[ 1Co 1:1-3]. The salutation is full and varied in the epp. of this group. As in Galatians and Romans, P. emphasises his apostleship (see [ 1Co 9:1] f.), at present in dispute. The readers are (in 1 and 2 Cor.) “the Church” and “the saints”—a transition from “the ch.” of 1 and 2 Thess. (“the churches,” Gal.) to “the saints” of Rom. and later epp. Here stress is thrown with a purpose, (1) on the sanctity of the Cor[32] Church, (2) on its fellowship with the general body of Christians.
[32] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[ 1Co 1:2]. τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ (in salutation of 1 and 2 Cor[39] only) gives supreme dignity to the assembly of Cor[40] addressed by the Ap. of Christ Jesus—the assembled citizens of God’s kingdom and commonwealth ([ Eph 2:12]; [ Eph 2:19]; cf. [ Tit 2:14], [ 1Pe 2:9] f.). τῇ οὔσῃ ἐν Κορ., “that exists in Corinth”—lætum et ingens paradoxon (Bg[41]): so far the Gospel has reached ([ 2Co 10:13] f.); in so foul a place it flourishes! ([ 1Co 6:9] ff.). Not as earlier, “the assembly of Thessalonians,” etc.: the conception of the ecclesia widens; the local Christian gathering is part of one extended “congregation of God,” existing in this place or that (see last clause). To τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τ. Θεοῦ is apposed, by way of predicative definition (hence anarthrous), ἡγιασμένοις ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, “the Church of God (consisting of men) sanctified in Christ Jesus”: Church status is grounded on personal relationship to God in Christ. Now this relationship began with God’s call, which summoned each to a holy life within the Christian fellowship; hence the further apposition, κλητοῖς ἁγίοις (see note on 1, and [ Rom 1:7]; cf. [ Act 18:10], λαός ἐστίν μοι πολύς κ.τ.λ.). The pf. pass[42] ptp[43] expresses a determinate state: once for all the Cor[44] readers have been devoted to God, by His call and their consent. This initial sanctification is synchronous with justification ([ 1Co 6:11]), and is the positive as that is the negative side of salvation: ἐλευθερωθέντες ἀπὸ τ. ἁμαρτίας, ἐδουλώθητε τ. δικαιοσύνῃ ([ Rom 6:16-19]). “Sanctified in Christ Jesus” (= “living to God in Christ Jesus,” [ Rom 6:11]) imports union with Christ ([ 1Co 6:17]; [ 1Co 6:19], [ 1Co 12:11], [ Rom 8:9] f.) as well as salvation through Christ. His past work is the objective ground, His present heavenly being (implied by the name “Christ Jesus,” as in this order) the active spring of this ζῆν τῷ Θεῷ: cf. [ 1Co 1:30] and note. The repeated ref[45] to the holiness of the readers recalls them to their vocation; low practice calls for the reassertion of high ideals; admonet Corinthios majestatis ipsorum (Bg[46]). Cv[47] draws a diff[48] yet consistent inference: “Locus diligenter observandus, ne requiramus in hoc mundo Ecclesiam omni ruga et macula carentem”. The adjunct σὺν πᾶσιν … τόπῳ may qualify ἡγιασμένοις κ.τ.λ. (so some moderns), or the main predicate (Gr[49] Ff[50]): i.e., the Church shares (a) in its Christian sanctity, or (b) in the Apostle’s good wishes, “with all that call upon the name,” etc. (b) gives a better balanced sentence, and a true Pauline sentiment: cf. [ Eph 6:24], also the Benediction of Clem. Rom. ad Cor[51], lxv.—ἐν πάντι τόπῳ, an expression indefinitely large (see parls.), approaching “in all the world” of [ Rom 1:8], [ Col 1:6]; there is nothing here to indicate the limit given in [ 2Co 1:1]. The readers belong to a widespread as well as a holy community; Paul insists on this in the sequel, pointing in reproof to “other churches”. To “call on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ”—to invoke Him in prayer as “Lord”—is the mark of the Christian, by which Saul, e.g., once recognised his victims (see parls.), the index of saving faith ([ 1Co 12:3], [ Rom 10:12] ff.). The afterthought αὐτῶν καὶ ἡμῶν, correcting the previous ἡμῶν (Cm[52], Cv[53], Gd[54], Sm[55]), heightens the sense of wide fellowship given by the previous clause; “one Lord” ([ 1Co 8:6]; [ Rom 10:12]; [ Rom 14:9], [ Eph 4:5]) unites all hearts in the obedience of faith. To attach these pronouns to τόπῳ (in omni loco ipsorum et nostro, Vg[56]) gives a sense strained in various ways: “their place and ours,”—belonging to us equally with them (Mr[57], El[58], Ed[59]); “illorum (prope Cor[60]), nostro (ubi . et Sosth. versabantur,” Bg[61]); in non-Pauline and Pauline Churches (Hn[62]); and so on.
[39] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[40] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[41] Bengel’s Gnomon Novi Testamenti.
[42] passive voice.
[43] participle
[44] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[45] reference.
[46] Bengel’s Gnomon Novi Testamenti.
[47] Calvin’s In Nov. Testamentum Commentarii.
[48] difference, different, differently.
[49] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
[50] Fathers.
[51] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[52] John Chrysostom’s Homiliœ († 407).
[53] Calvin’s In Nov. Testamentum Commentarii.
[54] F. Godet’s Commentaire sur la prem. Ép. aux Corinthiens (Eng. Trans.).
[55] P. Schmiedel, in Handcommentar zum N.T. (1893).
[56] Latin Vulgate Translation.
[57] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[58] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians.
[59] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians.
[60] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[61] Bengel’s Gnomon Novi Testamenti.
[62] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklärung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).
[ 1Co 1:3]. χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ Θεοῦ κ.τ.λ.: Paul’s customary greeting; see note on [ Rom 1:7]. “The occurrence of the peculiar phrase ‘grace and peace’ in Paul, John, and Peter intimates that we have here the earliest Christian password or symbolum” (Ed[63]). κυρίου might grammatically be parl[64] to ἡμῶν, both depending upon πατρός, as in [ 2Co 1:3], etc.; but 1 and [ 2Th 1:1] (Θεῷ πατρὶ κ. Κυρίῳ Ἰ. Χ.) prove Father and Lord in this formula to be parl[65]: cf. [ 1Co 8:6], [ 2Co 13:13]; nowhere does P. speak (as in [ Joh 20:17]) of God as Father of Christ and of men co-ordinately, and for ἡμῶν to come first in such connexion would be incongruous. “The union of” Θεοῦ and Κυρίου “under the vinculum of a common prp[66] is one of the numberless hints scattered through St. Paul’s epp. of the consciously felt and recognised co-ordination” of the Father and Christ (El[67]).
[63] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians.2
[64] parallel.
[65] parallel.
[66] preposition.
[67] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians.
[ 1Co 1:4-9]. § 2. THE THANKSGIVING. The Pauline thanksgiving holds the place of the captatio benevolentiœ in ancient speeches, with the diff[68] that it is in solemn sincerity addressed to God. The Ap. thanks God (1) for the past grace given the Cor[69] in Christ, [ 1Co 1:4]; (2) for the rich intellectual development of that grace, according with the sure evidence upon which they had received the Gospel, and attended by an eager anticipation of Christ’s advent, [ 1Co 1:5-7]; (3) for the certainty that they will be perfected in grace and found unimpeached at Christ’s return—a hope founded on God’s fidelity to His own signal call, [ 1Co 1:8] f. Paul reflects gratefully on the past, hopefully on the future of this Church; he is significantly silent respecting its present condition: contrast with this the Thess. and Phil. Thanksgivings. He extracts from a disquieting situation all the comfort possible.
[68] difference, different, differently.
[69] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[ 1Co 1:5]. ὅτι κ.τ.λ. stands in explicative apposition to the foregoing τ. χάριτι τ. δοθείσῃ, bringing out the matter of thanksgiving eminent in the conversion of the Cor[75]—“(I mean), that in everything you were enriched,” etc. For this defining ὅτι after a vbl[76] noun, cf. [ 1Co 1:26] and [ 2Co 1:8]. The affluence of endowment conferred on the Cor[77] stirred the Apostle’s deep gratitude (cf. [ 1Co 1:7], [ 2Co 8:9]): this wealth appears in another light in [ 1Co 4:6-10], [ 1Co 5:2], [ 1Co 8:1-3]; see also Introd., p. 730 f. The Church doubtless dwelt upon this distinction in its recent letter, to which P. is replying. ἐν παντὶ is defined, and virtually limited, by ἐν παντὶ λόγῳ καὶ πάσῃ γνώσει (kindred gifts, linked by the single prp[78]): the exuberance of grace in the Cor[79] shone “in all (manner of) utterance and all (manner of) knowledge”. λόγος in this connexion signifies not the thing said (as in 18), but the saying of it, loquendi facultas (Bz[80]). “Relatively to γνῶσις, λόγος is the ability and readiness to say what one understands; γν. the power and ability to understand” (Hn[81]). “Knowledge” would naturally precede; but the Cor[82] excelled and delighted in “speech” above all: see [ 1Co 2:1-4]; [ 1Co 2:13], [ 1Co 4:19] f., [ 1Co 13:1].
[75] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[76] verbal.
[77] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[78] preposition.
[79] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[80] Beza’s Nov. Testamentum: Interpretatio et Annotationes (Cantab., 1642).
[81] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklärung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).
[82] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[ 1Co 1:6]. τοῦ Χριστοῦ is objective gen[83] to τὸ μαρτύριον—“the witness to Christ,”—coming from both God and man ([ 1Co 15:3-11], [ 2Th 1:10]); otherwise in [ 1Co 2:1]; cf. [ Rom 1:2], “the good news of God about His Son”. μαρτόριον indicates the well-established truth of the message (see, e.g., [ 1Co 15:15]), εὐαγγέλιον its beneficial and welcome nature (see [ Rom 1:16] f.).—ἐβεβαιώθη ἐν ὑμῖν, “(the witness about Christ) was made sure among you”; its reality was verified. By outward demonstration—miracles, etc.; or by the inner persuasion of a firm faith, “interna Spiritus virtus” (Cv[84])? The latter certainly, in Pauline usage (see parls.: but not to the exclusion of the former); cf. [ 1Co 2:4] f., and notes; [ 1Co 12:10], ἐνεργήματα δυνάμεων; also [ 1Th 1:5] f., [ 1Co 2:13], [ Gal 3:5]; the two went together—πολλῶν θαυμάτων, ἀφάτου χάριτος (Cm[85]). At first discouraged, Paul had preached at Cor[86] with signal power, and his message awakened a decided and energetic faith; see [ 1Co 2:1-5], [ 1Co 15:1]; [ 1Co 15:11]; [ Act 18:5-11].
[83] genitive case.
[84] Calvin’s In Nov. Testamentum Commentarii.
[85] John Chrysostom’s Homiliœ († 407).
[86] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[ 1Co 1:7] describes the result of the firm establishment of the Gospel: ὥστε ὑμᾶς μὴ ὑστερεῖσθαι κ.τ.λ. (ὥστε with inf[87] of contemplated result: see Bn[88] §§ 369 ff.), “causing you not to feel behindhand in any gift of grace”; the mid[89] ὑστερεῖσθαι implies subjective reflexion, the consciousness of inferiority (Ev[90]): similarly in [ Rom 3:23], “find themselves short of the glory of God” (Sanday and Headl.); and in [ Luk 15:14], “he began to feel his destitution”. The pr[91] inf[92] and ptp[93] of the vbs. bear no ref[94] to the time of writing; their time is given by the governing ἐβεβαιώθη: the strong assurance with which the Cor[95] embraced the Gospel was followed by a shower of spiritual energies, of which they had a lively sense. A χάρισμα (see parls.) is χάρις in some concrete result (see Cr[96] s. v.),—a specific endowment of (God’s) grace, whether the fundamental charism, embracing all others, of salvation in Christ ([ Rom 5:16]), or, e.g., the special and individual charism of continence ([ 1Co 7:7]). No church excelled the Cor[97] in the variety of its endowments and the satisfaction felt in them. Chaps. 12–14 enumerate and discuss the chief Cor[98] χαρίσματα, setting ἀγάπη in their midst; ethical qualities are included under this term, [ 1Co 1:8] f.—ἀπεκδεχομένους τ. ἀποκάλυψιν κ.τ.λ. “while you eagerly awaited (or eagerly awaiting, as you did) the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ”. The vb[99] is one of P.’s characteristic intensive compounds (see parls.). The anarthrous pr[100] ptp[101] implies a continuous state conditioning that of the foregoing clause: the unstinted plenty of Divine gifts continued while the recipients fixed their thought upon the day of Christ; [ 1Co 15:12]; [ 1Co 15:33] f. show that this expectation had been in many instances relaxed. Romans 8 and Colossians 3 (also [ 1Jn 2:28] to [ 1Jn 3:3]) illustrate the bearing of faith in the παρουσία on Christian character; cf. Matthew 25, [ Luk 12:32] ff., etc. It is an ἀποκάλυψις, an “unveiling” of Christ that the Cor[102] looked for; since although they are “in Christ,” still he is hidden ([ Col 3:3] f.); His presence is a mystery ([ Col 1:27], [ Eph 5:32]). “Παρουσία denotes the fact of Christ’s (future) presence, ἑπιφάνεια its visibility” and splendour, “ἀποκάλυψις its inner meaning” (Ed[103]); φανέρωσις (it might be added: [ Col 3:4]) its open display. The Cor[104] were richly blessed with present good, while expecting a good far exceeding it: “a tacit warning against fancied satisfaction in the present” (Gd[105]: cf. [ 1Co 4:8]).
[87] infinitive mood.
[88] E. Burton’s Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in the N.T. (1894).
[89] middle voice.
[90] T. S. Evans in Speaker’s Commentary.
[91] present tense.
[92] infinitive mood.
[93] participle
[94] reference.
[95] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[96] Cremer’s Biblico-Theological Lexicon of N.T. Greek (Eng. Trans.).
[97] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[98] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[99] verb
[100] present tense.
[101] participle
[102] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[103] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians.2
[104] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[105] F. Godet’s Commentaire sur la prem. Ép. aux Corinthiens (Eng. Trans.).
[ 1Co 1:8]. ὃς καὶ βεβαιώσει ὑμᾶς echoes ἐβεβαιώθη ([ 1Co 1:6]); cf. the thanksgiving of [ Php 1:6]. ἕως τέλους (see parls.) points to a consummation, not a mere termination of the present order; cf. [ Rom 6:21] f. ἀνεγκλήτους, “unimpeached,” synonymous with ἀμέμπτους (unblamed), but judicial in significance,—in view of the ἡμέρα τοῦ Κυρίου: “free from charge when the day of the Lord shall come”; cf. [ Rom 8:33], τίς ἐγκαλέσει;—ὅς refers to the foregoing κύριος Ἰ. Χ., not to the distant Θεὸς of [ 1Co 1:4]; the Saviour “who will make sure” the innocence of the Cor[106] on that day is the Judge who will pronounce upon it (cf. [ Col 1:22], [ Eph 5:27], where Christ is to “present” the Church “unblemished and unimpeached” before Himself): He will then confirm them and vindicate their character, as they have confirmed the testimony about Him (cf. [ Luk 9:26]). P. does not say the Cor[107] are ἀνέγκλητοι now; he hopes that they will prove so then. “The day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (cf. note on [ 1Co 3:13]) is the O.T. “day of Jehovah” (LXX, τ. Κυρίου), translated into the “day of Christ,” since God has revealed His purpose to “judge through Jesus Christ” ([ Rom 2:16], [ Act 17:31]).—ἐν τ. ἡμέρᾳ = ἐν τ. παρουσίᾳ τ. κυρ. Ἰ. Χ. ([ 1Th 5:23], etc.), with the added connotation of judgment, to which the ἀποκάλυψις of [ 1Co 1:7] leads up: for this connexion of thought, see [ Rom 2:5], [ 2Th 1:7] ff. P. does not say “His day,” though ὅς recalls ὁ κύρ. Ἰ. Χ.: Christ’s name is repeated ten times in the first ten vv.—six times, as here, in full style—with sustained solemnity of emphasis (cf. the repetition of “God” in 20–29); “P. thus prepares for his exhortations these Cor[108], who were disposed to treat Christianity as a matter of human choice and personal liking, under the sense that in a Christian Church Christ is the one thing and everything” (Hf[109]).
[106] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[107] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[108] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[109] J. C. K. von Hofmann’s Die heilige Schrift N.T. untersucht, ii. 2 (2te Auflage, 1874).
[ 1Co 1:9]. The ground of Paul’s hope for the ultimate welfare of the Cor[110] is God’s fidelity. His gifts are bestowed on a wise and settled plan ([ 1Co 1:21], [ Rom 8:28] ff; [ Rom 11:29]); His word, with it His character, is pledged to the salvation of those who believe in His Son: πιστὸς ὁ Θεὸς διʼ οὗ ἐκλήθητε = πιστὸς ὁ καλῶν of [ 1Th 5:23] f.; the formula πιστὸς ὁ λόγος of the Past. Epp. is not very different. διʼ οὗ is “through (older Eng., by) whom you were called”; cf. διὰ θελήματος Θεοῦ ([ 1Co 1:1], see note), and διʼ οὗ … τὰ πάντα (of God, [ Rom 11:36]); similarly in [ Gal 4:7]: God had manifestly interposed to bring the Cor[111] into the communion of Christ (see, further, [ 1Co 1:26-28]); His voice sounded in the ears of the Cor[112] when the Gospel summons reached them (cf. [ 1Th 2:13]). Christ ([ 1Co 1:8]) and God are both therefore security for the perfecting of their Christian life.—God’s accepted call has brought the readers εἰς κοινωνίαν τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν—i.e., not “into a communion (or partnership) with His Son Jesus Christ our Lord” (nowhere else has this noun an objective gen[113] of the person: see parls.), but “into a communion belonging to (and named after) God’s Son,” of which He is founder, centre and sum. In this fellowship the Cor[114] partake “with all those that call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ” ([ 1Co 1:2]); κοινωνία denotes collective participation. The κοινωνία τ. υἱοῦ is the same, both in content and constituency, as the κοινωνία τ. πνεύματος (see [ 1Co 12:13], [ 2Co 13:13], [ Php 2:1], [ Eph 4:4-6]). Its content—that which the Cor[115] share in—is sonship to God, since it is “a communion of His Son,” with Christ for “first-born among many brethren” ([ Rom 8:29] f.; cf. [ Heb 2:10-16]), and consequent heirship to God ([ Rom 8:17], [ Gal 3:26] to [ Gal 4:7]). The title “our Lord,” added to “His Son Jesus Christ,” invests the Christian communion with present grandeur and certifies its hope of glory; Christ’s glory lies in His full manifestation as Lord ([ 1Co 15:25], [ Php 2:11]), and its glorification is wrapped up in His ([ 2Th 1:12]; [ 2Th 2:14]; also [ 1Th 2:12]). [ 1Co 1:9] sustains and crowns the hope expressed in [ 1Co 1:8]. For κοινωνία, see further the notes on [ 1Co 10:16] f.
[110] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[111] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[112] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[113] genitive case.
[114] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[115] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
DIVISION I. THE CORINTHIAN PARTIES AND THE GOSPEL MINISTRY, [ 1Co 1:10] to [ 1Co 4:21]. Paul could not honestly give thanks for the actual condition of the Cor[116] Church. The reason for this omission at once appears. The Church is rent with factions, which ranged themselves under the names of the leading Christian teachers. On the causes of these divisions see Introduction, Chap. 1 Out of their crude and childish experience ([ 1Co 3:1-4]) the Cor[117] are constructing prematurely a γνῶσις of their own ([ 1Co 8:1], see note), a σοφία resembling that “wisdom of the world” which is “foolishness with God” ([ 1Co 1:18] ff., [ 1Co 1:30], [ 1Co 3:18] f., [ 1Co 4:9] f.); they think themselves already above the mere λόγος τοῦ σταύρου brought by the Ap., wherein, simple as it appeared, there lay the wisdom and the power of God. This conceit had been stimulated, unwittingly on his part, by the preaching of Apollos. Ch. [ 1Co 3:3-7] shows that it is the Apollonian faction which most exercises Paul’s thoughts at present; the irony of [ 1Co 1:18-31] and [ 1Co 4:6-13] is aimed at the partisans of Ap., who exalted his ὑπεροχὴ λόγου κ. σοφίας in disparagement of Paul’s unadorned κήρυγμα τοῦ σταύρου. Mistaking the nature of the Gospel, the Cor[118] mistook the office of its ministers: on the former subject they are corrected in [ 1Co 1:18] to [ 1Co 2:5] showing in what sense and why the Gospel is not, and in [ 1Co 2:6] to [ 1Co 3:2] showing in what sense and to whom the Gospel is a σοφία; the latter misconception is rectified in [ 1Co 3:3] to [ 1Co 4:21], where, with express reference to Ap. and P., Christian teachers are shown to be no competing leaders of human schools but “fellow-workmen of God” and “servants of Christ,” co-operative and complementary instruments of His sovereign work in the building of the Church. The four chapters constitute an apologia for the Apostle’s teaching and office, parl[119] to those of 2 Corinthians 10-13 and Galatians 1-3; but the line of defence adopted here is quite distinct. Here Paul pleads against Hellenising lovers of wisdom, there against Judaising lovers of tradition. Both parties stumbled at the cross; both judged of the Ap. κατὰ σάρκα, and fastened upon his defects in visible prestige and presence. The existence of the legalist party at Cor[120] is intimated by the cry, “I am of Cephas,” and by Paul’s words of self-vindication in [ 1Co 9:1] f.; but this faction had as yet reached no considerable head; it developed rapidly in the interval between 1 and 2 Cor.
[116] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[117] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[118] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[119] parallel.
[120] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[ 1Co 1:10-17] a. § 3. THE REPORT ABOUT THE PARTIES, AND PAUL’S EXPOSTULATION. Without further preface, the Apostle warns the Cor[121] solemnly against their schisms ([ 1Co 1:10]), stating the testimony on which his admonition is based ([ 1Co 1:11]). The four parties are defined out of the mouths of the Cor[122] ([ 1Co 1:12]); and the Ap. protests esp. against the use of Christ’s name and of his own in this connexion ([ 1Co 1:13]). In founding the Church he had avoided all self-exaltation, bent only on fulfilling his mission of preaching the good news ([ 1Co 1:14-17] a).
[121] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[122] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[ 1Co 1:11]. The appeal above made implies a serious charge; now the authority for it: “For it has been signified to me about you, my brothers, by the (people) of Chloç”.—ἐδηλώθη (see parls.) implies definite information, the disclosure of facts.—οἱ Χλόης, “persons of Chloç’s household”—children, companions, or possibly slaves (cf. [ Rom 16:10]): there is nothing further to identify them. “Chloç is usually considered a Cor[139] Christian, whose people had come to Eph.; but it is more in harmony with St. Paul’s discretion to suppose that she was an Ephesian known to the Cor[140], whose people had been at Cor[141] and returned to Eph.” (Ev[142], Hf[143]). “Chloç’s people” are distinct from the Cor[144] deputies of [ 1Co 16:17], or Paul would have named the latter here; besides, Stephanas was himself the head of a household.—Χλόη (Verdure) was an epithet of the goddess Demeter, as φοίβη of Artemis ([ Rom 16:1]): such names were often given to slaves, and . may have been a freedwoman of property (Lt[145]). “That strifes exist among you” (cf. [ 1Co 3:3], [ 2Co 12:20]) was the information given; these ἔριδες, the next ver. explains, were generating the σχίσματα (see note on 10).
[139] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[140] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[141] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[142] T. S. Evans in Speaker’s Commentary.
[143] J. C. K. von Hofmann’s Die heilige Schrift N.T. untersucht, ii. 2 (2te Auflage, 1874).
[144] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[145] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).
[ 1Co 1:12]. “But I mean this (τοῦτο δὲ λέγω), that each one of you is saying (instead of your all saying the same thing, 10), ‘I am of Paul (am Paul’s man),’—‘But I of Apollos,’—‘But I of Cephas,’—‘But I of Christ’!”—ἕκαστος, distributive, as in [ 1Co 14:26]: each is saying one or other of these things; the party cries are quoted as from successive speakers challenging each other.
The question of the FOUR COR. PARTIES is one of the standing problems of N.T. criticism. It is fully examined, and the judgments of different critics are digested, by Gd[146] ad loc[147]; see also Mr[148]-Hn[149], Einleitung, § 3; Weiss’ Manual of Introd. to the N.T., § 19. After all, this was only a brief phase of Church life at Cor[150]; P. had just heard of it when he wrote, by the time of 2 Cor[151] a new situation has arisen. The three first parties are easy to account for: (1) The body of the Ch., converted under P.’s ministry, adhered to its own apostle; P. valued this loyalty and appeals to it, while he condemns its combative expression,—the disposition of men “more Pauline than Paul himself” (Dods) to exalt him to the disparagement of other leaders, and even to the detriment of Christ’s glory. (2) Apollos (cf. [ Act 18:24] ff.) had preached at Cor[152], in the interval since Paul’s first departure, with brilliant effect. He possessed Alexandrian culture and a graceful style, whereas P. was deemed at Cor[153] ἰδιώτης τῷ λόγῳ ([ 2Co 11:6]). Some personal converts Ap. had made; others were taken with his genial method, and welcomed his teaching as more advanced than P.’s plain gospel-message. Beside the more cultured Greeks, there would be a sprinkling of liberally-minded Jews, men of speculative bias imbued with Greek letters, who might prefer to say Ἐγὼ Ἀπολλώ. Judging from this Ep., the Pauline and Apollonian sections included at present the bulk of the Church, divided between its “planter” and “waterer”. Ἀπολλώς, of Attic 2nd decl., is probably short for Ἀπολλώνιος. (3) In a Judæo-Gentile Church the cry “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” was certain to be met with the retort, “But I of Kephas!” Conservative Jewish believers, when conflict was afoot, rallied to the name of the preacher of Pentecost and the hero of the Church’s earliest victories. The use of Κηφᾶς, the Aramaic original of Πέτρος, indicates that this party affected Palestinian traditions. Some of them may, possibly, have been Peter’s converts in Judæa. Had Peter visited Cor[154], as Dionysius of Cor[155] supposed (Euseb., Hist. Eccles., ii. 125: Weiss and Harnack favour the tradition), the event would surely have left some trace in these Epp. Judging from the tenor of the two Letters, this faction was of small account in Cor[156] until the arrival of the Judæan emissaries denounced in 2 Cor., who found a ground of vantage ready in those that shouted “I am of Kephas”. In both Epp. P. avoids every appearance of conflict with Peter (cf. [ 1Co 9:5], [ 1Co 15:5]). (4) The Christ party forms the crux of the passage:—(a) After F. C. Baur, οἱ Χριστοῦ has been commonly interpreted by [ 2Co 10:7]: “If any one is confident on his own part that he is Christ’s (Χριστοῦ εἶναι), let him take this into account with himself, that just as he is Christ’s, so also are we”. Now P.’s opponents of 2 Cor. were ultra-Judaists; so, it is inferred, these οἱ Χριστοῦ must have been. But the Judaisers of 2 Cor. presumed to be “of Christ” as His ministers, apostles ([ 1Co 11:13]; [ 1Co 11:23]), deriving their commission (as they maintained P. did not) from the fountain-head; whereas the Christ-party of this place plumed themselves, at most, on being His disciples (rather than P.’s, etc.): the coincidence is verbal rather than real. Upon Baur’s theory, there were two parties at Cor[157], as everywhere else in the Church, diametrically opposed—a Gentile-Christian party, divided here into Pauline and Apollonian sections, and a Jewish-Christian party naming itself from Kephas or Christ as occasion served. Later scholars following Baur’s line of interpretation, distinguish variously the Petrine and Christine Judaists: ([158]) Weizsäcker associates the latter with James; ([159]) Reuss and Beyschlag see in them strict followers of the example and maxims of Jesus as the διάκονος περιτομῆς, from which Peter in certain respects deviated; (γ) Hilgenfeld, Holsten, Hausrath, Sm[160], think they had been in personal relations with Jesus (it is quite possible that amongst the “five hundred” of [ 1Co 15:5] some had wandered to Cor[161]); (δ) Gd[162] strangely conjectures that “they were Gnostics before Gnosticism, who formulated their title οἱ Χριστοῦ, after the fashion of Cerinthus, in opp[163] not merely to the names of the apostles, but even to that of Jesus!” He identifies them with the men who cried “Jesus is anathema” ([ 1Co 12:2]: see note). This notion is an anachronism, and has no real basis in the Epp.
[146] F. Godet’s Commentaire sur la prem. Ép. aux Corinthiens (Eng. Trans.).
[147] ad locum, on this passage.
[148] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[149] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklärung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).
[150] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[151] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[152] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[153] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[154] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[155] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[156] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[157] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[158] A(ntiochena), in Blass, a fair rough copy of St. Luke.
[159] R(omana), in Blass, a first rough copy of St. Luke.
[160] P. Schmiedel, in Handcommentar zum N.T. (1893).
[161] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[162] F. Godet’s Commentaire sur la prem. Ép. aux Corinthiens (Eng. Trans.).
[163] opposite, opposition.
(b) [ 1Co 3:22] f. (see notes, ad loc[164]) supplies a nearer and safer clue to the interpretation; this is the Apostle’s decisive correction of the rivalries of [ 1Co 1:12]. The human leaders pitted against each other all belong to the Church (not this teacher or that to this section or that), while it belongs without distinction to Christ, and Christ, with all that is His, to God. The catholic Ὑμεῖς Χριστοῦ swallows up the self-assertive and sectarian Ἐγὼ δὲ Χριστοῦ. Those who used this cry arrogated the common watchword as their peculium; they erred by despising, as others by glorying in men. “Ἐγὼ Χριστοῦ ad eos pertinet qui in contrariam partem peccabant; i.e., qui sese unius Christi ita dicebant, ut interim iis per quos quos Deus loquitur nihil tribuerent” (Bz[165]); similarly Aug[166], Bg[167], Mr[168], Hf[169], El[170], Bt[171]
[164] ad locum, on this passage.
[165] Beza’s Nov. Testamentum: Interpretatio et Annotationes (Cantab., 1642).
[166] Augustine.
[167] Bengel’s Gnomon Novi Testamenti.
[168] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[169] J. C. K. von Hofmann’s Die heilige Schrift N.T. untersucht, ii. 2 (2te Auflage, 1874).
[170] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians.
[171] J. A. Beet’s St. Paul’s Epp. to the Corinthians (1882).
(c) The Gr[172] Ff[173], followed by Cv[174], Bleek, Pfleiderer, Râbiger, and others, saw in the Ἐγὼ δὲ Χριστοῦ the true formula which P. approves, or even which he utters propriâ personâ. But the context subjects all four classes to the same reproach. It is a sufficient condemnation for the fourth party that they said “I am of Christ,” in rejoinder to the partisans of Paul and the rest, lowering His name to this competition.
[172] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
[173] Fathers.
[174] Calvin’s In Nov. Testamentum Commentarii.
(d) Hn[175], finding the riddle of the “Christus-partei” insoluble, eliminates it from the text; “we are driven,” he says, “to explain the Ἐγὼ δὲ Χριστοῦ as a gloss, which some reader of the original codex inscribed in the margin, borrowing it from [ 1Co 3:23] as a counter-confession to the Ἐγὼ μὲν Παύλου κ.τ.λ.”
[175] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklärung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).
[ 1Co 1:13]. In his expostulation P. uses, with telling contrast, the first and last only of the party names: “Is the Christ divided? Was Paul crucified on your behalf? or into the name of Paul were you baptised?” Lachmann, W.H[176], Mr[177], Bt[178], read μεμέρισται ὁ Χ. as an exclamation: “The Christ (then) has been divided!”—torn in pieces by your strife. But μερίζω (here in pf. of resultful fact) denotes distribution, not dismemberment (see parls.): the Christian who asserts “I am Christ’s” in distinction from others, claims an exclusive part in Him, whereas the one and whole Christ belongs to every limb of His manifold body (see [ 1Co 12:12]; also [ 1Co 11:3], [ Rom 10:12]; [ Rom 14:7-9], [ Eph 4:3] ff., [ Col 2:19]). A divided Church means a Christ parcelled out, appropriated κατὰ μέρος. ὁ Χριστὸς is the Christ, in the fulness of all that His title signifies (see [ 1Co 12:12], etc.).—While μεμέρισται ὁ Χ.; is Paul’s abrupt and indignant question to himself, μὴ Παῦλος ἐσταυρώθη; (aor[179] of historical event) interrogates the readers—“Is it Paul that was crucified for you?” From the cross the Ap. draws his first reproof, the point of which [ 1Co 6:20] makes clear, “You were bought at a price”: the Cor[180] therefore were not Paul’s or Kephas’, nor some of them Christ’s and some of them Paul’s men, but only Christ’s and all Christ’s alike.
[176] Westcott and Hort’s The New Testament in Greek: Critical Text and Notes.
[177] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[178] J. A. Beet’s St. Paul’s Epp. to the Corinthians (1882).
[179] aorist tense.
[180] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
The cross was the ground of κοινωνία Χριστοῦ ([ 1Co 1:9], [ 1Co 10:16]); baptism, signalising personal union with Him by faith, its attestation ([ Rom 6:3]); to this P. appeals asking, ἢ εἰς τὸ ὄνομα Παύλου ἐβαπτίσθητε; His converts will remember how Christ’s name was then sealed upon them, and Paul’s ignored. What was true of his practice, he tacitly assumes for the other chiefs. The readers had been baptised as Christians, not Pauline, Apollonian, or Petrine Christians. Paul’s horror at the thought of baptising in his name shows how truly Christ’s was to him “the name above every name’ ([ Php 2:9]; cf. [ 2Co 4:5]).
[ 1Co 1:14-16]. In fact, P. had himself baptised very few of the Cor[181] He sees a providence in this; otherwise he might have seemed wishful to stamp his own name upon his converts, and some colour would have been lent to the action of the Paulinists—“lest any one should say that you were baptised into my name”. For βαπτίζω εἰς τὸ ὄνομα, cf. [ Mat 28:19] and other parls.; also βαπτίζω εἰς, [ 1Co 10:2]; it corresponds to πιστεύω εἰς, and has the like pregnant force. “The name” connotes the nature and authority of the bearer, and His relationship to those who speak of Him by it. Crispus and Gaius: both Roman names (see Introd., p[182] 733); the former a cognomen (Curly), the latter an exceedingly common prænomen. These two were amongst Paul’s earliest converts ([ Act 18:8], [ Rom 16:23]), the former a Synagogue-ruler. On second thoughts (“he was reminded by his amanuensis,” Lt[183]; or by Steph. himself), P. remembers that he had “baptised the house of Stephanas” (see [ 1Co 16:15], and note), the first family here won to Christ. Στεφανᾶς (perhaps short for Στεφανηφόρος), like Κηφᾶς, takes the Doric gen[184] in -ᾶ usual with proper names in -ᾶς, whether of native or foreign origin (see Bm[185], p. 20).—λοιπὸν οὐκ οἶδα εἴ τινα κ.τ.λ.: P. cannot recall any other instance of baptism by his own hands at Cor[186]; this was a slight matter, which left no clear mark in his memory, λοιπόν (more regularly, τὸ λοιπόν), “for the rest”—in point of time ([ 1Co 7:29]), or number—a somewhat frequent idiom with Paul (cf. [ 1Co 4:2]). In οὐκ οἶδα εἰ (haud scio an), the conjunction is indir[187] interr[188], as in [ 1Co 7:16].
[181] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[182]. Paul.
[183] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).
[184] genitive case.
[185] A. Buttmann’s Grammar of the N.T. Greek (Eng. Trans., 1873).
[186] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[187]ndir. indirect.
[188]nterr. interrogative.
[ 1Co 1:17-25]. § 4. THE TRUE POWER OF THE GOSPEL. To “preach the gospel” meant, above all, to proclaim the cross of Christ ([ 1Co 1:17] b). In Cor[189] “the wisdom of the world” scouted this message as sheer folly ([ 1Co 1:18]). To use “wisdom of word” in meeting such antagonism would have been for P. to fight the world with its own weapons and to betray his cause, the strength of which lay in the Divine power and wisdom embodied in Christ, a force destined, because it was God’s, to bring to shame the world’s vaunting wisdom ([ 1Co 1:19-25]).
[189] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[ 1Co 1:18]. What P. asserted in [ 1Co 1:17] as intrinsically true, he supports by experience ([ 1Co 1:18]) and by Scripture ([ 1Co 1:19]), combining their testimony in [ 1Co 1:20].—ὁ λόγος γάρ, ὁ τοῦ σταύρου, “For the word, namely that of the cross”. ὁ λόγος (distinguish from the anarthrous λόγος above) takes its sense from εὐαγγελίζεσθαι ([ 1Co 1:17]); it is “the tale” rather than “the doctrine of the cross,” synonymous with μαρτύριον ([ 1Co 1:6]) and κήρυγμα ([ 1Co 1:21]).—τοῖς μὲν ἀπολλυμένοις … τοῖς δὲ σωζομένοις, the two classes into which P. sees his hearers divide themselves (see parls.). The ptps. are strictly pr[197]—not expressing certain expectation (Mr[198]), nor fixed predestination (Bz[199]); the rejectors and receivers of “the word” are in course of perishing and being saved respectively (cf. [ 1Co 15:2]; contrast the aor[200] of σώζω in [ Rom 8:24], and the pf. in [ Eph 2:5]). “In the language of the N.T. salvation is a thing of the past, a thing of the present, and a thing of the future.… The divorce of morality and religion is fostered by failing to note this, and so laying the whole stress either on the past or on the future—on the first call or on the final change” (Lt[201]). Paul paints the situation before his eyes: one set of men deride the story of the cross—these are manifestly perishing; to another set the same story is “God’s power unto salvation”. The appended pers[202] pron[203] (τ. σωζομένοις) ἡμῖν, “to the saved, viz., ourselves,” speaks from and to experience: “You and I know that the cross is God’s saving power”. Cf. with the whole expression [ Rom 1:16], also [ Joh 3:14-17].—The antithesis to μωρία is not, in the first instance, σοφία, but δύναμις Θεοῦ—a practical vindication against false theory; saved men are the Gospel’s apology. Yet because it is δύναμις, the word of the cross is, after all, the truest σοφία (see 30, [ 1Co 2:6] ff.). The double ἐστὶν emphasises the actuality of the contrasted results.
[197] present tense.
[198] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[199] Beza’s Nov. Testamentum: Interpretatio et Annotationes (Cantab., 1642).
[200] aorist tense.
[201] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).
[202]ers. grammatical person, or personal.
[203]ron. pronoun.
[ 1Co 1:19]. As concerns “the perishing,” the above sentence agrees with God’s ways of judgment as revealed in Scripture: γέγραπται γάρ κ.τ.λ. The quotation Ἀπολῶ κ.τ.λ. (suggested by τ. ἀπολλυμένοις) belongs to the cycle of Isaiah’s prophecies against the worldly-wise politicians of Jerus. in Assyrian times ([ 1Co 1:28-31].), who despised the word of Jehovah, relying on their shallow and dishonest statecraft; their policy of alliance with Egypt will lead to a shameful overthrow, out of which God will find the means of vindicating His wisdom and saving His people and city. The O.T. and N.T. situations are analogous: Gentile and Jewish wisdom, united in rejection of the Gospel, are coming to a like breakdown; and P. draws a powerful warning from the sacred history.—ἀθετήσω (a reminiscence, perhaps, of [ Psa 33:10]) displaces the less pointed κρύψω: otherwise the LXX text of Isa. is followed; in the Heb. the vbs. are pass[204], “the wisdom … shall perish,” etc. Isaiah 29 is rich in matter for N.T. use: [ 1Co 1:13]; [ 1Co 1:18] gave our Lord texts, in [ Mat 15:8] f., [ 1Co 11:5] respectively; the Ap. quotes the chap. twice elsewhere, and ch. 28 thrice.
[204] passive voice.
[ 1Co 1:20]. τοῦ σοφός; ποῦ γραμματεύς; and (possibly) ἐμώρανεν … τήν σοφίαν, are also Isaianic allusions—to [ Isa 19:11] f. (mocking the vain wisdom of Pharaoh’s counsellors), and [ Isa 33:18] (predicting the disappearance of Sennacherib’s revenue clerks and army scouts, as a sign of his defeat). The LXX γραμματικὸς becomes γραμματεύς, in consistence with the sophçr of the latter passage; συνζητητής (cf. ζητοῦσιν, [ 1Co 1:22]), in the third question, is Paul’s addition.—γραμματεὺς unmistakably points, in the application, to the Jewish Scribe (cf. our Lord’s denunciation in Matthew 23); of the parl[205] terms, σοφὸς is supposed by most moderns to be general, comprehending Jewish and Gr[206] wise men together, συνζητητὴς to be specific to the Gr[207] philosopher—a distinction better reversed, as by Lt[208] after the Gr[209] Ff[210] συνζητέω, with its cognates, is employed in the N.T. of Jewish discussions ([ Act 6:9]; [ Act 28:29], etc.), and the adjunct τ. αἰῶνος τούτου gives to the term its widest scope, whereas σοφός, esp. at Cor[211], marks the Gr[212] intellectual pride; καλεῖ σοφὸν τὸν τῇ Ἑλληνικῇ στωμυλίᾳ κοσμούμενον (Thd[213]; cf. [ Rom 1:23]).—ποῦ σοφός (not ὁ σοφός); κ.τ.λ.: “Where is a wise man? where a scribe? where a disputer of this age?” These orders of men are swept from the field; all such pretensions disappear (cf. [ 1Co 1:29])—“Did not God make foolish the wisdom of the world?” The world and God are at issue; each counts the other’s wisdom folly (cf. [ 1Co 1:18]; [ 1Co 1:25]; [ 1Co 1:30]). But God actually turned to foolishness (infatuavit, Bz[214]: cf. [ Rom 1:21] f., for μωραίνω; also [ Isa 44:25]) the world’s imagined wisdom: how, [ 1Co 1:21-25] proceed to show. On αἰὼν see parls., and Ed[215]’s note; also Trench’s Synon., lix., and Gm[216], for the distinction between αἰὼν and κόσμος; “αἰών, like sæculum, refers to the prevailing ideas and feelings of the present life, κόσμος to its gross, material character” (Lt[217]).
[205] parallel.
[206] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
[207] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
[208] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).
[209] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
[210] Fathers.
[211] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[212] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
[213] Theodoret, Greek Commentator.
[214] Beza’s Nov. Testamentum: Interpretatio et Annotationes (Cantab., 1642).
[215] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians.2
[216] Grimm-Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the N.T.
[217] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).
[ 1Co 1:21-25]. The ἐπειδὴ of [ 1Co 1:21] and that of [ 1Co 1:22-25] are parl[218], the second restating and expanding the first (cf. the double ὅταν in [ 1Co 15:24], and in [ 1Co 15:27] f.: see notes), rather than proving it; together they justify the assertion implied in [ 1Co 1:20] b, which virtually repeats [ 1Co 1:18].
[218] parallel.
[ 1Co 1:22-25] open out the thought of [ 1Co 1:21]: “the world” is parted into “Jews” and “Greeks”; μωρία becomes σκάνδαλον and μωρία; the κήρυγμα is defined as that of Χριστὸς ἐσταυρωμένος; and the πιστεύοντες reappear as the κλητοί. Both Mr[229] and Al[230] make this a new sentence, detached from [ 1Co 1:20] f., and complete in itself, with ἐπειδὴ καί κ.τ.λ. for protasis, and ἡμεῖς δέ κ.τ.λ. for apodosis,—as though the mistaken aims of the world supplied Paul’s motive for preaching Christ; the point is rather (in accordance with 20) that his “foolish” message, in contrast with (δέ, [ 1Co 1:23]) the desiderated “signs” and “wisdom,” convicts the world of folly ([ 1Co 1:20]); thus the whole of [ 1Co 1:22-24] falls under the regimen of the 2nd ἐπειδή, which with its καί, emphatically resumes the first ἐπειδή ([ 1Co 1:21])—“since indeed”. God turned the world’s wise men into fools ([ 1Co 1:20]) by bestowing salvation through faith on a ground that they deem folly ([ 1Co 1:21])—in other words, by revealing His power and wisdom in the person of a crucified Messiah, whom Jews and Greeks unite to despise ([ 1Co 1:22-24]).
[229] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[230] Alford’s Greek Testament.
[ 1Co 1:23]. Instead of working miracles to satisfy the Jews, or propounding a philosophy to entertain the Greeks, “we, on the other hand, proclaim a crucified Christ”—Χριστὸν ἐσταυρωμένον, i.e., Christ as crucified (predicative adjunct), not “Christ the crucified,” nor, strictly, “Christ crucified”; cf., for the construction, [ 2Co 4:5], κηρύσσομεν Χ. Ἰ. κύριον, “We preach (not ourselves but) Christ Jesus as Lord”. Not a warrior Messiah, flashing His signs from the sky, breaking the heathen yoke, but a Messiah dying in impotence and shame (see [ 2Co 4:10]; [ 2Co 13:4]: hattalúy, [ Deu 21:23]—the hangéd—He is styled in the Talmud) is what the app. preach for their good news! “To Jews indeed a σκάνδαλον”: this word (cl[237] σκανδάληθρον) signified first the trap-stick, then any obstacle over which one stumbles to one’s injury, an “offence” (syn[238] with προσκοπή, πρόσκομμα: see [ 1Co 8:9]; [ 1Co 8:13]), a moral hindrance presented to the perverse or the weak (see parls.).—τοῖς δὲ ἔθνεσιν μωρίαν: for the “folly” of offering the infelix lignum to cultured Gentiles, see Cicero, pro Rabirio, v.: “Nomen ipsum crucis absit non modo a corpore civium Romanorum, sed etiam a cogitatione, oculis, auribus”; and Lucian, De morte Peregrini, 13, who mocks at those who worship τὸν ἀνεσκολοπισμένον τὸν σοφιστήν,—“that gibbeted sophist!” For reff. in the early Apologists see Justin ., Tryph., lxix., and Apol., i., 13; Tertull., adv. Jud., § 10; Aristo of Pella, in Routh’s Rel. Sacr., i., 95; and the graffito of the gibbeted ass discovered on the wall of the Pædagogium in the Palatine. To Jews the λόγος τοῦ σταύρου announced the shameful reversal of their most cherished hopes; to Greeks and Romans it offered for Saviour and Lord a man branded throughout the Empire as amongst the basest of criminals; it was “outrageous,” and “absurd”.
[237] classical.
[238] synonym, synonymous.
[ 1Co 1:24]. αὐτοῖς δὲ τοῖς κλητοῖς, ipsis autem vocatis (Vg[239]): for the emphatic prefixed αὐτοῖς, cf. [ 2Co 11:14], 1 Thess. 16, etc.; it “marks off those alluded to from the classes to which they nationally belonged” (El[240])—“to the called however upon their part, both Jews and Greeks”—cf. the οὐ … διαστολὴ of [ Rom 3:9]; [ Rom 3:22] ff. “(We proclaim) a Christ (to these) God’s power and God’s wisdom.” Of God reiterated four times, with triumphant emphasis, in the stately march of [ 1Co 1:24] f. Θεοῦ δύν., Θεοῦ σοφ. are predicative, in antithesis to ἐσταυρωμένον ([ 1Co 1:23]): the app. “preach as power and wisdom” One who wears to the world the aspect of utter powerlessness and folly.—Δύναμις and Σοφία Θεοῦ were synonyms of the Λόγος in the Alexandrian-Jewish speculations, in which Apollos was probably versed; these surpassing titles Paul appropriates for the Crucified.—Θεοῦ δύναμιν reaffirms, after explanation, the δύναμις Θεοῦ of [ 1Co 1:18]; now Θεοῦ σοφίαν is added to it, for “power” proves “wisdom” here (see note on [ 1Co 1:30]); the universal efficacy of the Gospel demonstrates its inner truth, and faith is finally justified by reason.—δύναμιν matches the σημεῖον of [ 1Co 1:22] (see, e.g., [ 2Th 2:9]); believing Jews found, after all, in the cross the mightiest miracle, while Greeks found the deepest wisdom. The “wisdom of God,” secretly working in the times of preparation ([ 1Co 1:20]), is thus at length brought to human recognition in Christ. On κλητοῖς see note to [ 1Co 1:2]: this term is preferable to οἱ σωζόμενοι, or οἱ πιστεύοντες, where the stress rests upon God’s initiative in the work of individual salvation; cf. [ 1Co 1:9]; [ 1Co 1:26], [ Rom 8:28] ff.
[239] Latin Vulgate Translation.
[240] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians.
[ 1Co 1:25]. What has been proved in point of fact, viz., the stultification by the cross of man’s wisdom, the Ap. (as in [ Rom 3:30]; [ Rom 11:29], [ Gal 2:6]) grounds upon an axiomatic religious principle, that of the absolute superiority of the Divine to the human. That God should thus confound the world one might expect: “because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men”. Granted that the λόγος τ. σταυροῦ is folly and weakness, it is God’s folly, God’s weakness: will men dare to match themselves with that? (cf. [ Rom 9:20]).—τὸ μωρόν (not μωρία as before), τὸ ἀσθενές are concrete terms—the foolish, weak policy of God (cf. τὸ χρηστόν, [ Rom 2:4]), the folly and weakness embodied in the cross.—ἰσχυρός (ἰσχύς) implies intrinsic strength; δύναμις is ability, as relative to the task in view.
[ 1Co 1:26-31]. § 5. THE OBJECTS OF THE GOSPEL CALL. § 4 has shown that the Gospel does not come ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου ([ 1Co 1:17] b) by the method of its operation; this will further be evidenced by the status of its recipients. If it were, humanly speaking, a σοφία, it would have addressed itself to σοφοί, and won their adherence; but the case is far otherwise.
[ 1Co 1:27-28]. “Nay, but (ἀλλά, the but of exclusion) the foolish … the weak … the base-born things of the world God did choose out (when He chose you).”—ἐξελέξατο (selected, picked out for Himself) is equivalent to ἐκάλεσεν ([ 1Co 1:2]; [ 1Co 1:9]; [ 1Co 1:26]), εὐδόκησεν … σῶσαι ([ 1Co 1:21]), τὴν χάριν ἔδωκεν ἐν Χ. Ἰ. ([ 1Co 1:4]); this word indicates the relation in which the saved are put both to God and to the world, out of (ἐξ) which they were taken (see parls.); nothing here suggests, as in [ Eph 1:4], the idea of eternal election.—ἐξελέξατο ὁ Θεός: the astonishing fact thrice repeated, with solemn emphasis of assurance. The objects of God’s saving choice and the means of their salvation match each other; by His τὸ μωρὸν and τὸ ἀσθενές ([ 1Co 1:25]) He saves τὰ μωρὰ and τὰ ἀσθενῆ: “the world laughs at our beggarly selves, as it laughs at our beggarly Gospell” The neut. adj[249] of [ 1Co 1:27] f. mark the category to which the selected belong; their very foolishness, weakness, ignobility determine God’s choice (cf. [ Mat 9:13], [ Luk 10:21], etc.).—τοῦ κόσμου is partitive gen[250]: out of all the world contained, God chose its (actually) foolish, weak, base things—making “fæx urbis lux orbis!” In this God acted deliberately, pursuing the course maintained through previous ages, ἐν τῇ σοφίᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ (see note, [ 1Co 1:21]): He “selected the foolish things of the world, that He might shame its wise men (τοὺς σοφούς) … the weak things of the world, that He might shame its strong things (τὰ ἰσχυρά), and the base-born things of the world and the things made absolutely nothing of … the things nonexistent, that He might bring the things existent to naught”. In the first instance a class of persons, immediately present to Paul’s mind (cf. [ 1Co 1:20]), is to be “put to shame”; in the two latter P. thinks, more at large, of worldly forces and institutions (cf. [ 1Co 7:31], [ 2Co 10:4-6]). The pride of the cultured and ruling classes of paganism was to be confounded by the powers which Christianity conferred upon its social outcasts; as, e.g., Hindoo Brahminism is shamed by the moral and intellectual superiority acquired by Christian Pariahs.—τὰ ἀγενῆ τοῦ κόσμου, third of the categories of disparagement, is reinforced by τὰ ἐξουθενημένα (from ἐξ and οὐδέν, pf. pass[251]: things set down as of no account whatever), then capped by the abruptly apposed τὰ μὴ ὄντα, to which is attached the crowning final clause, ἵνα τὰ ὄντα καταργήσῃ. For καταργέω (ut enervaret, Bz[252]), see note on κενόω ([ 1Co 1:17]), and parls.; the scornful world-powers are not merely to be robbed of their glory (as in the two former predictions), but of their power and being, as indeed befell in the end the existing social and political fabric. In τὰ μὴ ὄντα, “μὴ implies that the non-existence is not absolute but estimative” (Al[253]); the classes to which Christianity appealed were non-entities for philosophers and statesmen, cyphers in their reckoning: contrast οὐκ ὤν, of objective matter of fact, in [ Joh 10:12], [ Act 7:5]; also Eurip., Troad., 600.—τὰ ὄντα connotes more than bare existence; “ipsum verbum εἶναι eam vim habet ut significet in aliquo numero esse, rebus secundis florere” (Pflugk, on Eurip., Hecuba, 284, quoted by Mr[254]); it is τὰ ὄντα κατʼ ἐξοχήν: cf. the adv[255] ὄντως in [ 1Ti 6:19].
[249] adjective.
[250] genitive case.
[251] passive voice.
[252] Beza’s Nov. Testamentum: Interpretatio et Annotationes (Cantab., 1642).
[253] Alford’s Greek Testament.
[254] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[255] adverb
[ 1Co 1:29]. God’s purposes in choosing the refuse of society are gathered up into the general and salutary design, revealed in Scripture (see parls.), “that so no flesh may glory in God’s presence” (a condens quotation) = πάντα εἰς δόξαν Θεοῦ ([ 1Co 10:31]). For ὅπως, which carries to larger issue the intentions stated in the previous clauses, cf. [ 2Co 8:14], [ 2Th 1:12]. Two Hebraisms, characteristic of the LXX, here: μὴ … πᾶσα (khôl … lo’), for μηδεμία; and σάρξ (bâsâr), for humanity in its mortality or sinfulness. Cf., for this rule of Divine action, [ 2Co 12:9] f.; also Plato, Ion, 534 E, ἵνα μὴ διστάζωμεν ὅτι οὐκ ἀνθρώπινά ἐστι τὰ καλὰ ταῦτα ποιήματα οὐδὲ ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλὰ θεῖα καὶ θεῶν … ὁ θεὸς ἐξεπίτηδες διὰ τοῦ φαυλοτάτου ποιητοῦ τὸ κάλλιστον μέλος ᾖσεν.
[ 1Co 1:30]. ἐξ αὐτοῦ δὲ ὑμεῖς ἐστε ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ: is ἐν Χ. Ἰησοῦ or ἐξ αὐτοῦ (sc. τοῦ Θεοῦ) the predicate to ἐστέ? Does P. mean, “It comes of Him (God) that you are in Christ Jesus”—i.e., “Your Christian status is due to God” (so Mr[256], Hn[257], Bt[258], Ed[259], Gd[260], El[261])? or, “It is in Christ Jesus that you are of Him”—“Your new life derived from God is grounded in Christ” (Gr[262] Ff[263], Cv[264], Bz[265], Rückert, Hf[266], Lt[267])? The latter interpretation suits the order of words and the trend of thought (see Lt[268]): “You, whom the world counts as nothing ([ 1Co 1:26] ff.: note the contrastive δέ), are of Him before whom all human glory vanishes ([ 1Co 1:29]); in Christ this Divine standing is yours”. Thus Paul exalts those whom he had abased. The conception of the Christian estate as “of God,” if Johannine, is Pauline too (cf. [ 1Co 8:6], [ 1Co 10:12], [ 1Co 12:6], [ 2Co 4:6]; [ 2Co 5:18], etc.), and lies in Paul’s fundamental appropriation, after Jesus, of God as πατὴρ ἡμῶν ([ 1Co 1:4], and passim), and in the correlative doctrine of the υἱοθεσία; the whole passage ([ 1Co 1:18-29]) is dominated by the thought of the Divine initiative in salvation. This derivation from God is not further defined, as in [ Gal 3:26]; enough to state the grand fact, and to ground it “in Christ Jesus” (see note, [ 1Co 1:4]).
[256] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[257] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklärung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).
[258] J. A. Beet’s St. Paul’s Epp. to the Corinthians (1882).
[259] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians.2
[260] F. Godet’s Commentaire sur la prem. Ép. aux Corinthiens (Eng. Trans.).
[261] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians.
[262] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
[263] Fathers.
[264] Calvin’s In Nov. Testamentum Commentarii.
[265] Beza’s Nov. Testamentum: Interpretatio et Annotationes (Cantab., 1642).
[266] J. C. K. von Hofmann’s Die heilige Schrift N.T. untersucht, ii. 2 (2te Auflage, 1874).
[267] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).
[268] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).
The relative clause, “who was made wisdom,” etc., unfolds the content of the life communicated “to us from God” in Christ. Of the four defining complements to ἐγενήθη ἡμῖν, σοφία stands by itself, with the other three attached by way of definition—“wisdom from God, viz., both righteousness, etc.”; Mr[269], Al[270], Gd[271], however, read the four as coordinate. On σοφία the whole debate, from [ 1Co 1:17] onwards, hinges: we have seen how God turned the world’s wisdom to folly ([ 1Co 1:20-25]); now He did this not for the pleasure of it, but for our salvation—to establish His own wisdom ([ 1Co 1:24]), and to bestow it upon us in Christ (“us” means Christians collectively—cf. [ 1Co 1:17]—while “you” meant the despised Cor[272] Christians, [ 1Co 1:26]). This wisdom (how diff[273] from the other! See [ 1Co 1:17]; [ 1Co 1:19]; [ Jas 3:15] ff.) comes as sent “from God” (ἀπὸ of ultimate source: ἐξ of direct derivation). It is a vitalising moral force—δύναμις καὶ σοφία ([ 1Co 1:24])—taking the shape of δικαιοσύνη τε καὶ ἁγιασμός, and signally contrasted in its spiritual reality and regenerating energy with the σοφία λόγου and σοφία τ. κόσμου, after which the Cor[274] hankered. Righteousness and Sanctification are allied “by their theological affinity” (El[275]): cf. note on [ 1Co 6:11], and Romans 6 passim—hence the double copula τε … καί; καὶ ἀπολύτρωσις follows at a little distance (so Lt[276], Hn[277], Ed[278]; who adduce numerous cl[279] parls. to this use of the Gr[280] conjunctions): “who was made wisdom to us from God—viz., both righteousness and sanctification, and redemption”.—δικαιοσύνη carries with it, implicitly, the Pauline doctrine of Justification by faith in the dying, risen Christ (see [ 1Co 6:11], and other parls.; esp., for Paul’s teaching at Cor[281], [ 2Co 5:21]). With the righteousness of the believer justified in Christ sanctification (or consecration) is concomitant (see note on the kindred terms in 2); the connexion of chh. 5 and 6 in Rom. expounds this τε … καί; all δικαιοσύνη ἐν Χριστῷ is εἰς ἁγιασμόν. (Vbl. nouns in -μός denote primarily a process, then the resulting state.)—Ἀπολύτρωσις (based on the λύτρον of [ Mat 20:28], [ 1Ti 2:6], with ἀπὸ of separation, release), deliverance by ransom, is the widest term of the three—“primum Christi donum quod inchoatur in nobis, et ultimum quod perficitur” (Cv[282]); it looks backward to the cross ([ 1Co 1:18]), by whose blood we “were bought” for God ([ 1Co 6:19]), so furnishing the ground both of justification ([ Rom 3:24]) and sanctification ([ Heb 10:10]), and forward to the resurrection and glorification of the saints, whereby Christ secures His full purchased rights in them ([ Rom 8:23]; [ Eph 1:14]; [ Eph 4:30]); thus Redemption covers the entire work of salvation, indicating the essential and just means of its accomplishment (see Cr[283] on λύτρον and derivatives).
[269] Meyer’s Critical and Exegetical Commentary (Eng. Trans.).
[270] Alford’s Greek Testament.
[271] F. Godet’s Commentaire sur la prem. Ép. aux Corinthiens (Eng. Trans.).
[272] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[273] difference, different, differently.
[274] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[275] C. J. Ellicott’s St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians.
[276] J. B. Lightfoot’s (posthumous) Notes on Epp. of St. Paul (1895).
[277] C. F. G. Heinrici’s Erklärung der Korintherbriefe (1880), or 1 Korinther in Meyer’s krit.-exegetisches Kommentar (1896).
[278] T. C. Edwards’ Commentary on the First Ep. to the Corinthians.
[279] classical.
[280] Greek, or Grotius’ Annotationes in N.T.
[281] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[282] Calvin’s In Nov. Testamentum Commentarii.
[283] Cremer’s Biblico-Theological Lexicon of N.T. Greek (Eng. Trans.).
[ 1Co 1:31]. “In order that, as it stands written, he who glories, in the Lord let him glory;” by “the Lord” the readers could only understand Christ, already five times thus titled; so, manifestly, in [ 2Co 10:17] f., where the citation reappears. Paul quotes the passage as a general Scriptural principle, which eminently applies to the relations of Christians to Christ; ἐν Κυρίῳ belongs to his adaptation of the original: God will have no flesh (see note, [ 1Co 1:29]) exult in his wisdom, strength, high birth (cf. the objects of false glorying in Jer[284]) before Him; He will have men exult in “the Lord of glory” ([ 1Co 2:8]; cf. [ Php 2:9] ff.), whom He sent as His own “wisdom” and “power unto salvation” ([ 1Co 1:24]; [ 1Co 1:30]). What grieves the Ap. most and appears most fatal in the party strifes of Cor[285], is the extolling of human names by the side of Christ’s and at his expense (see notes on 12–15; also [ 1Co 3:5]; [ 1Co 3:21-23], and [ 2Co 4:5], [ Gal 6:14]). Christians are specifically οἱ καυχώμενοι ἐν Χ. Ἰ., [ Php 3:3]. The irregularity of mood after ἵνα—καυχάσθω for subj. καυχᾶται—s accounted for in two ways: either as in anacoluthon, the impv[286] of the origina. being transplanted in lively quotation (cf [ Rom 15:3]; [ Rom 15:21]); or as an ellipsis, with γένηται or πληρωθῇ mentally supplied (cf. [ Rom 4:16], [ Gal 2:9], [ 2Co 8:13])—explanations not materially different. Clem. Rom. (§ 13) quotes the text with the same peculiarity.
[284] Jerome, Hieronymus.
[285] Corinth, Corinthian or Corinthians.
[286] imperative mood.