believe she was a member of the Corinthian congregation.

At the end of verse 11 Paul said he had received information about “contentions” (eris). When this word was used in a “non-moral” context it meant “the clash of sounds of the musical scale” (Willis, p. 25). In the New Testament it describes people clashing with each other. It pictures people on one side of something lining up against people on another side. The opposition might be based upon envy, ambition, the desire for prestige, or a quest for prominence. There was probably as much a “party spirit” in the church at Corinth as there is among the Democrat and Republican parties in the United States. Here the Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (2:52) said it means “quarrels” or “factions in the church, which are traced back to an attachment of individuals to a specific apostle or teacher or to Christ (v. 12).” Gromacki’s definition (p. 11) is also quite good: “This word means more than just a difference of opinion; it connotes quarrels or wranglings.” “The contentions, therefore, were not quiet and subtle; they had progressed to a shouting, hot-temper stage. The believers were acting and talking like unsaved men (cf. 3:3), not like saints within the church of God.” In Galatians 5:20 this word is rendered “strife” in the ASV and “variance” in the KJV. Paul classified it as a “work of the flesh.” It is only used about a dozen times in the New Testament, but it is often found in key texts (Romans 1:29; 1 Corinthians 3:3; 2 Corinthians 12:20; Philippians 1:15; Titus 3:9).

In her book The Key to a Loving Heart, Karen Mains has a parable entitled “The Brawling Bride.” This parable describes a climactic moment in a wedding ceremony. Both families have been seated. The groom and his attendants are in place and the minister is waiting. The bridesmaids are positioned and the wedding march begins to play. Down comes the bride and the guests gasp as they see the bride limping. The future wife’s gown is ripped and covered with mud. One of her eyes is swollen and purple. Her hair is messy. It is said that the groom in this parable is Jesus. Then the author asks this question: “Doesn’t the Lord deserve better than this?” God does not want a beaten-up bride or a bride ripped apart by division (compare Ephesians 5:27). The author’s question would have been appropriate for the people at Corinth because the church is the Lord’s bride (Ephesians 5:27).

The 12^th verse suggests the divisions in Corinth may not have actually involved Paul, Apollos, and Peter (compare 1 Corinthians 4:6). Paul may have used these names as examples. Doing this may have helped the apostle keep a bad situation from getting worse. Agitating a bad situation is rarely a good thing. In support for understanding the thought literally we may point out Paul and Apollos had both been at Corinth (Acts 17:33 + 18:1, 19:1).

If the divisions at Corinth were actually based around the men Paul listed, it should be understood that Peter, Paul, and Apollos were not in disagreement with each other. That is, Peter did not preach one message and have his own set of followers, Paul did not preach another gospel and still others followed him, etc. There were sometimes difficulties between the apostles (Peter was rebuked by Paul, Galatians 2:11-15), but Peter endorsed Paul’s writings (2 Peter 3:15) and all the apostles taught the same message. Paul and Apollos were friends (1 Corinthians 16:12). The Corinthians could not, therefore, rightly say their factions were caused by or attributable to the apostles. The Corinthians may have used the apostles’ names for the division, but the apostles did not support this lack of unity. Today we may extract this critical point from what Paul said: If it was wrong for people to call themselves after the apostles or other key figures in the first century church, what about being part of a religious group today that does a similar thing?

The CBL (First Corinthians, p. 267) suggests “four major divisions had developed: One group followed Paul, with whom we are familiar already; one followed Apollos, who differed not in message but apparently in method, having a more rhetorical, eloquent style. His method of presentation was very popular with those of Greek background. One group followed Cephas or Peter, the ‘hero’ of Pentecost and a true apostle (these were probably conservative Jewish-Christians). Another group said they followed Christ. These may have been ultraconservative followers, or individuals who were trying to satisfy their ego by convincing themselves that their religion was more pure and spiritual than anyone else’s.” A second possibility is that the last group had some false ideas about freedom; they rejected all information from people like Paul because they viewed Jesus as a way (system of religion) without rules. A third suggestion about the of Christ party is that this claim was being made by all the groups. Those who followed Peter said they were of Christ and those who had attached themselves to Paul may have been making this same claim. It is difficult to determine who the “of Christ” party was (verse 12). Perhaps the best possibility is that this group was just as bad as the rest, but it chose to use Jesus as the basis for the division instead of a well-known first century preacher. Whatever the exact nature of the faction, there was division! An interesting point about this division is offered by Holman (7:9): “It is possible that the use of the singular ‘I’ as opposed to the plural ‘we’ in this context indicates that these groups were not organized, solidified factions. The problem may have been much more individualistic.”

Interesting suggestions have been made concerning those who followed Paul. Perhaps this group “was a combination of simple and earnest believers and the ‘old guard,’ made up of the founding fathers, or charter members. Their concern may have been basically spiritual. But the fact that they exhibited the factious spirit also indicated that they may have desired to use their seniority to exert priorities on the leadership of the church” (Beacon Bible Commentary, 8:315). Willmington (p. 172) proposed the Paulite group said, “‘We are of Paul and therefore better than you! Anyone knows Paul is a great doctrinal preacher, and that’s the only kind to have.’ Those who claimed to follow Apollos might have said ‘Apollos is an eloquent preacher and can preach circles around Paul any day.’ Those who felt strongly about Peter may have said ‘We are of Cephas and you can brag about doctrine and eloquence all you want to, but there’s just nobody as down-to-earth and practical as Peter.’ The final group may have said ‘We are of Christ, and therefore look to no human preacher to lead us and feed us.’” The Expositor’s Greek Testament (2:762) adds: “the party cries are quoted as from successive speakers challenging each other.”

Secular history says many traveling philosophers came to Corinth. These men developed small schools and bands of students and the students were faithful to their teachers. It appears the Corinthians did a similar thing in the church and this created at least some of the strife. At this congregation the problem must have been especially severe because verse 12 says, “each one of you says.” This may be a hyperbole (an exaggeration for emphasis). If it is not, it means that every Christian at this congregation was involved with the division.

When Paul spoke about the lack of unity he put his name first. This prevented anyone from accusing him of being partial. “Paul hit his own fan club first! It is easy to rebuke a group if they are wrong, especially, if that group is against you anyway, but it is another thing to criticize sharply those who sing your praises the loudest” (Willmington, p. 172). Paul’s example is still relevant. When a wrong is being addressed, and our name is associated with the problem, we should be quick to recognize and acknowledge our responsibility or involvement in the matter. We should act uprightly and be honest in all things.

Calvin's Commentary on the Bible

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

(58) “La sancte union qui doit estre entre les Chrestiens;” — “That holy unity which ought to be among Christians.”

(59) “Bien plus dangereuses;” — “Much more dangerous.”

(60) It is remarked by Beza that the verb here employed, δηλοω, (to declare,)has a stronger signification than σημαινω (to intimate,) just as there is a difference of meaning between the Latin words declarare (to declare) and significare (to intimate,) an example of which is furnished in a letter of Cicero to Lucretius, “tibi non significandum solum, sed etiam declarandum arbitror, nihil mihi esse potuisse tuis literis gratius;” “I think it ought to be not merely intimated to you but declared, that nothing could be more agreeable to me than your letters.” The emphatic word εδηλωθν (it has been declared,) appears to have been made use of by the Apostle to convey more fully to the mind of the Corhlthians, that he had not hastily given heed to a mere report. — Ed

(61) Some have thought that by τῶς Χλόης,(those of Chloe,) the Apostle means persons who were in a flourishing condition in religion; from χλόη, green herbage, (Herodotus, 4:34, Euripides, Hipp. 1124.) One writer supposes Paul to mean seniores, (elders,) deriving the word χλόη from כלח, old age. These conjectures, however, are manifestly more ingenious than solid. It is certain that the name Χλόν (Chloe,) was frequent among the Greeks as the name of a female. It is most natural to understand by των Χλονς those of Chloe, as equivalent to των Χλονς σοικειως — those of the household of Chloe. — Ed

Smith's Bible Commentary

Let's turn to I Corinthians, chapter 1.

Paul introduces himself as the writer with Sosthenes in the first verse.

Paul, called an apostle ( 1 Corinthians 1:1 )

Notice the words to be are in italics. That means that they were added by the translators, and they were not there in the Greek.

Paul, called an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother ( 1 Corinthians 1:1 ),

Now there is a name Sosthenes that is related to Corinth. When Paul was in Corinth, he was brought by some of the Jews before the Corinthian magistrate, Galileo. And charges were brought against Paul by the Jews concerning their religion. Galileo said, "Look, if the guy were guilty of treason or something against the government, then I should stand in judgment of him, but because its just religious matters, why do you take my time?" And he ordered them out and the men that were there beat up on Sosthenes who was the chief ruler of the synagogue, and thus, probably the chief conspirator in bringing Paul before the Roman magistrate.

If this is the same Sosthenes, it is also interesting from a standpoint that here he was leading this uprising against Paul, and now the companion of Paul. And it is fascinating that often when a person is under heavy conviction of the Spirit, he gets cantankerous against God or the people of God. Sometimes people are so antagonistic towards the Lord, we sort of write them off in our minds. We think there is no way they would ever come, but what we don't realize is it is all a big shell about ready to crack, and they realize it is about ready to crack and that is why they are struggling so hard.

So Paul joins his name with Sosthenes in greeting the church of Corinth. Corinth was the center of the world commerce. It was an extremely luxurious city. If you'll take a look of your map of Greece, you'll find that the southern area of Greece is almost an island. Greece narrows down to this very narrow isthmus and Corinth was there in this very narrow isthmus of Greece, only four miles across the land.

Thus, any commerce going from north to south, that is from Macedonia to Achaia, had to pass through Corinth. It came to be that most of the commerce that was going from east to west also passed through Corinth, because around the southern tip of Greece the Cape of Mathene was so treacherous that the early sailors really did not like to sail around southern Greece. So they would usually sail to Corinth. If their ships were light enough, they would take them out of the water and put them on rollers and roll them across the four miles and then launch them again in the Aegean and sail on to Puteoli, the port of Rome, or the same thing coming back. If the ships were too big to transport across the land, then they would often unload the ships and just take the cargo across this four miles.

Nero, seeing the advantage of the shipping coming through this area, attempted to build a canal, but he failed to do so. But those men who built the Suez Canal, when they were completed with that project, they built the Corinthian Canal, and today you'll find that there is a canal connecting the Aegean Sea with the Adriatic Sea. This Corinthian Canal is operable today and the ships are able to save many miles from going around the southern end of Greece.

Corinth was not just a commercial center. It was a center of philosophical thought in those days. There came a phrase, "He speaks in the Corinthian style," which meant very articulate, precise and colorful. These men were more interested, not in what they said, but how they said it. Giving a lot of flair and color and all to their speeches. They loved oratory. Doesn't matter what the guy said, just as long as he was a good orator. They were attracted to oratory, but also interested in philosophical thought.

Corinth was also one of the most debased, wicked cities in the world. With all of their philosophy, they could not keep that city from sinking into the lowest kind of debauchery. Thus, "He lives like a Corinthian" was a very common phrase that became a part of their vernacular to describe a man who was always drunk and living in open debauchery. In the Greek theater, whenever they would portray a drunk, they would always refer to him as the Corinthian.

Now, in the midst of this pagan city, one of the lowest as far as morals goes, there was a Church of God, the Ecclesia. Now the word ecclesia is a word that is common in Greek, but it usually referred to the city counsel. They were called the Ecclesia, those who have been called to rule in the city, they were known as the Ecclesia. So there was the Ecclesia of Corinth, the city counsel, those who ruled over the city affairs. But there was also the Ecclesia of God, those who are called to reign and to rule with God, the church. And the word ecclesia has been translated church, but it is really those who are called to rule.

Unto the church of God ( 1 Corinthians 1:2 )

Notice he didn't say the Church of Corinth. I think we make a mistake today when we talk about the Church of England, the Church of Scotland, as though the church is divided. Paul speaks of the church of God,

which is at Corinth ( 1 Corinthians 1:2 ),

So we are the Church of God which is at Santa Ana, but we are not the only Church of God at Santa Ana. There are many, but we are one. We need to recognize and realize the oneness of the church. So he does not address the Church of Corinth, but the Church of God which is at Corinth, a very important distinction. God help us that we will make that distinction also in our minds and not think of ourselves exclusively as God's sole representative in an area, or to think that God is limited to one representation in an area.

There is a very tragic mentality existing among the local church who have made the mistake of thinking that God has only one church in a given area, and of course, it's the local church they are in. All of the rest of the churches they immediately exclude as "Babylon" and they are the only true representatives of the unity of the body of Christ within a given area wherever they go to establish the local church.

Now, nothing could be more bigoted than that. And foolish as to think that we are God's exclusive representatives in this area because we have now affiliated with the local church, but we are a part of the local church, thus, we have become. They did offer us that privilege years ago, which we promptly rejected as Romaine was kicking them off the grounds. The Church of God is the Catholic Church in the true sense of the word, the universal church of God in which every true child of God is a member, is a part. You see, there's only one person who can say "my church" and that's Jesus Christ. We are all members of His church, His body, and the thing is you really can't join it. You've got to be born into it; born again by the Spirit. So God help us and deliver us from any kind of exclusivism.

Now as we get into Corinth, the Corinthian letter, there's a division when we get to chapter 12. The beginning of chapter 12, he says, "Now concerning spirituals, brethren, I want to write to you a few things." In the first eleven chapters he is dealing with carnal things. Those from the household of Chloe had reported to Paul a lot of the mess that the Corinthian church was in, a lot of carnality, fighting, divisions, bickerings. And so Paul wrote to correct these carnal abuses that were existing in the Corinthian church. But then when he finishes that, he says, "Now I want to talk to you about spiritual things; enough of the carnal things, now I want to talk to you about spiritual things." And he begins to talk to them about the operation of the gifts of the Spirit, the supremacy of love, and the power of the resurrection in the latter part of the book, the spiritual things. But he had to get the carnal things out of the way first.

So he deals in this early part with some of the problems that existed. One of them was division within the body. So he addresses the church of God which is at Corinth seeking to show them and bring them into the consciousness of the universal church of God, Jesus Christ.

"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth,"

to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus ( 1 Corinthians 1:2 ),

The word sanctified comes from a root word which is hagios, which is also translated saint, the root word. It means one who is set apart for exclusive purposes. In the Old Testament, when they constructed the tabernacle and they made the vessels that were to be used in the service of the tabernacle, before they used these vessels, the plates, the cups and all, they sanctified them. That is, they set them apart for exclusive use, and thus, they were never to be used for anything other than the service and worship of God.

Now you remember when Belshazzar had made the feast for a thousand of his lords and all, and while he was drunk he ordered that they bring the golden cups that they had taken as booty from the temple in Jerusalem, that they might drink their wine out of these golden cups. As he drank the wine, they praised the gods of gold and of silver. They were desecrating the vessels that had been set apart for the exclusive purpose of being used in the worship and service to God. And as the result of the desecration of these, the handwriting came on the wall and the judgment of God fell that night upon Belshazzar and the Babylonian kingdom.

Your life, God has set it apart for His use, service to Him. So, those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus, set apart from the world, and from the things of the world in Christ Jesus. God help us not to take the holy vessels that God has set aside for His use and use them for our own gain or pleasure.

called saints ( 1 Corinthians 1:2 ),

Notice to be are in italics. That was added. You aren't called to be a saint. You're called a saint. I like that, Saint Charles. Got a good ring, doesn't it?

It's unfortunate that the church has designated certain special persons as saints, because as far as the Bible is concerned, you are all saints. It isn't some special honor conferred upon you by a counsel of men after determining that so many miracles have been wrought and so forth and thus you are elevated to sainthood. You are called by God a saint and that's good enough for me.

called saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours ( 1 Corinthians 1:2 ):

Again, wherever they call on Jesus Christ, He is their Lord but He is also our Lord. There are those who like to feel that they have an exclusive claim on the Lord, and this is the kind of division that was taking place in Corinth. "We're of Cephas, we're of Paul, we're of Jesus. We have exclusive little claims." He is their Lord, but He is also our Lord. And so this endeavor to break down this party spirit that created the divisions within the church of Corinth.

Grace unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ ( 1 Corinthians 1:3 ).

Grace, the word means beauty. The beauty of giving. The beauty of giving to those who are undeserving. Grace, one of Paul's favorite words; he expounds on it throughout the New Testament. Peace. Now "grace" was the common Greek greeting. Instead of in the morning, when you see someone and say, "Good morning," or "hello," or whatever, they'd say, "grace." The Jews when they greet you, rather than saying "hello" or "good morning," they'd say, "shalom," "peace."

So Paul took these two familiar greetings, those of the Greeks and those of the Jews and he combines them in so many of his New Testament epistles, "Grace be unto you, and peace." They are always combined in this order and it is the proper order, because a person cannot know real peace until they have experienced the grace of God. Now, for years as a Christian I did not really have the peace of God, because I did not know the grace of God. It was not until I realized the grace of God that I then discovered the peace of God. "Grace and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ."

Now, in the first ten verses of this epistle, Paul uses the name of Jesus Christ ten times. He's really laying the foundation for our faith and all in the constant repetition of the name Jesus Christ. Here in verse 1 Corinthians 1:2 , it was "the name of Jesus Christ our Lord," and here "from the Lord Jesus Christ."

Lord is not His name; it's His title, the kurios. Jesus is His Greek name, the Hebrew is Joshua, which means "Jehovah is salvation." It was the name that the angel told Joseph to call Him, for he said, "He will save His people from their sins." So He was named after His purpose, Jehovah-Shua, Joshua. Christ is actually, again, His designation, for it is the Hebrew word Messiah. So, again, it is not His name, but it is His mission.

So the first Lord is title, the name is Joshua, and the mission is Christ or Me-she'ak, the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, unfortunately, we think of first, middle and last name, not so. And thus, people talk about the Lord Jesus, not really thinking of that as the title signifying relationship, which indeed it is. Jesus said, "Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and yet you don't do the things I command you?"

God has given a name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus, that's the name, "Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Lord" to the glory of God the Father. So probably it would be better if they put a comma after Lord to distinguish it from His name. Even a comma is after Jesus to distinguish that from His mission as the Messiah, the Lord, Jesus, the Messiah.

I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ ( 1 Corinthians 1:4 );

And so Christ is the one through which the grace of God is bestowed upon us.

That in everything you are enriched by him ( 1 Corinthians 1:5 ),

That word enriched in the Greek is an interesting word, plouto-ke'tus, actually. And we get our word plutocrat from that Greek word. "You've become a plutocrat because of Jesus Christ. You're enriched." And the word means "luxuriously rich," that in everything you are enriched luxuriously by Him. Oh, the depth of the riches that are ours through Jesus Christ. You're enriched

in all utterance, and in all knowledge ( 1 Corinthians 1:5 );

Now, this utterance is the thing that the Greek was especially interested in. It was the logos, that's the Greek word used, but also in the knowledge.

Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you ( 1 Corinthians 1:6 ):

Paul wrote to them again and said, "You have no need that I send you letters of commendation because you are living epistles, your lives are my letters of commendation" ( 2 Corinthians 3:1-2 ). So here they're being enriched in Christ in all utterance and knowledge. Their lives became the testimony of Christ, and that witness of Christ confirmed by the lives that they were living, actually.

So that you come behind in no charisma; waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ ( 1 Corinthians 1:7 ):

Now the interesting thing to me is that as Paul writes to the church of Corinth, he makes mention that they have all kinds of charisma. They do not come behind in any charisma. Paul devotes three chapters to the charisma, the gifts of the Spirit, the operation of those gifts, the proper use of the gifts of the Spirit. Because they came behind in no charisma, they had them all. But, unfortunately, there was an abuse of the gifts of the Spirit in the church of Corinth that needed correcting, and Paul spends chapter 12 through 14 in correcting the abuses. But what is interesting to me is that this New Testament church of Corinth that came behind in no charisma, that had all of these gifts in operation, was also the church that Paul had to rebuke for its carnality.

Now somehow in our minds there is a twisted wire that's crossed over and is shorting out, so that we have a false concept that if a person is using the gifts of the Spirit, he must be especially righteous or holy. And those that do have the gifts of the Spirit in operation often have that attitude, "Well, I'm more spiritual than you. If you were only as spiritual as I, you, too, could have these gifts working in your life." And there's just an awful lot of promotionalism, hucksterism, and ballyhooing about the gifts of the Spirit. But I have observed that even as in the church of Corinth, so today many of those people who are making the most commotion and the most noise about the gifts of the Spirit are really some of the most carnal people I know. They really do not walk after the Spirit. Their whole appearance is marked with carnality. Their whole lifestyle is carnal, though they are constantly talking about the gifts of the Spirit, the power of the Spirit, the anointing of the Holy Spirit and so forth. Yet, when you observe their lifestyles, they are still extremely carnal, much like the church in Corinth. It did not come behind in any charisma, and yet was the church that needed the most rebuke because of the carnality that was existing within the church. Unfortunately, there is a tendency many times to use the gifts of the Spirit more or less as a novelty, as a toy, as a parlor game, where we entertain ourselves with the gifts of the Spirit and the operations of the gifts of the Spirit.

Now, please don't think that I am opposed to the gifts of the Spirit and their operation. False. I believe in the validity of the gifts of the Spirit today, all of them. I only wish that I had more of the charisma, that working of the Spirit and the gifts of the Spirit within my life. I, as Paul, enjoin covet earnestly the best gifts. I desire that God would use my life, but I also desire that the Lord use me in such a way that it doesn't draw attention to myself. I don't want to be lifted up and begin to walk after the flesh instead of walking after the Spirit.

The Corinthian church commended by Paul because they didn't fall behind in any of the gifts or of the charisma as they were waiting for the coming. The word coming there is apocalypse, which is the same word used for the book of Revelation, the unveiling of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ ( 1 Corinthians 1:8 ).

Now he's talking about the future and Christ in the future. The same idea is given to us in Jude where he said, "Now unto him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy" ( Jude 1:24 ).

When my name is called there at the judgment bar, and I step forward, God will say, "Read the charges against this fellow," and Jesus will step forth and say, "No charges, Father. He's one of mine." You better believe I'll be praising God at that moment. Blameless, without fault, that's how Jesus is going to present me to the Father, confirming that work in me. "Blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ."

God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord ( 1 Corinthians 1:9 ).

Notice how Paul is putting it together. "Jesus Christ our Lord," "the Lord Jesus Christ," "our Lord Jesus Christ," just getting Him in there every lick.

Now, you've been "called into the fellowship," that Greek koinonia is a difficult word to translate because it has such a depth of meaning. It means oneness, it means communion, it means fellowship, it means common, it means sharing, all of these things. We do not have an English equivalent, and so we use different words at different times as it appears in the text, because all of them are words that define or help define koinonia. You've been brought into a sharing in all things in Jesus Christ. Now that's exciting, because everything that is His becomes mine. I'm an heir of God, but I'm a joint-heir with Jesus Christ as He shares with me. "Come ye blessed of the Father, inherit the kingdom that was prepared for you from the foundations of the world." But don't think that is a one way; that also means that everything that I have belongs to Him. Well, just a minute.

Isn't it interesting how we can get so excited about everything that's His belongs to me, and yet, I would hold out my pittance from Him. I would hold back my mite while reaching for His wealth. But in reality, all that is mine is His. I need to take that view of things. Lord, you've made me a steward, you've entrusted me with Your goods as we've entered into this fellowship with each other. May I use wisely that which You've entrusted to me for Your glory because, Lord, it really belongs to You because we have this koinonia, this communion, this sharing.

Now I beseech you, [I beg you,] brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you speak the same thing, that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment ( 1 Corinthians 1:10 ).

So Paul now begins to deal with some of the issues that had been brought to his attention, these divisions that were existing in the church there in Corinth. And he is exhorting them now, "I beseech you, brethren," that you get together, speak the same things, don't want these divisions, be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

For it has been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I am of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul? ( 1 Corinthians 1:11-13 )

So they had divided off. There were those who say, "I am of Paul." Probably those who were wanting to live under the umbrella of grace. Perhaps abusing the grace of God, as Peter said some were doing, using it as a cloak for licentiousness. So when someone would rebuke them for their actions, they'd say " I'm of Paul!" I'm under the cloak of grace. Probably the intellectuals said, "Well, I'm of Apollos." Then there were always those who wanted to go back to the foundation and say, "Well, I'm of Peter." And then there is always that little segment that says, "We're the only ones were of Christ." They have that holier than thou and we are the most and no one else is anything because we are the church of Christ. You don't have the right name and therefore are second-rate. You don't belong. We're of Christ. Is Christ divided?

When men divide the body of Christ, who bleeds? What a shame that we bring up our petty differences in such ways that we divide the body.

Now I believe that there is room for disagreement, different opinions. I can allow for that. I can accept it if you don't understand the scripture the same way I understand it. If you have a different idea on baptism than I have. I can accept it if you want to be sprinkled; I'll sprinkle you. Sometimes when I'm baptizing people they say, "Will you put me down head first?" I say sure, I'll dunk 'em. I can make allowances for the different ideas that people have. But when we disagree, surely we ought to disagree agreeably that we not create a division. Well he . . . and we begin to divide over the issues. They shouldn't separate us; Christ is not divided. Paul said, "I wasn't crucified for you and you weren't baptized in the name of Paul."

I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius ( 1 Corinthians 1:14 );

Now these who say, "I am of Christ," make an issue over baptism and they'll come and hassle you about water baptism. They declare that you aren't really saved until you're baptized. Therefore they keep the tank full in the church all the time so that the minute a person is saved, they can take them right back to the tank and baptize them . . . so they can be saved. Instantaneous baptisms, and they feel that is extremely important. And better to do it here at the church, because if you're driving to the beach and you happen to get into an accident before you get there, oh brother, you've had it. What a shame, on his way to get baptized and he got snuffed.

Now, if water baptism were so essential for salvation, then Paul here is speaking blasphemously, really, when he said, "I thank God I didn't baptize any of you, but Crispus and Gaius. And if there are any others, I don't remember them."

Lest any should say that I had baptized in my own name. I also baptized the household of Stephanas: but besides these, I don't know if I baptized any body else [I don't remember]. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel ( 1 Corinthians 1:15-17 ):

A very fascinating statement by Paul that once and for all should put down the concept of baptismal regeneration.

Water baptism is an obedience to the faith of Jesus Christ that I have. It is an outward sign of an inward work of God's Spirit within my life. It is renouncing my old life as being dead and now in water baptism buried, that I might live now the new life after the Spirit. But if I am not living the new life after the Spirit, then it means that the water baptism was not really valid. If I'm getting into all kinds of carnal arguments and fights because a person doesn't baptize instantaneously, and I divide the body and get upset and want to argue the issue, I don't care if you've been baptized a hundred times, you're not showing fruit of a true walk in the Spirit. Which, of course, according to Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:0 is marked by love, which doesn't seek its own way but believes all things, and hopes all things, and endures all things and never fails.

So man, prone to these little party divisions when he is walking after the flesh, when he is living a carnal life.

G. Campbell Morgan said, "I have noted that the more spiritual a man becomes, the less denominational he becomes." Had Paul been writing to the church today concerning the divisions among it, I'm sure he would say, "But some of you say I'm a Baptist, and some of you say I'm a Presbyterian, and others say I'm an Episcopalian, and then others say, well I'm a Nazarene, and there are those who would say, "Well, we're of the Church of Christ." Again he'd say, "Is Christ divided?" And he would urge toward unity within the body to realize that we are all of Jesus Christ. Paul was sent to preach the gospel, not with the wisdom of words, something that they were very familiar with there in Corinth.

These philosophers played with words, but "God didn't send me to preach,"

with the wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect ( 1 Corinthians 1:17 ).

Lest a person be drawn by the clever speeches rather than the conviction of the Spirit in his heart.

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish, foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God ( 1 Corinthians 1:18 ).

To the Greek, to the philosophers the preaching of the cross was foolishness.

When Paul was there in Athens addressing the Epicureans on Mars Hill, when he came to the place in his story where he referred to the resurrection of Jesus and they said, "What's this? Get out of here. What's this babbler talking about? Resurrection; foolishness, ridiculous," and they rejected Paul's message when he came to the cross and the resurrection. Foolishness. "The preaching of the cross is to them that perish, foolishness."

What is your attitude towards the cross of Jesus Christ? It's important that you examine it.

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and I will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where then is the wise? and where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? ( 1 Corinthians 1:19-20 )

Talking now about the Greek philosophers, those men who purported their love for wisdom, the scribe, the disputers of this world.

hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? ( 1 Corinthians 1:20 )

Yes, He surely has.

When I look at the theory of evolution that they are religiously trying to promote and realize the incredible paucity of evidence of transitional forms in the geological column, I realize all of the hype, all of the deceit, all that has gone to promote the theory of evolution. And then I look at the very concepts themselves trying to be pawned off on us as the wisdom of the world men of science. Yes, God has made foolish the wisdom of this world.

To think that I have the capacity to see because one day a little amphibious kind of a creature finally emerged out of the water lifting his frontal part above the water, and allowed the sun to beat down upon it--a mutation, a freckle of sorts that continued the mutation process until it became a nerve center and then developed the optical capacities, and now thank God to a freckle I can see. Yes, God has made foolish the wisdom of this world. I don't read comic books anymore. I read evolutionary books. Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world!

Did you know that when bathtubs were first introduced, that the scientists were warning about the use of bathtubs, how dangerous they were to the health? And the men of science actually had many cities in the United States form ordinances forbidding bathtubs in houses. Oh, my, a person has all kinds of chronic illnesses and all and they start taking baths. There were cities that actually outlawed the use of bathtubs because the scientists warned them about the dangers that could come to man because of their use.

It's interesting to me how often science textbooks have to be revised. I am amazed that facts can change so quickly. When I went to school, the world was only two billion years old and now it's twelve billion, and I'm not that old. See, theoretically, that should make me ten billion years old. It's interesting to me that the Bible really has never needed to be revised; we may get a new translation that updates the language structure for better understanding, but let a person mess with the original text and he's in big trouble. We don't have to keep revising. The revised edition, new, modern, updated, we didn't have to do that, did we?

God has made foolish the wisdom of this world.

For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God ( 1 Corinthians 1:21 ),

God is the one who is the source of wisdom. Through wisdom in Christ it says "are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" ( Colossians 2:3 ). But the world by its wisdom knew not God. That to me is very interesting, for there is no true wisdom that eliminates God.

People today so often speak about being agnostics, the wisdom of this world, the sophisticated person, and so often around the universities you bring up the subject of God, the ultimate knowledge. A person will say, "Well, I'm an agnostic." The wisdom of this world knew not God, but yet, a child can know Him. Where are the wise? The word agnostic in Latin is ignoramus, but that doesn't sound sophisticated, does it? "Well, what about God?" "Oh, I'm an ignoramus, man."

I think it was Eliphaz who said to Job, "Who by searching can find out God unto perfection?" The answer is no one. You can't start with an earth base and reach God. That's the history of religion. Men starting with an earth base, reaching out for the infinite. Thus, religions are doomed for failure by their very nature.

We have in the Bible the revelation of God through Jesus Christ, which is not man reaching out for God, but God reaching down for man. The infinite, it starts with the infinite base reaching to the finite. Thus, God is not found or discovered by man's pursuit and wisdom knew not God. God is discovered by the revelation of Himself to man, and that revelation is oftentimes made through preaching. So the world by its wisdom knew not God.

but it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe ( 1 Corinthians 1:21 ).

So that through the preaching, God is revealed to man that man might believe. Now notice, it is the foolishness of preaching and preaching is really a foolish exercise in a sense, and especially the way some do it. But it is not the preaching of foolishness, so be careful of that, but the foolishness of preaching.

For the Jews require a sign ( 1 Corinthians 1:22 ),

Remember they said to Jesus, "Show us a sign that we might believe."

the Greeks seek after wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews it's a stumbling block ( 1 Corinthians 1:22-23 ),

Even to the disciples it was a stumbling block. The idea that the Messiah would be crucified was a stumbling block.

When Jesus began to say to the disciples after Peter acknowledged, "You are the Messiah," Jesus said "Yes, and I'm going to be turned over to the hands of sinful men and they're going to crucify Me and slay Me. And the third day I'll rise again." Peter said, "Lord, be that far from Thee." Oh, a stumbling block! Peter stumbled over it. Their Messiah rejected, crucified? No way!

The Jews to the present day, for the most part, are still stumbling over the crucifixion, in spite of the fact that they have Psalms 22:0 and Isaiah 53:0 right before them.

"But we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews it's a stumbling block,"

to the Greeks it's foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. The foolishness of God [which is, of course, the preaching of the cross,] is wiser than men; the weakness of God, stronger than men. For look around, you will see brethren, that there are not many wise men after the flesh, and not many mighty, and not many noble, called: But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty ( 1 Corinthians 1:23-27 );

This is the best explanation I can give you for my being the pastor of Calvary Chapel. For God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and Calvary Chapel confounds the wise. They come from all over to study our methods, our techniques, our programs, to discover the secret of how it is that so many people attend a church.

The base things of the world, and things which are despised, God has chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to naught things that are ( 1 Corinthians 1:28 ):

God uses simple things and the purpose is:

That no flesh should glory in his sight ( 1 Corinthians 1:29 ).

Now, if God would use mighty men and noble men and all, then these men would glory in His sight. People would glory in the men that God was using. God doesn't want any flesh to glory in His sight, and so He uses the foolishness of preaching and He uses simple people, base people, not many wise, not many mighty, not many noble to do His work because He wants the glory for the work that He does.

But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption ( 1 Corinthians 1:30 ).

These are the things that we find in Jesus and in the preaching of the cross of Jesus Christ, the wisdom of God. For God had to establish a just basis to forgive man their sins. That God might be righteous when He justified, a problem. How can a just God forgive man his sins?

When you really analyze it and dig into it, you find that God had a real problem, and He solved the problem in the cross. For He sent His Son to take the guilt of our sins and to suffer the penalty of our sins and He died that spiritual death and physical death which is the result of sin. The spiritual death first. On the cross He cried, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken Me?" And there separated from God because of our sins. Secondly, the physical death as He dismissed His Spirit, suffering again the penalty of our sins.

Now, because the penalty has been paid, if I will just believe in Jesus Christ, God now has a righteous basis to forgive me of my sins. There's been a substitute, Christ, my substitute. Oh, the wisdom of God in the cross of Christ. Therein is the righteousness of God revealed. A righteousness again, predicated not upon the law or my works or my obedience to a rule or code of ethics or a standard that I have set or others have set, but a righteousness that is secure and constant because it is based upon the work of Jesus Christ in my behalf, not on my work.

If my righteousness were predicated upon my work, it would be a variable thing, very tenuous. I would have access to God some of the time. But because it is predicated upon the work of Jesus Christ, He has been made to us the righteousness of God. So as Paul said, "Those things which were gain to me," talking about his life in obedience to the law, "I count it loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ for whom I suffered the loss of all things. I count them but refuse that I may know Him and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness which is of the law, but the righteousness which is of Christ through faith" ( Philippians 3:8-9 ). Christ made to us the righteousness of God.

He's made to us the sanctification. I need power over sin. I need power over the flesh. I don't want to live after the flesh, but I find the flesh is strong. It is powerful; it holds me in its power. I try, I struggle, I pray, I vow, I promise, and still I fail, "O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me?"

Well, thank God Jesus Christ has been made the sanctification of God for me. Now I see myself crucified with Christ, for I am in Christ and His death becomes my death--the death of the old man, the death of the old nature. So I'm baptized with Christ, and I bury the old life and the old man, and I come up out of the water risen in Christ to live the new life after the Spirit. The new nature of Christ now in control and living and walking after the Spirit. Christ is made the sanctification of God unto me. Finally, He's made the redemption of God.

Lost, a slave to sin in the bondage of corruption. Through the cross of Jesus Christ I've been purchased and I now belong to a new owner and my allegiance to Him.

That, according as it is written, He that glories, let him glory in the Lord ( 1 Corinthians 1:31 ).

That no flesh should glory in His presence. The only place I can glory tonight is in the cross of Jesus Christ and His finished work in my behalf.

"

Contending for the Faith

For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren: The word "declared" (deloo) is defined as "to make known by relating" (Thayer 131-2-1213). Paul has been told about some sins within the church in Corinth that could possibly cause division (verse 10); but still he refers to them, out of love and concern, as "brethren."

by them which are of the house of Chloe: Paul names the "house of Chloe" as his source of information. All we know about Chloe is that she was a Christian and probably a member of the church in Corinth. It does not appear that Chloe was the only one offering this information. As a matter of fact, she may not, personally, have given any information at all. Paul says the information came from her "house," or her household. Vine says,

the mention of them and of her name implies their willingness to be known as the informants. That the Apostle has no hesitation in identifying them provides sufficient evidence that it was not a case of mere tale-telling, but of God-fearing disclosure to the one who was especially qualified to handle the matter so that it might be dealt with after a godly sort. To impart the information thus was doubtless a grief and a burden and a testing of their faith (17).

that there are contentions among you: The word "contentions" (eris) signifies "a quarrel" (Strong #2054), indicating strife or bitter discussions that would easily deteriorate into divisions. Whenever the term "contention" is found in the New Testament, it always has reference to an evil act. Strife and quarreling were very common within the Corinthian church; it came about because, rather than having Jesus first in their lives, members were trying to get others to side with them.

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

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

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

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

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

Barclay's Daily Study Bible

Chapter 1

AN APOSTOLIC INTRODUCTION ( 1 Corinthians 1:1-3 )

1:1-3 Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle of Jesus Christ, and Sosthenes, our brother, write this letter to the Church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been consecrated in Christ Jesus, to those who have been called to be God's dedicated people in the company of those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus--their Lord and ours. Grace be to you and peace from God, our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

In the first ten verses of Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians the name of Jesus Christ occurs no fewer than ten times. This was going to be a difficult letter for it was going to deal with a difficult situation, and in such a situation Paul's first and repeated thought was of Jesus Christ. Sometimes in the Church we try to deal with a difficult situation by means of a book of laws and in the spirit of human justice; sometimes in our own affairs we try to deal with a difficult situation in our own mental and spiritual power. Paul did none of these things; to his difficult situation he took Jesus Christ, and it was in the light of the Cross of Christ and the love of Christ that he sought to deal with it.

This introduction tells us about two things.

(i) It tells us something about the Church. Paul speaks of The Church of God which is at Corinth. It was not the Church of Corinth; it was the Church of God. To Paul, wherever an individual congregation might be, it was a part of the one Church of God. He would not have spoken of the Church of Scotland or the Church of England; he would not have given the Church a local designation; still less would he have identified the congregation by the particular communion or sect to which it belonged. To him the Church was the Church of God. If we thought of the Church in that way we might well remember more of the reality which unites us and less of the local differences which divide us.

(ii) This passage tells us something about the individual Christian. Paul says three things about him.

(a) He is consecrated in Jesus Christ. The verb to consecrate (hagiazo, G37) means to set a place apart for God, to make it holy, by the offering of a sacrifice upon it. The Christian has been consecrated to God by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. To be a Christian is to be one for whom Christ died and to know it, and to realize that that sacrifice in a very special way makes us belong to God.

(b) He describes the Christians as those who have been called to be God's dedicated people. We have translated one single Greek word by this whole phrase. The word is hagios, which the King James Version translates saints. Nowadays that does not paint the right picture to us. Hagios ( G40) describes a thing or a person that has been devoted to the possession and the service of God. It is the word by which to describe a temple or a sacrifice which has been marked out for God. Now, if a person has been marked out as specially belonging to God, he must show himself to be fit in life and in character for that service. That is how hagios comes to mean holy, saintly.

But the root idea of the word is separation. A person who is hagios ( G40) is different from others because he has been separated from the ordinary run in order specially to belong to God. This was the adjective by which the Jews described themselves; they were the hagios ( G40) laos ( G2992) , the holy people, the nation which was quite different from other peoples because they in a special way belonged to God and were set apart for his service. When Paul calls the Christian hagios ( G40) he means that he is different from other men because he specially belongs to God and to God's service. And that difference is not to be marked by withdrawal from ordinary life, but by showing there a quality which will mark him out.

(e) Paul addresses his letter to those who have been called in the company of those who in every place call upon the name of the Lord. The Christian is called into a community whose boundaries include all earth and all heaven. It would be greatly to our good if sometimes we lifted our eyes beyond our own little circle and thought of ourselves as part of the Church of God which is as wide as the world.

(iii) This passage tells us something about Jesus Christ. Paul speaks of our Lord Jesus Christ, and then, as it were, he corrects himself and adds their Lord and ours. No man, no Church, has exclusive possession of Jesus Christ. He is our Lord but he is also the Lord of all men. It is the amazing wonder of Christianity that all men possess all the love of Jesus Christ, that "God loves each one of us as if there was only one of us to love."

THE NECESSITY OF THANKSGIVING ( 1 Corinthians 1:4-9 )

1:4-9 Always I thank my God for you, for the grace of God which has been given to you in Christ Jesus. I have good reason to do so, because in him you have been enriched in everything, in every form of speech and in every form of knowledge, inasmuch as what we promised you that Christ could do for his people has been proved to be true in you. The result is that there is no spiritual gift in which you lag behind, while you eagerly wait for the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will keep you secure right to the end so that no one will be able to impeach you in the Day of our Lord Jesus Christ. You can rely on God, by whom you were called to share the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

In this passage of thanksgiving three things stand out.

(i) There is the promise which came true. When Paul preached Christianity to the Corinthians he told them that Christ could do certain things for them, and now he proudly claims that all that he pledged that Christ could do has come true. A missionary told one of the ancient Pictish kings, "If you will accept Christ, you will find wonder upon wonder--and every one of them true." In the last analysis we cannot argue a man into Christianity; we can only say to him, "Try it and see what happens," in the certainty that, if he does, the claims we make for it will all come true.

(ii) There is the gift which has been given. Paul here uses a favourite word of his. It is charisma ( G5486) , which means a gift freely given to a man, a gift which he did not deserve and which he could never by himself have earned. This gift of God, as Paul saw it, comes in two ways.

(a) Salvation is the charisma of God. To enter into a right relationship with God is something which a man could never achieve himself. It is an unearned gift, coming from the sheer generosity of the love of God. (compare Romans 6:23).

(b) It gives a man whatever special gifts he may possess and whatever special equipment he may have for life. ( 1 Corinthians 12:4-10; 1 Timothy 4:14; 1 Peter 4:10). If a man has the gift of speech or the gift of healing, if he has the gift of music or of any art, if he has a craftsman's gifts upon his hands, all these are gifts from God. If we fully realized that, it would bring a new atmosphere and character into life. Such skills as we possess are not our own achievement, they are gifts from God, and, therefore, they are held in trust. They are not to be used as we want to use them but as God wants us to use them; not for our profit or prestige but for the glory of God and the good of men.

(iii) There is the ultimate end. In the Old Testament the phrase, The Day of the Lord, keeps recurring. It was the day when the Jews expected God to break directly into history, the day when the old world would be wiped out and the new world born, the day when all men would be judged. The Christians took over this idea, only they took The Day of the Lord in the sense of The Day of the Lord Jesus, and regarded it as the day on which Jesus would come back in all his power and glory.

That indeed would be a day of judgment. Caedmon, the old English poet, drew a picture in one of his poems about the day of judgment. He imagined the Cross set in the midst of the world; and from the Cross there streamed a strange light which had a penetrating X-ray quality about it and stripped the disguises from things and showed them as they were. It is Paul's belief that when the ultimate judgment comes the man who is in Christ can meet even it unafraid because he will be clothed not in his own merits but in the merits of Christ so that none will be able to impeach him.

A DIVIDED CHURCH ( 1 Corinthians 1:10-17 )

1:10-17 Brothers, I urge you through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you should make up your differences and that you should see to it that there may be no divisions among you, but that you should be knit together in the same mind and the same opinion. Brothers, it has become all too clear to me, from information that I have received from members of Chloe's household, that there are outbreaks of strife amongst you. What I mean is this--each of you is saying, "I belong to Paul; I belong to Apollos; I belong to Cephas; I belong to Christ." Has Christ been partitioned up? Was it Paul's name into which you were baptized? As things have turned out, I thank God that I baptized none of you, except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one can say you were baptized into my name. Now that I think of it, I baptized the household of Stephanas too. For the rest, I do not know if I baptized anyone else, for Christ did not send me to baptize but to proclaim the good news, and that not with wisdom of speech, lest the Cross of Christ should be emptied of its effectiveness.

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

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

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

Paul identifies four parties in the Church at Corinth. They have not broken away from the Church; the divisions are as yet within it. The word he uses to describe them is schismata ( G4978) , which is the word for rents in a garment. The Corinthian Church is in danger of becoming as unsightly as a torn garment. It is to be noted that the great figures of the Church who are named, Paul and Cephas and Apollos, had nothing to do with these divisions. There were no dissensions between them. Without their knowledge and without their consent their names had been appropriated by these Corinthian factions. It not infrequently happens that a man's so-called supporters are a bigger problem than his open enemies. Let us look at these parties and see if we can find out what they were standing for.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

STUMBLING-BLOCK TO THE JEWS & FOOLISHNESS TO THE GREEKS( 1 Corinthians 1:18-25 )

1:18-25 For the story of the Cross is foolishness to those who are on the way to destruction, but it is the power of God to those who are on the way to salvation. For it stands written, "I will wipe out the wisdom of the wise and I will bring to nothing the cleverness of the clever." Where is the wise? Where is the expert in the law? Where is the man who debates about this world's wisdom? Did not God render foolish the wisdom of this world? For when, in God's wisdom, the world for all its wisdom did not know God, it pleased God to save those who believe by, what men would call, the foolishness of the Christian message. For the Jews ask for signs and the Greeks search for wisdom, but we proclaim Christ upon his Cross; to the Jews a stumbling-block, to the Greeks a thing of foolishness; but to those who have been called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God, for the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

Both to the cultured Greek and to the pious Jew the story that Christianity had to tell sounded like the sheerest folly. Paul begins by making free use of two quotations from Isaiah ( Isaiah 29:14; Isaiah 33:18) to show how mere human wisdom is bound to fail. He cites the undeniable fact that for all its wisdom the world had never found God and was still blindly and gropingly seeking him. That very search was designed by God to show men their own helplessness and so to prepare the way for the acceptance of him who is the one true way:

What then was this Christian message? If we study the four great sermons in the Book of Acts ( Acts 2:14-39; Acts 3:12-26; Acts 4:8-12; Acts 10:36-43) we find that there are certain constant elements in the Christian preaching. (i) There is the claim that the great promised time of God has come. (ii) There is a summary of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. (iii) There is a claim that all this was the fulfilment of prophecy. (iv) There is the assertion that Jesus will come again. (v) There is an urgent invitation to men to repent and receive the promised gift of the Holy Spirit.

(i) To the Jews that message was a stumbling-block. There were two reasons.

(a) To them it was incredible that one who had ended life upon a cross could possibly be God's Chosen One. They pointed to their own law which unmistakably said, "He that is hanged is accursed by God." ( Deuteronomy 21:23). To the Jew the fact of the crucifixion, so far from proving that Jesus was the Son of God, disproved it finally. It may seem extraordinary, but even with Isaiah 53:1-12 before their eyes, the Jews had never dreamed of a suffering Messiah. The Cross to the Jew was and is an insuperable barrier to belief in Jesus.

(b) The Jew sought for signs. When the golden age of God came he looked for startling happenings. This very time during which Paul was writing produced a crop of false Messiahs, and all of them had beguiled the people into accepting them by the promise of wonders. In A.D. 45 a man called Theudas had emerged. He had persuaded thousands of the people to abandon their homes and follow him out to the Jordan, by promising that, at his word of command, the Jordan would divide and he would lead them dryshod across. In A.D. 54 a man from Egypt arrived in Jerusalem, claiming to be the Prophet. He persuaded thirty thousand people to follow him out to the Mount of Olives by promising that at his word of command the walls of Jerusalem would fall down. That was the kind of thing that the Jews were looking for. In Jesus they saw one who was meek and lowly, one who deliberately avoided the spectacular, one who served and who ended on a Cross--and it seemed to them an impossible picture of the Chosen One of God.

(ii) To the Greeks the message was foolishness. Again there were two reasons.

(a) To the Greek idea the first characteristic of God was apatheia (compare G3806) . That word means more than apathy; it means total inability to feel. The Greeks argued that if God can feel joy or sorrow or anger or grief it means that some man has for that moment influenced God and is therefore greater than he. So, they went on to argue, it follows that God must be incapable of all feeling so that none may ever affect him. A God who suffered was to the Greeks a contradiction in terms.

They went further. Plutarch declared that it was an insult to God to involve him in human affairs. God of necessity was utterly detached. The very idea of incarnation, of God becoming a man, was revolting to the Greek mind. Augustine, who was a very great scholar long before he became a Christian, could say that in the Greek philosophers he found a parallel to almost all the teaching of Christianity; but one thing, he said, he never found, "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us." Celsus, who attacked the Christians with such vigour towards the end of the second century A.D., wrote, "God is good and beautiful and happy and is in that which is most beautiful and best. If then 'He descends to men' it involves change for him, and change from good to bad, from beautiful to ugly, from happiness to unhappiness, from what is best to what is worst. Who would choose such a change? For mortality it is only nature to alter and be changed; but for the immortal to abide the same forever. God would never accept such a change." To the thinking Greek the incarnation was a total impossibility. To people who thought like that it was incredible that one who had suffered as Jesus had suffered could possibly be the Son of God.

(b) The Greek sought wisdom. Originally the Greek word sophist (compare G4678) meant a wise man in the good sense; but it came to mean a man with a clever mind and cunning tongue, a mental acrobat, a man who with glittering and persuasive rhetoric could make the worse appear the better reason. It meant a man who would spend endless hours discussing hair-splitting trifles, a man who had no real interest in solutions but who simply gloried in the stimulus of "the mental hike." Dio Chrysostom describes the Greek wise men. "They croak like frogs in a marsh; they are the most wretched of men, because, though ignorant, they think themselves wise; they are like peacocks, showing off their reputation and the number of their pupils as peacocks do their tails."

It is impossible to exaggerate the almost fantastic mastery that the silver-tongued rhetorician held in Greece. Plutarch says, "They made their voices sweet with musical cadences and modulations of tone and echoed resonances." They thought not of what they were saying, but of how they were saying it. Their thought might be poisonous so long as it was enveloped in honeyed words. Philostratus tells us that Adrian, the sophist, had such a reputation in Rome, that when his messenger appeared with a notice that he was to lecture, the senate emptied and even the people at the games abandoned them to flock to hear him.

Dio Chrysostom draws a picture of these so-called wise men and their competitions in Corinth itself at the Isthmian games. "You might hear many poor wretches of sophists, shouting and abusing each other, and their disciples, as they call them, squabbling; and many writers of books reading their stupid compositions, and many poets singing their poems, and many jugglers exhibiting their marvels, and many sooth-sayers giving the meaning of prodigies, and ten thousand rhetoricians twisting lawsuits, and no small number of traders driving their several trades." The Greeks were intoxicated with fine words; and to them the Christian preacher with his blunt message seemed a crude and uncultured figure, to be laughed at and ridiculed rather than to be listened to and respected.

It looked as if the Christian message had little chance of success against the background of Jewish or Greek life; but, as Paul said, "What looks like God's foolishness is wiser than men's wisdom; and what looks like God's weakness is stronger than men's strength."

THE GLORY OF THE SHAME ( 1 Corinthians 1:26-31 )

1:26-31 Brothers, just look at the way in which you have been called. You can see at once that not many wise men--by human standards--not many powerful men, not many high-born men have been called. But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise men; and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the strong things and God has chosen the ignoble and the despised things of the world, yes, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things which are; and he did this so that no human being might be able to boast in the sight of God. It is through him that we are in Christ Jesus, who, for us, by God, was made wisdom and righteousness and consecration and deliverance, so that what stands written might come true in us. Let him who boasts, boast in the Lord.

Paul glories in the fact that, for the most part, the Church was composed of the simplest and the humblest people. We must never think that the early Church was entirely composed of slaves. Even in the New Testament we see that people from the highest ranks of society were becoming Christians. There was Dionysius at Athens ( Acts 17:34); Sergius Paulus, the proconsul of Crete ( Acts 13:6-12); the noble ladies at Thessalonica and Beroea ( Acts 17:4; Acts 17:12); Erastus, the city treasurer, probably of Corinth ( Romans 16:23). In the time of Nero, Pomponia Graecina, the wife of Plautius, the conqueror of Britain, was martyred for her Christianity. In the time of Domitian, in the latter half of the first century, Flavius Clemens, the cousin of the Emperor himself, was martyred as a Christian. Towards the end of the second century Pliny, the governor of Bithynia, wrote to Trajan the Emperor, saying that the Christians came from every rank in society. But it remains true that the great mass of Christians were simple and humble folk.

Somewhere about the year A.D. 178 Celsus wrote one of the bitterest attacks upon Christianity that was ever written. It was precisely this appeal of Christianity to the common people that he ridiculed. He declared that the Christian point of view was, "Let no cultured person draw near, none wise, none sensible; for all that kind of thing we count evil; but if any man is ignorant, if any is wanting in sense and culture, if any is a fool let him come boldly." Of the Christians he wrote, "We see them in their own houses, wool dressers, cobblers and fullers, the most uneducated and vulgar persons." He said that the Christians were "like a swarm of bats--or ants creeping out of their nests--or frogs holding a symposium round a swamp--or worms in conventicle in a corner of mud."

It was precisely this that was the glory of Christianity. In the Empire there were sixty million slaves. In the eyes of the law a slave was a "living tool," a thing and not a person at all. A master could fling out an old slave as he could fling out an old spade or hoe. He could amuse himself by torturing his slaves; he could even kill them. For them there was no such thing as marriage; even their children belonged to the master, as the lambs of the fold belonged not to the sheep but to the shepherd. Christianity made people who were things into real men and women, more, into sons and daughters of God; it gave those who had no respect, their self-respect; it gave those who had no life, life eternal; it told men that, even if they did not matter to other men, they still mattered intensely to God. It told men who, in the eyes of the world were worthless, that, in the eyes of God they were worth the death of his only Son. Christianity was, and still is, the most uplifting thing in the whole universe.

The quotation with which Paul finishes this passage is from Jeremiah 9:23-24. As Bultmann put it, the one basic sin is self-assertion, or the desire for recognition. It is only when we realize that we can do nothing and that God can and will do everything that real religion begins. It is the amazing fact of life that it is the people who realize their own weakness and their own lack of wisdom, who in the end are strong and wise. It is the fact of experience that the man who thinks that he can take on life all by himself is certain in the end to make shipwreck.

We must note the four great things which Paul insists Christ is for us.

(i) He is wisdom. It is only in following him that we walk aright and only in listening to him that we hear the truth. He is the expert in life.

(ii) He is righteousness. In the writings of Paul righteousness always means a right relationship with God. Of our own efforts we can never achieve that. It is ours only by realizing through Jesus Christ that it comes not from what we can do for God, but from what he has done for us.

(iii) He is consecration. It is only in the presence of Christ that life can be what it ought to be. Epicurus used to tell his disciples, "Live as if Epicurus always saw you." There is no "as if" about our relationship to Christ. The Christian walks with him and only in that company can a man keep his garments unspotted from the world.

(iv) He is deliverance. Diogenes used to complain that men flocked to the oculist and to the dentist but never to the man (he meant the philosopher) who could cure their souls. Jesus Christ can deliver a man from past sin, from present helplessness, and from future fear. He is the emancipator from slavery to self and to sin.

-Barclay's Daily Study Bible (NT)

Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible

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

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

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

b Carrain. l. 3. Ode 7, 9, 19. c L. 4. Epigr. 22. & l. 9. Epigr. 13. d L. 1. sive Attica, p. 38.

Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible

      10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.   11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.   12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.   13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

      Here the apostle enters on his subject.

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

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

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

Kelly Commentary on Books of the Bible

As usual, the introductory words (1 Corinthians 1:1-3) of the epistle give us no little intimation of that which is to follow. The apostle speaks of himself as such "called [to be ] an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God," but coupling a brother with him, "and Sosthenes our brother," he writes to "the church of God at Corinth" not to the saints, as was the case in the epistle to the Romans, but to the church at Corinth "to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus," as in the former epistle "called [to be] saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours."

This will be found to lead the way into the main subject of the present communication. Here we must not look for the great foundations of Christian doctrine. There is the unfolding of the assembly in a practical way; that is, the church of God is not viewed here in its highest character. There is no more than an incidental glance at its associations with Christ. No notice is here taken of the heavenly places as the sphere of our blessing; nor are we given to hear of the bridal affections of Christ for His body. But the assembly of God is addressed, those sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints called, "with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord." Thus room is left for the profession of the Lord's name. It is not, as in Ephesians, "to the saints which are in Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus." There is no such closeness of application, nor intimacy, nor confidence in a really intrinsically holy character. Sanctified they were in Christ Jesus. They had taken the place of being separate, "calling upon the name of the Lord;" but the remarkable addition should be noticed by the way "with all that in every place call upon the name of the Lord, both theirs and ours." And this is the more notable, because if there be an epistle which the unbelief of Christendom tries more than another to annul in its application to present circumstances, it is this first letter to the Corinthians. Nor need we wonder. Unbelief shrinks from that which calls, now rather recalls, the saints to a due sense of their responsibility in virtue of their position as the church of God here below. Those at Corinth had forgotten it. Christendom has not merely forgotten but denied it, and so would fain treat a large part of that which will come before us tonight as a bygone thing. It is not disputed that God did thus work in times past; but they have not the smallest serious thought of submitting to its directions as authoritative for present duty. Yet who can deny that God has taken more care to make this plain and certain in the very frontispiece of this epistle than anywhere else? He is wise and right: man is not. Our place is to bow and believe.

There is another point also to be weighed in the next verses (4-8). The apostle tells them how he thanks his God always on their behalf, but refrains from any expression of thankfulness as to their state. He recognises their rich endowments on God's part. He owns how they had been given all utterance, and all knowledge, the working of the Spirit of God, and His power. This is exceedingly important; for there is a disposition often to consider that difficulties and disorder among the saints of God are due to a want of government and of ministerial power. But no amount of gift, in few or many, can of itself produce holy spiritual order. Disorder is never the result of weakness alone. This, of course, may be taken advantage of, and Satan may tempt men to assume the semblance of a strength they do not possess. No doubt assumption would produce disorder; but weakness simply (where it leads souls, as it should, to spread out their need before the Lord) brings in the gracious action of the Holy Ghost, and the unfailing care of Him who loves His saints and the assembly. It was not so at Corinth. Theirs was rather the display of conscious strength; but at the same time they lacked the fear of God, and the sense of responsibility in the use of what God had given them. They were like children disporting themselves with not a little energy that wrought in vessels which altogether failed in self-judgment. This was a source, and a main source, of the difficulty and disorder at Corinth. It is also of great importance to us; for there are those that continually cry out for increase of power as the one panacea of the church. What reflecting spiritual mind could doubt that God sees His saints are not able to bear it? Power in the sense in which we are now speaking of it that is, power in the form of gift is far from being the deepest need or the gravest desideratum of the saints. Again, is it ever the way of God to display Himself thus in a fallen condition of things? Not that He is restrained, or that He is not Sovereign. Not, moreover, that He may not give, and liberally as suits His own glory; but He gives wisely and holily, so as to lead souls now into exercise of conscience and brokenness of spirit, and thus keep and even deepen their sense of that to which God's church is called, and the state into which it has fallen.

At Corinth there was a wholly different state of things. It was the early rise of the church of God, if I may so say, among the Gentiles. And there was not wanting an astonishing sample of the power of the Spirit in witness of the victory that Jesus had won over Satan. This was now, or at least should have been, manifested by the church of God, as at Corinth. But they had lost sight of God's objects. They were occupied with themselves, with one another, with the supernatural energy which grace had conferred on them in the name of the Lord. The Holy Ghost in inspiring the apostle to write to them in no way weakens the sense of the source and character of that power. He insists on its reality, and reminds them that it was of God; but at the same time he brings in the divine aim in it all. "God," says he, "is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord." Immediately after he alludes to the schisms that were then at work among them, and calls on them to be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment; informing them of the tidings which had reached him through the house of Chloe, that there were contentions among them, some saying, "I am of Paul," others "I am of Apollos;" some, "I am of Cephas," and others "I am of Christ himself." There is no abuse to which flesh cannot degrade the truth. But the apostle knew how to introduce the Lord's name and grace with the grandly simple but weighty facts of His person and work. It was unto His name that they were baptized; it was He that had been crucified. And be it observed, that from the first of this epistle it is the cross of Christ that has the prominence. It is not so much His blood-shedding, nor even His death and resurrection, but His cross. This would have been as much out of place in the beginning of Romans as the putting forward of propitiation would be out of place here. Expiation of sins by Christ, His death and resurrection, are given of God to be displayed before the saints, who needed to know the firm, immutable foundation of grace; but what the saints wanted most was to learn the gross inconsistency of turning to selfish ease, honour, and aggrandisement the privileges of God's church, and the power of the Spirit of God that wrought in its members.

It is the cross which stains the pride of man, and puts all his glory in the dust. Hence the apostle brings Christ crucified before them. This to the Jew was a stumbling-block, and to the Greek foolishness. These Corinthians were deeply affected by the judgment of both Jews and Greeks. They were under the influence of man. They had not realized the total ruin of nature. They valued those that were wise, scribes, or disputers of this world. They were accustomed to the schools of their age and country. They conceived that if Christianity did such great things when those who possessed it were poor and simple, what might it not do if it could only be backed by the ability, and the learning, and the philosophy of men! How it must ride triumphantly to victory! How the great must bow, and the wise be brought in! What a glorious change would result when not the unlettered poor only, but the great and the noble, the wise and the Prudent, were all joined in the confession of Jesus!

Their thoughts were fleshly, not of God. The cross writes judgment on man, and folly on his wisdom, as it is itself rejected by man as folly; for what could seem more egregiously unreasonable to a Greek than the God that made heaven and earth becoming a man, and, as such, crucified by the wicked hands of His creatures here below? That God should use His power to bless man was natural; and the Gentile could coalesce as to it with the Jew. Hence too, in the cross, the Jew found his stumbling-block; for he expected a Messiah in power and glory. Though the Jew and the Greek seemed opposite as the poles, from different points they agreed thoroughly in slighting the cross, and in desiring the exaltation of man as he is. They both, therefore, (whatever their occasional oppositions, and whatever their permanent variety of form,) preferred the flesh, and were ignorant of God the one demanding signs, the other wisdom. It was the pride of nature, whether self-confident or founded on religious claims.

Hence the apostle Paul, in the latter part of chap. 1, brings in the cross of Christ in contrast with fleshly wisdom, as well as religious pride, urging also God's sovereignty in calling souls as He will. He alludes to the mystery (1 Corinthians 2:1-16), but does not develop here the blessed privileges that flowed to us from a union with Christ, dead, risen, and ascended; but demonstrates that man has no place whatever, that it is God who chooses and calls, and that He makes, nothing of flesh. There is glorying, but it is exclusively in the Lord. No flesh should glory in his presence."

This is confirmed in1 Corinthians 2:1-16; 1 Corinthians 2:1-16, where the apostle reminds them of the manner in which the gospel had entered Corinth. He had come there setting his face against all things that would commend himself. No doubt, to one of such eminent ability and such varied gifts as the apostle Paul, it was hard, to speak after the manner of men, to be nothing. How much it must have called for self-denial utterly to decline that which he could have handled so well, and which people at Corinth would have hailed with loud acclamation. Just think of the great apostle of the Gentiles, on the immortality of the soul, giving free rein to the mighty spirit that was in him! But not so. What absorbed his soul, in entering, the intellectual and dissolute capital of Achaia, was the cross of Christ. He determined therefore, as he says, to know nothing else not exactly to know the cross alone, but "Jesus Christ and him crucified." It was emphatically, though not exclusively, the cross. It was not simply redemption, but along with this another order of truth. Redemption supposes, undoubtedly, a suffering Saviour, and the shedding of that precious blood which ransoms the captives. It is Jesus who in grace has undergone the judgment of God, and brought in the full delivering power of God for the souls that believe. But the cross is more than this. It is the death of shame pre-eminently. It is utter opposition to the thoughts, feelings, judgments, and ways of men, religious or profane. This is the part accordingly that he was led in the wisdom of God to put forward. Hence the feelings of the apostle were distrust of self, and dependence on God according to that cross. As he says, "I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling." Thus, as Christ Himself is said in 2 Corinthians 13:1-14 to be crucified in weakness, such was also the servant here. His speech and his preaching was "not in enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power." Accordingly, in this chapter he proceeds to supplement the application of the doctrine of the cross to the state of the Corinthians by bringing in the Holy Ghost; for this again supposes the incapacity of man in divine things.

All is opened out in a manner full of comfort, but at the same time unsparing to human pride. Weigh from the prophecy of Isaiah the remarkable quotation "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit." There is first the great standing fact before our eyes. Such is the Saviour to the saved. Christ crucified is the death-knell on all man's wisdom, and power, and righteousness. The cross writes total condemnation on the world. It was here the world had to say to Jesus. All that it gave Him was the cross. On the other hand, to the believer it is the power of God and the wisdom of God, because he humbly but willingly reads in the cross the truth of the judgment of his own nature as a thing to be delivered from, and finds Him that was crucified, the Lord Himself, undertaking a deliverance just, present, and complete; as he says, "Of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." Flesh is absolutely put down. Man cannot go lower for weakness and ignominy than the cross on which hangs all the blessedness God gives the believer. And therein God is glorified as He is nowhere else. This in both its parts is exactly as it should be; and faith sees and receives it in Christ's cross. The state of the Corinthians did not admit of Christ risen being brought in, at least here. It might have drawn a halo, as it were, round human nature this presenting the risen man in the first instance. But he points to God as the source, and Christ as the channel and means, of all the blessing. "Of him," says he, "are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." But then, as he shows, there was not only this great source of blessing in Christ, but there is the power that works in us. Never is it the spirit of man that lays hold of this infinite good which God vouchsafes him. Man requires a divine power to work within him, just as he needs the Saviour outside himself

Accordingly, in 1 Corinthians 2:1-16, still carrying on the thought of Christ crucified, and connecting it with their condition, he intimates that he was in no wise limited to it. If persons were grounded in Christianity, he was prepared to go into the greatest depths of revealed truth; but then the power of entering safely was not human, but of the Holy Ghost. Man is no more capable of fathoming the depths of divine things than a brute can comprehend the works of human wit or science. This doctrine was utterly repulsive to the pride of the Greeks. They might admit man to have need of pardon, and of moral improvement. They fully admitted his want of instruction, and refinement, and, so to speak, of spiritualization, if it only might be. Christianity deepens our estimate of every want. Man not only wants a new life or nature, but the Holy Ghost. It is not merely His grace in a general sense, but the power of the Holy Ghost personally dwelling in him. It is this alone which can lead us into the deep things of God. And this, he lets us see, affects not merely this particular or that, but the whole working of divine grace and power in man. The whole and sole means of communicating blessing to us must be the Holy Ghost. Hence he insists, that as it is the Spirit of God in the first place who reveals the truth to us, so it is the same Spirit who furnishes suitable words, as, finally, it is through the Holy Ghost that one receives the truth revealed in the words He Himself has given. Thus, from first to last, it is a process begun, carried on, and completed by the Holy Ghost. How little this makes of man!

This introduces 1 Corinthians 3:1-23 and gives point to his rebukes. He taxes them with walking as men. How remarkable is such a reproach! Walking as men! Why, one might ask, how else could they walk? And this very difficulty as no doubt it would be to many a Christian now (that walking as men should be a reproach) was no doubt a clap of thunder to the proud but poor spirits at Corinth. Yes, walking as men is a departure from Christianity. It is to give up the distinctive power and place that belongs to us; for does not Christianity show us man judged, condemned, and set aside? On the faith of this, living in Christ, we have to walk. The Holy Ghost, besides, is brought in as working in the believer, and this, of course, in virtue of redemption by our Lord Jesus. And this is what is meant by being not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, which is proved by the Holy Ghost dwelling in us.

Here the apostle does not explain all this, and he gives a very withering reason for his reticence. These Corinthians had an uncommonly good opinion of themselves, and so they must be told plainly the reason why he does not open out these deep things. They themselves were not fit; they were but babes. What! the polished Greek believers no more than babes! This was rather what they would have said of the apostle or of his teaching. They thought themselves far in advance. The apostle had dwelt on the elementary truths of the gospel. They yearned after the fire of Peter and the rhetoric of Apollos. No doubt they might easily flatter themselves it was to carry on the work of God. How little many a young convert knows what will best lead him on! How little the Corinthians dreamt of depreciating the Second man, or of exalting the first! Hence the apostle tells them that he could not speak unto them as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. "I have fed you with milk, and not with meat." Far from denying, he owns that their insinuation was true he had only brought before them elementary truths. They were not in a condition to bear more. Now this is full of meaning and importance practically at all times. We may damage souls greatly by presenting high truths to those that want the simplest rudiments of divine truth.

The apostle, as a wise master-builder, laid the foundation. The state of the Corinthians was such that he could not build on the foundation as he would have desired. His absence had given occasion for the breaking out of their carnal wishes after the world's wisdom. They were making even the ardour of a Peter and the eloquence of an Apollos to be a reason for dissatisfaction with one that, I need not say, was superior to both of them. But the apostle meets them in a way most unexpected to their self-satisfaction and pride, and lets them know that their carnality was the real reason why he could not go on with them into deeper things.

This leads him to point out the seriousness of the work or building; for he presents the church of God under this figure. What care each servant needs to take how and what he builds! What danger of bringing in that which would not stand the fire or judgment of God nay, further, of bringing in that which was not simply weak and worthless, but positively corrupting; for it was to be feared there were such elements even then at Corinth! Again he brings in another principle to bear upon them. Their party spirit, their feeling of narrowness, the disposition to set up this servant of Christ or that, was not only a dishonour to the Master, but a real loss to themselves. Not that there is any ground to suppose it was the fault of Peter or Apollos any more than of Paul. The evil was in the saints themselves, who indulged in their old zeal of the schools, and allowed their natural partiality to work. In point of fact this never can be without the most grievous impoverishment to the soul, as well as a hindrance to the Holy Ghost. What faith must learn is, that "all things are yours, whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas; . . . . . all are yours." Thus the subject enlarges, as is his wont, taking in an immense breadth of the Christian's possessions life, death, things present, and things to come. "All are yours, and ye are Christ's, and Christ is God's."

This again brings in another point before the subject closes. He is not content with the pressing of responsibility on others; he had a solemn sense of his own place, which made him wonderfully independent of the judgments of men. Obedience gives firmness as well as humility. Not in the smallest degree was the pride of the Corinthians met by pride on his part, but by keeping the Lord and His will before his soul. Yet this is certainly true that this effect of faith looks like pride to a man who merely views things on the surface. The calm going on in the service of Christ, the endurance of this spirit or that, as no more than the idle wind, was no doubt exceedingly unpleasant to such as were wise in their own conceit, and valued the criticism they freely bestowed on the different servants of the Lord. But Paul sees all in the light of the eternal day. They had forgotten this, and were in a sense trafficking with these powers of the Spirit of God. They were making them the counters of a game they were playing in this world. They had forgotten that what God gives He gives in time, but in view of eternity. The apostle puts the truth of the case before their souls as he had it vividly before his own. (1 Corinthians 4:1-21)

Another thing is noticeable here. He had reproached them with walking not as Christians but as men (that is, with their habitual life and conversation formed on human principles instead of divine). On the other hand, it would appear from what follows, that they reproached the apostle in their hearts, not, of course, in so many words, with not being enough of a gentleman for their taste. This seems to me the gist of the fourth chapter. It was a thing that they considered quite beneath a Christian minister to work from time to time with his hands, often poor, occasionally in prison, knocked about by crowds, and so on. All this they thought the fruit of indiscretion and avoidable. They would have preferred respectability, public and private, in one who stood in the position of a servant of Christ. This the apostle meets in a very blessed way. He admitted that they were certainly not in such circumstances; they were reigning as kings. As for him it was enough to be the off-scouring of all men, this was his boast and blessedness. He wished that they did indeed reign that he might reign with them (that the blessed time might really arrive). How his heart would rejoice in that day with them! And surely the time will come, and they would all reign together when Christ reigns over the earth. But he quite admits that for the present the fellowship of Christ's sufferings was the place he had chosen. Of honour in the world, and ease for the flesh, he at least could not, if they could, boast. Present greatness was what he in no wise coveted; to suffer great things for His sake was what the Lord had promised, and what His servant expected in becoming an apostle. If his own service was the highest position in the church, his was certainly the lowest position in the world. This was as much an apostle's boast and glory as anything that God had given them. No answer can I conceive more telling to any one of his detractors at Corinth who had a heart and conscience.

In 1 Corinthians 5:1-13 we enter on another and more painful part of the epistle. A fearful instance of sin had come to light, so gross, indeed, that the like was not even named among the Gentiles. In fact it was a case of incest, and this among those called of God, and sanctified in Christ Jesus! The question is not in the least raised whether the guilty person was a saint or not; still less does he allow that which one so often and painfully heard pleaded in extenuation, "Oh, but he [or she] is a dear Christian." Christian affection is most excellent; as brethren we should love even to laying down life for each other; as it is also very right that we should own the work God has wrought, above all what He has wrought in grace. But when one bearing the name of the Lord has, through unwatchfulness, fallen into wickedness, which of course grieves the Holy Ghost and stumbles the weak, it is not the time to talk thus. It is the time, in the very love that God implants, to deal sternly with that which has disgraced the name of the Lord. Is this to fail in love to the person? The apostle showed ere long that he had more love for this evildoer than any of them. The second epistle to the Corinthians entreats them to confirm their love to him whom they had put away. They were too hard against him then, as they were too loose now. Here their consciences needed to be roused. To deal with the matter they owed to the Lord Jesus. It was not merely getting rid of the obnoxious man. They had to prove themselves clear in the matter certainly; but he puts before them another course, whenever the guilty one had repented.

"I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already," etc. The case was most gross, and there was no question about it. The facts were indisputable; the scandal was unheard of. "I have judged already, as though present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh." There was no discussion raised whether the person might be converted. The fact is, church discipline supposes and goes on the ground that those on whom it is exercised are Christians; but when it is a question of discipline, it is not the season for the display of Christian affection. This would falsify the conscience and turn the eye from off the point to which the Holy Ghost was directing attention. There was wickedness in their midst; and while known and unjudged, all were implicated; none could be clean till it was put away. Accordingly the apostle, while he expresses the desire that the spirit of the man should be saved in the day of the Lord, flesh being destroyed, at the same time rouses the saints to that which became the name of the Lord on the very ground that they were unleavened. If they were free from evil, let them act consistently. Let them preserve that purity in practice which was theirs in principle. They were unleavened, and therefore should be a new lump. Notoriously there was old leaven among them. What business had it there? "Put away from" not the table of the Lord merely, this he does not say, but "Put away from among yourselves." This is much stronger than expelling from the table. Of course, it implies exclusion from the Lord's table, but from their table too "with such an one, no, not to eat." An ordinary meal, or any such act expressive even in natural things of fellowship with the person thus dishonouring the Lord, is forbidden.

Mark, they must put away. It is not the apostle acting for them; for God took particular care that this case, demanding discipline to the uttermost, should be where the apostle was not. What an admirable instruction for us who have no longer an apostle! None can pretend that it was an assembly where there was a high degree of knowledge or spirituality. The very reverse was the case. The responsibility of discipline depends on our relationship as an assembly to the Lord, not on its changing states. The Corinthians were babes; they were carnal. He who loved them well could not speak of them as spiritual. Nevertheless, this responsibility attached to the very fact that they were members of Christ His body. If saints are gathered to the name of the Lord, and so are God's assembly, if they have faith to take such a position here below, and have the Holy Ghost owned as in their midst, this, and nothing short of this, is their responsibility; nor does the ruined state of the church touch the question, nor can it relieve them from their duty to the Lord. The church at Corinth had soon failed most gravely far and wide. This was the more shameful, considering the brightness of the truth vouchsafed to them, and the striking manifestation of divine power in their midst. The presence of apostles elsewhere in the earth, the beautiful display of Pentecostal grace at Jerusalem, the fact that so short a time had elapsed since they had been brought out of heathenism into their standing in God's grace, all made the present state of the Corinthians so much the more painful; but nothing can ever dissolve the responsibility of saints, whether as individuals or as an assembly. "Put away from among yourselves that wicked person."

Another thing is to be observed, that the Holy Spirit's scale of sin is not that of man. Which of you, my brethren, would have thought of classing a railer with an adulterer? A railer is one who uses abusive language for the purpose of injuring another, not the transient out-breaking of flesh, sad as it is, but provoked it may be, or at any rate, happening through unwatchfulness. The habit of evil speaking stamps him who practises it as a railer; and such a man is unfit for the company of the saints, for God's assembly. It is the old leaven of malice and wickedness. He is unclean. Doubtless the world would not so judge; but this is not the world's judgment. The Corinthians were under the influence of the world. The apostle had already shown that to walk as men is beneath the Christian. Now we see that to walk as the world, no matter how refinedly, ever exposes Christians to act worse than men of the world. God has stamped upon His children the name of Christ; and what does not express His name is inconsistent, not only with the Christian, but with His assembly. They are all as such held responsible, according to the grace and holiness and glory of Christ, for the sin done in their midst, of which they are cognisant. They are bound to keep themselves pure in ways.

There was another case also: brother was going to law with brother. (1 Corinthians 6:1-20) We have no reason to think they had fallen so far as to go to law with those that were not brethren; this would seem to be a lower step still. But brother was going to law with brother, ,and this before the unjust. How often now-a-days one hears, "Well, one expects something better from a brother; and surely he ought to suffer the consequences of his ill-doing." This was just the feeling of the Corinthian plaintiff. What, then, is the weapon that the apostle uses in this case? The dignified place in the glory that God designs for the Christian: "Know ye not that we shall judge the world judge angels?" Were such going before the Gentiles? Thus is seen how practical all truth is, and how God casts the bright light of the approaching day on the smallest matters of the life of today.

Again, there was no quarter in the world where personal purity was more unknown than at Corinth. Indeed, such were the habits of the ancient world, it would only defile the ears and minds of God's children to have any proofs of the depravity in which the world then lay, and that too in its best estate, the wisest and the greatest not excepted, those, alas. whose writings are in the hands of the youth of our day, and more than ever, perhaps, in their hands. Those wits, poets, and philosophers of heathen antiquity lived in habitual, yea, often in unnatural grossness, and thought nothing of it. It is a danger for the saints of God to be tinctured by the atmosphere of the world outside when the first fervour of grace cools, and they begin to take up their old habits. It was certainly so at Corinth.

Accordingly the believers there were betrayed into their former uncleanness of life when the heavenly light got dim. And how does the apostle deal with this? He recalls to them the Holy Spirit's dwelling in them. What a truth, and of what force to the believer! He does not say simply that they were redeemed, though he brings it in also; still less does he merely reason on the moral heinousness of the sin; neither does he cite the law of God that condemned it. He presses upon them that which was proper to them as Christians. It was no question of man, let him be Gentile or Jew, but of a Christian. Thus he sets before them the distinctive Christian blessing the Holy Ghost dwelling in the believer, and making his body (not his spirit but his body) a temple of the Holy Ghost; for here was precisely where the enemy seems to have misled these Corinthians. They affected to think they might be pure in spirit, but do what they liked with their bodies. But, answers the apostle, it is the body which is the temple of the Holy Ghost. The body belongs to the Lord and Saviour; the body, therefore, and not the spirit only, He claims now. No doubt that the spirit be occupied with Christ is a grand matter; but the licentious flesh of man would talk, at any rate, about the Lord, and at the same time indulge in evil. This is set aside by the blessed fact that the Holy Ghost even now dwells in the Christian, and this on the ground of his being bought with a price. Thus the very call to holiness ever keeps the saint of God in the sense of his immense privileges as well as of his perfect deliverance.

1 Corinthians 7:1-40 naturally leads from this into certain questions that had been proposed to the apostle touching marriage and slavery questions which had to do with the various relationships of life. The apostle accordingly gives us what he had learned from the Lord, as well as what he could speak of as a commandment of the Lord, distinguishing in the most beautiful manner, not between inspired and non-inspired, but between revelation and inspiration. All the word is inspired; there is no difference as to this. There is no part of Scripture that is less inspired than another. " All (every) scripture is given by inspiration of God;" but all is not His revelation. We must distinguish between parts revealed and the whole inspired. When a thing is revealed of God, it is absolutely new truth, and of course is the commandment of the Lord. But the inspired word of God contains the language of all sorts of men, and very often the conversation of wicked men nay, of the devil I need not say that all this is not a revelation; but God communicates what Satan and wicked men say (as for instance Pilate's words to our Lord and the Jews). None of these evidently was that which is called a revelation; but the Holy Ghost inspired the writers of the book to give us exactly what each of these said, or revealed what was in the mind of God about them. Take, for example, the book of Job, in which occur the sayings of his friends. What intelligent reader could think that they were in any way authorised communicators of the mind of God? They say sometimes very wrong things, and sometimes wise, and often things that do not in the smallest degree apply to the case. Every word of the book of Job is inspired; but did all the speakers utter necessarily the mind of God? Did not one of the speakers condemn one or other of the rest? Need one reason on such facts? This, no doubt, makes a certain measure of difficulty for a soul at the first blush; but on maturer consideration all becomes plain and harmonious, and the word of God is enhanced in our eyes.

And so it is in this chapter, where the apostle gives both the commandment of the Lord, and his own matured spiritual judgment, which he expressly says was not the commandment of the Lord. Still he was inspired to give his judgment as such. Thus the whole chapter is inspired, one part of it just as much as another. There is no difference in inspiration. What was written by the different inspired instruments is of God as absolutely as if He had written it all without them. There is no degree in the matter. There can be no difference in inspiration. But in the inspired word of God there is not always revelation. Sometimes it is a record which the Spirit gave a man to make of what he had seen and heard, sometimes he recorded by the Spirit what no man could have seen or heard. Sometimes it was a prophecy of the future, sometimes a communication of God's present mind according to His eternal purpose. But all is equally and divinely inspired.

The apostle then lays down at least as far as may be here briefly sketched that while there are cases where it is a positive duty to be married, undisguisedly there was a better place of undivided devotedness to Christ. Blessed is he who is given. thus to serve the Lord without let: still it must be the gift of God. The Lord Jesus had laid down the same principle Himself. InMatthew 19:1-30; Matthew 19:1-30, it is needless to say, you have the selfsame truth in another form.

Again, while the Lord employs the apostle thus to give us both His own commandment and His mind, the general principle is stated as to the relationships of life. It is broadly laid down that one should remain in that condition in which he is called, and for a very blessed reason. Supposing one were a slave even, he is already, if a Christian, a freeman of Christ. You must remember that in these days there were everywhere bondmen: those that then ruled the. world took them from all classes and all countries There were bondmen highly educated, and once in a high position of life. Need it be said that often these bondmen rose up against their cruel masters? The very knowledge of Christ, and the possession of conscious truth, if grace did not counteract mightily, would tend to increase their sense of horror at their position. Suppose, for instance, a refined person, with the truth of God communicated to his soul, was the slave of one living in all the filth of heathenism, what a trial it would be to serve in such a position! The apostle urges the truth of that liberty in Christ which Christendom has well-nigh forgotten that if I am Christ's servant I am emancipated already. Match if you can the manumission he has got. Twenty millions will procure no such emancipation. At the same time, if my master allows me liberty, let me use it rather. Is it not a remarkable style of speech and feeling? The Christian, even if a slave, possesses the best freedom after all: anything else is but circumstantial. On the other hand, if you are a freeman, take care how you use your liberty: use it as the Lord's bondman. The freeman is reminded of his bondmanship; the bondman is reminded of his freedom. What a wonderful antithesis of man is the Second Man! How it traverses all the thoughts, circumstances, and hopes of flesh!

Then he brings before us the different relationships at the end of the chapter, as they are affected by the coming of the Lord. And there is nothing which shows more the importance of that hope as a practical power. There is not only the direct but the indirect allusion when the heart is filled with an object; and the indirect is a yet stronger witness of the place it holds than the direct. A mere hint connects itself with that which is your joy and constant expectation; whereas when a thing is little before the heart you require to explain, prove, and insist upon it. But this chapter brings vividly before them how all outward things pass away, even the fashion of this world. Time is short. It is too late either to make much of scenes so changing, or to seek this thing or that here below with such a morrow before our eyes. Hence he calls on those who had wives to be as those who had none, on those who were selling and buying to be above all the objects that made up the sum of business. In short, he puts Christ and His coming as the reality, and all else as the shadows, transitions, movements of a world that even now crumbles underneath us. No wonder that he follows all up at the end with his own judgment, that the man most blessed is he who has the least entanglement, and is the most thoroughly devoted to Christ and His service.

Next in 1 Corinthians 8:1-13 he begins to take up another danger for the Corinthian saints. They had the sound of the truth ringing in their ears; and assuredly there are few sounds sweeter than the liberty of the Christian. But what is more liable to abuse? They had abused power to self-exaltation; they were now turning liberty to license. But there is a solemn fact which none can afford to forget as to both power and liberty that without responsibility nothing is more ruinous than either. Herein lay the sad failure of these saints. In the sense of responsibility they were utterly wanting They seem to have forgotten completely that the Lord from whom the liberty had come is the One in whose sight, and for whose glory, and according to whose will, all power was to be used. The apostle recalls them to this; but he takes up their license in going into heathen temples, and eating things offered to idols, not first of all on the high ground of the Lord, but on account of their brethren. In their boasted liberty, and because they knew an idol was nothing, they considered that they might go anywhere, and do what they pleased. Nay, not so, cries the apostle; you must consider your brother. There is many a disciple who, far from knowing how vain idolatry is, thinks a good deal of the idol. Thus, you that know so much, if you make light of going here and there, will induce other disciples to follow your steps who may slip into idolatry through it, and thus a brother perish for whom Christ died; and what is the liberty of one who is instructed may prove the extreme ruin of one who is equally a believer in the Lord. Thus he looks at the thing in its full character and ultimate tendency if unchecked. Grace, as we know, can arrest these tendencies, and avert the evil results.

In 1 Corinthians 9:1-27 he interrupts the course of his argument by an appeal to his own place as an apostle. Some were beginning to question his apostolate. It was not that he in the slightest degree forgot his call by God's will to that special service; neither was he insensible to the blessed liberty in which he was serving the Lord. He could lead about a sister-wife like another; he had foregone this for the Lord's sake. He could look for support from the church of God; he preferred to work with his own hands. So in the second epistle to the Corinthians he begs them to forgive the wrong; for he would not accept anything from them. They were not in a condition to be entrusted with such a gift. Their state was such, and God had so overruled it in His ways, that the apostle had received nothing from them. This fact he uses in order to humble them because of their pride and licentiousness.

The course of this chapter then touches on his apostolic place, and at the same time his refusal to use the rights of it. Grace can forego all questions of right. Conscious of what is due, it asserts rights for others, but refuses to use them for itself. Such was the spirit and the faith of the apostle. And now he shows what he felt as to practical state and walk. Far from being full of his knowledge, far from only using his place in the church for the assertion of his dignity and for immunity from all trouble and pain here below, he on the contrary was as one under the law to meet him that was under it; he was as a Gentile to meet him that was free from law (that is, a Gentile). Thus he was a servant of all that he might save some. Besides, he lets them know the spirit of a servant, which was so lacking in the Corinthians in spite of their gifts; for it is not the possession of a gift, but love which serves and delights in service. The simple fact of knowing that you have a gift may and often does minister to self-complacency. The grand point is to have the Lord before you, and when others are thought of, it is in the love which has no need to seek greatness, or to a et it. The love of Christ proves its greatness by serving others.

This, then, was the spirit of that blessed servant of the Lord. He reminds them of another point that he was himself diligent in keeping his body in subjection. He was like a man with a race that was going to be run, and who gets his body into training. He puts this in the strongest way, "Lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway." Mark the tact of the apostle. When he has something discreditable to say, he prefers to say it about himself; when he has something pleasing to say, he loves to put it with regard to others. So here he says, "Lest I myself become a castaway," not " you." He meant their profit, no doubt; his aim was for them to have their own consciences searched by it. If Paul even was exercising himself to have a conscience void offence; if Paul was keeping his body in subjection, how much more did these men need it? They were abusing all the comfort that Christianity brings, to live at ease and play the gentleman, if one may speak according to modern language. They had not entered in the smallest degree into the spirit of the moral glory of Christ humbled here below. They had dislocated the cross from Christianity. They had severed themselves from the power of service. Thus they were in the utmost possible jeopardy; but the apostle, who had the blessedness of Christ before him, and the fellowship of His sufferings is scarce another had like him, even he used all diligence of heart, and held a tight rein over himself. Faithful man as he was, he allowed himself none of these licenses. Liberty indeed he prized, but it was not going here and there to feasts of idols. He was free to serve Christ, and time was short: what had such an one to do with heathen temples?

Thus he wants them to feel their danger, but first of all he begins with himself. He was free but watchful; and he was jealous over himself, the greater the grace shown him. It was not that he in the smallest degree doubted his security in Christ, as some so foolishly say; or that such as have eternal life may lose it again. But it is plain that men who merely take the place of having eternal life may, and often do, abandon that place. Those who have eternal life prove it by godliness; those who have it not prove the lack of it by indifference to holiness, and lack of that love which is of God. So the apostle shows that all his knowledge of the truth, far from making him careless, prompted him to yet greater earnestness, and to daily denial of himself. This is a very important consideration for us all (I press it more especially on the young in such a day as this); and the greater the knowledge of the saints, the more they need to keep it in view.

The apostle draws their attention to another warning in the history of Israel. These had eaten of the same spiritual meat, for so he calls it; they had the heaven-sent manna, had drunk of the same spiritual drink; yet what became of them? How many thousands of them perished in the wilderness? The apostle is approaching far closer to their state. He began with application to his own case, and now he points to Israel as a people sanctified to Jehovah. At length the word is, "Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man; but God is faithful." This was a great comfort, but it was also a serious caution. "God is faithful who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able." It is in vain, therefore, to plead circumstances as an excuse for sin. "But [He] will, with the temptation, also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it. Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry." He makes it plain that he is, with characteristic address, dealing with their little-exercised consciences from the statement of his own earnest vigilance over his ways, and then from the sad and solemn history of Israel judged of the Lord. Thus, too, he goes forward into new ground, the deeper spiritual motives, the appeal to Christian affection as well as to faith. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? He begins with that which most nearly touches the heart. It would have been an order more natural, if one may so say, to speak of the body of Christ; as we know in the Lord's supper habitually, there is that which brings before us first the body and then the blood. The departure from what may be called the historical order makes the emphasis incomparably greater. More than that, the first appeal is founded on the blood of Christ, the answer of divine grace to the deepest need of a soul found in its guilt before God and covered with defilement. Was this to be slighted? "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?" He does not here say, "the blood" or the "body of the Lord." This we find in 1 Corinthians 11:1-34; but it is here Christ, because it becomes a question of grace. "The Lord" brings in the idea of authority. This, then, is evidently an immense advance in dealing with the subject. Accordingly he now develops it, not on the ground of injury to a brother, but as a breach of fellowship with such a Christ, and indifference to His immense love. But he does not forget His authority: "Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table and of the table of demons." It is not simply the love of Christ, but His full authority as the Lord. The apostle contrasts two mighty powers that were contesting demons, on the one hand, a power stronger than man, struggling as to him here below; and, on the other hand, there was the Lord that had shed His blood for them, but the Lord of all who should judge quick and dead. Hence he follows up with a comprehensive and simple principle, but full of liberty withal, that in going into the market you need ask no questions. If I do not know that the food has been connected with idols, the idol is nothing to me; but the moment I know it, it is no longer the question of an idol but a demon; and a demon, be assured, is a very real being indeed. Thus what the apostle insists on amounts to this, that their vaunted knowledge was short indeed. Whenever a person boasts, you will in general find. that he particularly fails precisely where he boasts most. If you set up for great knowledge, this will be the point in which you may be expected to break down. If you set up for exceeding candour, the next thing we may well dread to hear is that you have played very false. The best thing is to see that we give ourselves credit for nothing. Let Christ be all our boast. The sense of our own littleness and of His perfect grace is the way, and the only way, to go on well. "This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?"

Then in 1 Corinthians 11:1-34 we enter on another point. It would seem that the sisters at Corinth gave them a deal of trouble, and that they had forgotten entirely their due relative place. No doubt the men were at least as much to blame. It is hardly possible that women should ever put themselves forward in the church unless Christian men have deserted their true, responsible position and public action. It is the man's place to guide; and although women may assuredly be far more useful in certain cases, still, unless the man guides, what an evident departure from the order God has assigned to them both! How complete a desertion of the relative position in which they were placed from the first! Thus it was at Corinth. Among the heathen, women played a most important part, and in no quarter of the world, perhaps, so prominent a one as there. Need it be said that this was to their deep shame? There was no city in which they were so degraded as that in which the attained such conspicuous and unnatural prominence. And how does the apostle meet this new feature? He brings in Christ. This is what decides all. He affirms the everlasting principles of God, and he adds that which has so brightly been revealed in and by Christ. He points out that Christ is the image and the glory of God, and that the man stands in an analogous place as connected with and distinguished from the woman. That is to say, the woman's place is one of unobtrusiveness, and in fact, she is most effective where she is least seen. The man, on the contrary, has a public part a rougher and ruder task, no doubt one that may not at all bring into play the finer affections, but which demands a calmer and more comprehensive judgment. The man has the duty of the outward rule and administration.

Accordingly he marks the first departure from what was right by the woman's losing the sign of her subjection. She was to have a covering, on her head; she was to have that which indicated as a sign that she was subject to another. The man seemed to have failed just in the opposite way; and although this may seem a very little thing, what a wonderful thing it is, and what power it shows, to be able to combine in the same epistle eternal things and the very smallest matter of personal decorum, the wearing of long hair or short, the use of a covering on the head or not! How truly it marks God and His word!! Men. would scorn to combine them both in the same epistle; it seems so petty and so incongruous. But it is the littleness of man which calls for big matters to make him important; but the smallest things of God have significance when they bear on the glory of Christ, as they always do. In the first place, it was out of order that a woman should prophesy with her head uncovered; man's place was to do so. He was the image and the glory of God. The apostle connects it all with first principles, going up to the creation of Adam and Eve in a very blessed manner, and above all bringing in the second Man, the last Adam. Did they think to improve on both?

The latter part of the chapter takes up not the relative place of the man and the woman, but the supper of the Lord, and so the saints gathered together. The first part of it, as is evident, has nothing to do with the assembly, and thus does not dispose of the question whether a woman should prophesy there. In fact, nothing is said or implied in the early verses of the assembly at all. The point primarily mooted is of her prophesying after the manner of a man, and this is done with the greatest possible wisdom. Her prophesying is not absolutely shut out. If a woman has a gift for prophecy, which she certainly may have as well as a man, for what is it given of the Lord but for exercise? Certainly such an one ought to prophesy. Who could say the gift of prophecy given to a woman is to be laid up in a napkin? Only she must take care how she does exercise it. First of all, he rebukes the unseemly way in which it was done the woman forgetting that she was a woman, and the man that he is responsible not to act as a woman. They seem to have reasoned in a petty way at Corinth, that because a woman has a gift no less than a man, she is free to use the gift just as a man might. This is in principle wrong; for after all a woman is not a man, nor like one officially, say what you please. The apostle sets aside the whole basis of the argument as false; and we must never hear reasoning which overthrows what God has ordained. Nature ought to have taught them better. But he does not dwell on this; it was a withering rebuke even to hint at their forgetfulness of natural propriety.

Then, in the latter verses, we have the supper of the Lord, and there we find the saints expressly said to be gathered together. This naturally leads the way to the spiritual gifts that are treated of in1 Corinthians 12:1-31; 1 Corinthians 12:1-31. As to the supper of the Lord, happily I need not say many words to you. It is, by the great mercy of God, familiar to most of us; we live, I may say, in the enjoyment of it, and know it to be one of the sweetest privileges God vouchsafes us here below. Alas! this very feast had furnished occasion, in the fleshly state of the Corinthians, to a most humiliating abuse. What led to it was the Agape, as it was styled; for in those days there was a meal which the Christians used to take together. Indeed, the social character of Christianity never can be overlooked without loss, but in an evil state it is open to much abuse. Everything that is good may be perverted; and it never was intended to hinder abuse by extinguishing that which was only to be maintained aright in the power of the Spirit of God. No rules, no abstinence, no negative measures, can glorify God, or make His children spiritual; and it is only by the power of the Holy Ghost in producing a sense of responsibility to the Lord as well as of His grace that saints are duly kept. So it was then at Corinth, that the meeting for the Lord's Supper became mingled with an ordinary meal, where the Christians ate and drank together. They were glad to meet at any rate, originally it was so, when love was gratified with the company of each other. Being not merely young Christians, but unwatchful and then lax, this gave rise to sad abuse. Their old habits re-asserted their influence. They were accustomed to the feasts of the heathen, where people thought nothing whatever of getting drunk, if it was not rather meritorious. It was in some of their mysteries considered a wrong to the god for his votary not to get drunk, so debased beyond all conception were the heathen in their notions of religion.

Accordingly these Corinthian brethren had by little and little got on until some of them had fallen into intemperance on the occasion of the Eucharist; not, of course, simply by the wine drank at the table of the Lord, but through the feast that accompanied it. Thus the shame of their drunkenness fell upon that Holy Supper; and hence the apostle regulated, that from that time forward there should be no such feast coupled with the Lord's Supper. If they wished to eat, let them eat at home; if they came together in worship, let them remember it was to eat of the Lord's body, and to drink of the Lord's blood. He puts it in the strongest terms. He does not feel it needful or suitable to speak of "the figure" of the Lord's body. The point was to make its grace and holy impressiveness duly felt. It was a figure, no doubt; but .still, writing to men who were at least wise enough to judge aright here, he gives all its weight, and the strongest expression of what was meant. So Jesus had said. Such it was in the sight of God. He that partook undiscerningly and without self-judgment was guilty of the body and blood of the Lord Jesus. It was a sin against Him. The intention of the Lord, the true principle and practice for a saint, is to come, examining his ways, trying his springs of action, putting himself to the proof; and so let him eat (not stay away, because there is much discovered that is humbling). The guard and warning is, that if there be not self-judgment, the Lord will judge. How low is the state of things to which all saints tend, and not the Corinthians only! There ought to have been, I suppose, an interposition of the church's judgment between the Christian's lack of self-judgment and the Lord's chastenings; but, alas! man's duty was altogether lacking. It was from no want of gifts. They had no sense of the place God designed self-judgment to hold; but the Lord never fails.

In 1 Corinthians 12:1-31 accordingly, the apostle enters on a full statement of these spiritual powers. He shows that the distinctive feature of that which the Spirit of God leads to is the confession, not exactly of Christ, but of Jesus as Lord. He takes the simplest and most necessary ground that of His authority. This is observable in verse 3: "Wherefore I give you to understand that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed, and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost." Impossible that the Spirit should dishonour, yea, that He should not exalt, Him who humbled Himself for God's glory. "Now, there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord; and there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God that worketh all in all." They had forgotten all this. They were pre-occupied with human thoughts, with this clever Jew and that able Gentile. They had lost sight of God Himself working in their midst. The apostle points out that if there were different services, if distinct gifts to one and another, it was for the common good of all. He illustrates the nature of the church as a body with its various members subserving the interests of the body and the will of the head. "By one Spirit were we all baptized into one body;" it is not the Holy Ghost merely making many members, but "one body." Accordingly he confronts with this divine aim their misuse of their spiritual powers, independence one of another, disorder as to women, self-glorification, and the like, as we see in1 Corinthians 14:1-40; 1 Corinthians 14:1-40 the detail. He presses that the least comely members, those that are least seen, may be of more importance than any others; just as in the natural body some of the most vital parts are not even visible. What would a man do without a heart, or liver, or lungs? So in the spiritual body there are members which are most important and not seen at all. But men are apt to value most those which make a showy appearance. Thus he rebukes the whole tenor and spirit of Corinthian vanity; at the same time he maintains their place of blessing and responsibility to the last. After all their faults he does not hesitate to, say, "Now ye are the body of Christ." This way of dealing with souls has been grievously enfeebled in the present day. Grace is so feebly known, that the first thought you will find amongst godly people is what they ought to be; but the ground and weapon of the apostle Paul is what they are by God's grace. "Ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular; and God hath set some in the church." It was far from his mind in the least to deny it. Observe here an important use of the expression, "the church." It cannot be the local assembly, because, looking at Corinth, no apostles were there. Whatever might be the providential arrangements outside in the world, he is looking at the assembly of God here on earth; and it is the assembly as a whole, the Corinthian assembly being, as every true assembly is, a kind, of representative, of the church universally. It is the church of God here below; not merely churches, though that was true also.

Thus we can look at what the church will be by-and-by glorified and absolutely perfect. We can also look at a particular local assembly. Besides there is this most important sense of the church never to be forgotten namely, that divine institution viewed as a whole on. earth. Members of Christ no doubt compose it; but there is His body, the assembly as a whole, in which God works here below. Such is the reason why we do not find in this epistle evangelists or pastors, because it is not a question of what is needed to bring souls in or lead them on. He looks at the church as a thing already, subsisting as the witness of the power of God before men. Therefore it was not at all necessary to dwell on those gifts which are the fruit of Christ's love to and cherishing of the church. It is regarded as a vessel of power for the maintenance of God's glory, and responsible for this here below. Therefore tongues miracles, healings, the use of outward powers, are largely dwelt on here.

But we pass on to another and a still more important theme, a wonderfully full picture even for God's word, that most perfect and beautiful unfolding of divine love which we have in 1 Corinthians 13:1-13. After all, if the Corinthians had coveted gifts, they had not coveted the best But even if we may desire the best gifts, there is better still; and the best of all is charity love. Accordingly we have this in the most admirable manner brought out both in what it is and in what it is not, and that too as corrective of the wrong desires of the Corinthians, and the evil spirit which had manifested itself in the exercise of their gifts; so that what seems to be an interruption is the wisest of parentheses between chapter 12, which shows us the distribution of gifts and their character, and chapter 14, which directs the due exercise of gifts in the assembly of God. There is but one safe motive-power for their use, even love. Without it even a spiritual gift only tends to puff up its owner, and to corrupt those who are its objects.

Hence 1 Corinthians 14:1-40 thus opens: "Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy." And why? Prophecy seemed to be somewhat despised amongst the Corinthians. Miracles and tongues were liked, because these made themselves of importance. Such wonders made men stare, and drew general attention to those who were invested evidently with a superhuman energy. But the apostle lays it down, that the gifts which suppose the exercise of spiritual understanding have a far higher place. He himself could speak more tongues than they all. It need hardly be added that he did more miracles than any of them. Still, what he valued most was prophesying. We must not suppose that this gift simply means a man preaching. Prophesying never means preaching. More than this, prophesying is not simply teaching. It, no doubt, is teaching; but it is a good deal more. Prophesying is that spiritual application of the word of God to the conscience which puts the soul in His presence, and makes manifest as light to the hearer the mind of God. There is a great deal of valuable teaching, exhortation, and application, that has no such character. It is all very true, but it does not put the soul in the presence of God; it gives no such absolute certainty of God's mind flashing on the condition and judging the state of the heart before Him. I do not speak now of the unconverted, though prophesying might affect such as well as the converted. The direct object of it was, of course, the people of God; but in the course of the chapter the unbeliever is shown coming into the assembly and falling on his face, and owning that God was among them of a truth. Such is the genuine effect. The man finds himself judged in the presence of God.

There is no need to enter into all that this chapter brings before us, but it may be well to observe that we have giving of thanks and blessing, as well as singing and prayer. Prophesying and the rest are brought in as all pertaining to the Christian assembly. What was not directly edifying, as speaking in a tongue, is forbidden unless one could interpret. I doubt very much whether there was any revelation after the scheme of Scripture was complete. To suppose anything revealed, when that which is commonly called the canon was closed, would be an impeachment of God's purpose in it. But till the last portion of His mind was written down in a permanent form for the church, we can quite understand His goodness in allowing a special revelation now and then. This gives no warrant to look for anything of the sort at any time subsequent to the completion of the New Testament. Again, it is plain from this that there are certain modifications of the chapter. Thus so far it is true that if anything has, through the will of God, terminated (for instance, miracles, tongues, or revelations), it is evident that such workings of the Spirit ought not to be looked for; but this does not in the smallest degree set aside the Christian assembly or the exercise according to God's will of what the Spirit still distinctly gives. And undoubtedly He does continue all that is profitable, and for God's glory, in the present state of His testimony and of His church here below. Otherwise the church sinks into a human institute.

In the end of the chapter a very important principle is laid down. It is vain for people to plead the mighty power of God as an excuse for anything disorderly. This is the great difference between the power of the Spirit and the power of a demon. A demon's power may be uncontrollable: chains, fetters, all the power of man outside, may utterly fail to bind a man who is filled with demons. It is not so with the power of the Spirit of God. Wherever the soul walks with the Lord, the power of the Spirit of God on the contrary is always connected with His word, and subject to the Lord Jesus. No man can rightly pretend that the Spirit forces him to do this or that unscripturally. There is no justification possible against Scripture; and the more fully the power is of God, the less will a man think of setting aside that perfect expression of God's mind. All things therefore are to be done decently and in order an order which Scripture must decide. The only aim, as far as we are concerned, that God endorses, is that all be done to edification, and not for self-display.

The next theme (1 Corinthians 15:1-58) is a most serious subject doctrinally, and of capital importance to all. Not only had the devil plunged the Corinthians into confusion upon moral points, but when men begin to give up a good conscience, it is no wonder if the next danger is making shipwreck of the faith. Accordingly, as Satan had accomplished the first mischief among these saints, it was evident the rest threatened soon to follow. There were some among them who denied the resurrection not a separate state of the soul, but the rising again of the body. In fact the resurrection must be of the body. What dies is to be raised. As the soul does not die, "resurrection" would be quite out of place; to the body it is necessary for God's glory as well as man. And how does the apostle treat this? As he always does. He brings Christ in. They had no thought of Christ in the case. They seem to have had no wish to deny the resurrection of Christ; but should not a Christian have at once used Christ to judge all by? The apostle at once introduces His person and work as a test. if Christ did not rise, there is no resurrection, and therefore no truth in the Gospel; "your faith is vain: you are yet in your sins." Even they were quite unprepared for so dreadful a conclusion. Shake the resurrection and Christianity goes. Having reasoned thus, he next points out that the Christian waits for the time of joy and glory and blessing for the body by-and-by. To give up resurrection is to surrender the glorious hope of the Christian, and to be the most miserable of men.. For what could be more cheerless than to give up all present enjoyment without that blessed hope, for the future at Christ's coming? Thus strongly was the whole complex nature of man before the apostle's mind in speaking of this hope of blessedness by-and-by.

Then, somewhat abruptly, instead of discussing the matter any more, he unfolds a most weighty revelation of truth "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first-fruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the. resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." True, the kingdom is not yet come for which we are waiting, but it 'will come. See how all truth hangs together, and how Satan labours to make a consistency in error. He knows the weakness of man's mind. Nobody likes to be inconsistent. You may be dragged into it, but you are never comfortable when you have a sense of inconsistency about you. Hence, after one. error gains empire over the mind of man, he is ready to embrace others just to make all consistent.

Such was the danger here among the Corinthians. They had been offended by the apostle's supreme indifference to all that is of esteem among men. His habits of speech and life were not at all up to the mark that they supposed seemly before the world in a servant of God. Out of this fertile root of evil has the clergy grown. It has been the effort to acquire as much refinement as possible. Holy orders make a man a sort of gentleman if he was not so before. This seems to have been at work in, the minds of these critics of the apostle. Here we find what lay at the bottom of the matter. There is generally a root of evil doctrine where you find people wrong in practice. At any rate, where it is a deliberate, persistent, and systematic error, it will not be merely a practical one, but have a root deep underneath. And this was what now came out at Corinth. It was feebleness about that which, after all, lies at. the very foundation of Christianity. They did not mean to deny the person of Christ or His condition as risen from the dead; but, this is what the enemy meant, and into this their wrong notion tended to drift them. The next step, after denying resurrection for the Christian, would be to deny it about Christ. And here the apostle does not fail to rebuke them, and in a manner trenchant enough. He (exposes the stupidity of their questions, wise as they flattered themselves to be. How? It is always the danger of man that he is not content to believe; he would like first of all to understand. But this is ruinous in divine things, which are entirely outside sense and reason. All real understanding for the Christian is the fruit of faith.

The apostle does not hesitate in apostrophising the unbeliever, or at any rate, the errorist he has in view, to expose his folly. "Thou fool," says he, "that which thou sowest is not quickened except it die." Thus the strongest possible censure falls on these Corinthians, and this for the very matter in which they plumed themselves. Human reasoning is poor indeed outside its own sphere. However, he is not content merely with putting down their speculations; he brings in subsequent and special revelation. The previous part of the chapter had pointed out the connection of Christ's resurrection with our resurrection, followed by the kingdom which finally gives place in order that God may be all in all. In the latter part of the chapter he adds what had not been explained hitherto, From the early portion we should not have known but that all saints die, and that all rise at Christ's coming. But this would not be the full truth. It is most true that the dead in Christ rise, of course, but this does not explain about the living saints. He had vindicated the glorious character of the resurrection; he had proved how fundamental, and momentous, and practical, is the truth that the body is to be raised again, which they were disposed to deny as though it were a low thing, and useless even if possible. They imagined the true way to be spiritual was to make much of the spirit of man. God's way of making us spiritual is by a simple but strong faith in the resurrection-power of Christ; look to His resurrection as the pattern and spring of our own. Then at the last he adds that he would show them a mystery. On this I must just say a few words in order to develop its force.

The resurrection itself was not a mystery, The, resurrection of just and unjust was a well-known Old Testament truth. It might be founded on Scriptures comparatively few, but it was a fundamental truth of the Old Testament, as the apostle Paul lets us hear in his controversy with the Jews in the Acts of the Apostles. In fact, the Lord Jesus also assumes the same thing in the gospels. But if the raising of the dead saints was known, and even the raising of the wicked dead, the change of the living saints was a truth absolutely unrevealed. Up to this it was not made known, It was a New Testament truth, as this indeed is what is meant by a "mystery." It was one of those, truths that were kept secret in the Old Testament, but now revealed not so much a thing difficult to comprehend when stated, as a thing not revealed before. "And behold," says he, "I show you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed." Evidently this supports and confirms, while it might seem an exception to, the resurrection; but, in point of fact, it gives so much the more force and consistency to the rising of the dead in a very unexpected way. The general truth of the resurrection assuredly does put the sentence of death on all present things to the believer, showing that the earth cannot rightly be the scene of his enjoyment, where all is stamped with death, and that he must wait for the resurrection power of Christ to be applied before he enters the scene where the rest of God will be our rest, and where there will be nothing but joy with Christ, and even this earth will behold Christ and His saints reigning over it till the eternal day. The addition to this of the New Testament truth of the chance gives immense impressiveness to all, and a fresh force, because it keeps before the Christian the constant expectancy of Christ. "Behold, I show you a mystery" not now that the dead in Christ shall rise, but "we," beginning with the "we" "we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed; for this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal shall put on immortality." And "therefore," as he closes with the practical deduction from it all, "my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work, of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord."

The last chapter is now before us, in which the apostle lays down a weighty exhortation as to collections for the saints. He puts it on the ground of their being prospered in any degree, and connects it with the special day of Christian enjoyment, when they gather together for the communion of saints. "Upon the, first day of the week let every one of you lay by in store as he has been prospered, that there be no gatherings when I come." Need it be said how human influence has dislocated the truth there? No doubt this was precisely what the apostle, or the Holy Ghost rather, discerned to be at work at Corinth, the same mistake that has wrought so malignantly in Christendom; that is to say, personal rank, learning, eloquence, or a great name (as of an apostle for instance), invoked to call out the generosity of the saints (perhaps, even of the world), and increase the proceeds by all these or like means.

But is there not another danger? Is there no snare for you, beloved brethren? When persons are more or less free from the ordinary incubus of tradition, when they are not so much under the influence of excitement, and of those appeals to the love of being known and of pleasing this or that man, or the cause, or any of those human motives that often do operate, I apprehend that they are exposed to danger in a wholly opposite direction. Do we sufficiently make it a matter of personal responsibility to the Lord, everyone of us, to give, and that in connection with the first day of the week and its blessed surroundings and objects, when we meet at His table? Do we every one of us give as we are prospered by the way? It is very well to keep clear of human influence, but let us see to it that we do not forget that "the Lord has need" of our giving for the purposes He loves here below. And of this I am sure, that if we have rightly cast aside mere human calls, and if we do thank God for the deliverance from worldly influence, and from the power of custom, public opinion, etc., it would be a deep reproach if we did not do double as much now, under the grace that confides in us, as we used to do under the law that used to govern us. Your own consciences must answer whether you can meet the Lord about this matter. I believe that we are in no small danger of settling down in the conviction that our old way was quite wrong, and simply keeping the money in our pockets. It does seem to me, I confess, that bad as human pressure may be in order to raise money, bad as may be a variety of earthly objects in this way or that, bad as a worldly lavish expenditure is, after all, a selfish personal keeping to ourselves of what we have is the worst thing of all. I am quite persuaded that the danger of the saints of God who have been brought outside the camp lies here, lest, delivered from what they know to be wrong, they may not seek in this an exercised conscience. Standing in the consciousness of the power of God's grace, they need to be continually looking out that they be devoted to Him. To cease doing what was done in a wrong way, and sometimes for wrong ends too, is not enough. Let there be zealous and vigilant exercise of soul, and enquiry how to carry out right objects in right ways, and so much the more, if indeed a simpler, fuller knowledge of God's grace and of Christ's glory has been given us.

Then we have various forms of ministry noticed. It is not here gifts as such, but persons devoted to labouring in the Lord; for there is a difference between the two things, as this chapter shows us strikingly. For instance, the apostle himself comes before us in ministry with his especial gift and position in the church. Then again, Timothy is there, his own son in the faith, not only an evangelist, but with a charge over elders at length, to a certain extent acting occasionally for the apostle Paul. Again, we have the eloquent Alexandrian thus introduced: "As touching our brother Apollos I greatly desired him to come unto you, but his will was not at to come at this time." How delicate and considerate the grace of Paul who wished Apollos to go to Corinth then, and of Apollos who wished not to go under the circumstances! On the face of the case we have the working of liberty and responsibility in their mutual relations; and the apostle Paul is the very one to tell us that Apollos's will was not to go as he himself wished at this time. It was no question of one in a place of worldly superiority regulating the movements of another of subordinate degree. The apostle did express his strong desire for Apollos to go; but Apollos must stand to his Master, and be assured that he was using a wisdom greater than that of man's. Finally, we observe another character of service lower down in "the house of Stephanas." This was a simpler case and a humbler position, but very real before God, whatever the danger of being slighted of men. Hence, I think, the word of exhortation "I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the first-fruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints,)" etc. They gave themselves up in an orderly manner to this work. "That ye submit yourselves," not merely to Timothy or to Apollos, but to such, to the simple-hearted Christian men whose desire was to serve the Lord with the measure of power they had, and this proved by their persevering labour. Undoubtedly, in the midst of the difficulties of the church, in the face of the oppositions and disappointment, manifold griefs, enemies, and sources of sorrow and shame, it requires the power of God to go on without being moved by any of these things. It is an easy thing to make a start; but nothing short of the power of God can keep one without wavering at the work in the face of everything to cast down. And this was the question. We may suppose that these Corinthians were troublesome enough. From the statements made in the early part of the epistle it is evident; and so the apostle calls upon them to submit themselves. Evidently there was an unsubject spirit, and those ministered to thought they were just as good as the house of Stephanas. It is good to submit ourselves "unto such, and to every one that helpeth with us and laboureth." I am persuaded, beloved brethren, that it is no impeachment of the blessedness of the brotherhood to maintain the speciality of ministry in the Lord. There can be in these matters no more deplorable error than to suppose that there is not to be this godly submission one toward another, according to the place and power that the Lord is pleased to entrust.

The Lord grant that our souls may hold fast the truth here revealed, and in no general or perfunctory way. All I pretend to now is to give a sketch or combination of the parts of the epistle. But may the word itself, and every part of it, sink into our souls and be our joy, that we may not only take the precious truth of such an epistle as the Romans for the peace and joy of our hearts in believing individually, but also may understand our place by faith as of God's assembly on earth, and with thankful praise as those that call on the name of the Lord ours as well as theirs as those that find ourselves practically in need of such exhortations. The Lord give us His own spirit of obeying the Father.