Section II The New Faith and
Some Old Problems
The Corinthians had accepted the gospel as a new and revolutionary way of life. Yet many problems persisted in the church. In the Christian life some problems, such as actual sins and transgressions, are solved in the new birth (I John 3:8-9). Other problems, such as carnal affections and attitudes, are solved by the cleansing power of the Holy Spirit in the crisis of entire sanctifica-tion (I Cor. 3:3; II Cor. 7:1; Eph. 5:25-26). Other problems not related to sin or to the carnal mind are solved by spiritual maturity, growth in grace, and enlarged understanding. The problems of the church at Corinth were due primarily to the carnal mind, although some, such as the problem of marriage and celibacy, may have been due to lack of understanding.
One of the most glaring problems at Corinth was that of spiritual divisions. During Paul’s absence the church had developed into clashing cliques and egotistical factions that threatened to tear their fellowship to pieces. The problem was an old one. Paul attempted to show the unchristian nature of a quarreling, divided, critical group of professed believers. He claimed that the new experience in Jesus Christ could solve this ancient problem. In pleading for Christian unity Paul presented several contrasts, or comparisons, between the Spirit-directed life in Christ and the selfish, carnally motivated lives of the Corinthians.
A. INDIVIDUAL PREFERENCE VERSUS DIVINE UNITY, 1:10-17
One of the problems at Corinth was the insistence on personal liberty, even license, rather than unity in Christ. The apostle calls for unity in the church.
1. Exhortation to Unity (1:10)
Paul pleads in strong and persuasive words that ye all speak the same thing. This is an expression from classical writing used of political communities which are free from tensions, or of different states which conduct cordial diplomatic and commercial relationships.
The word for divisions (schismata) means “rift,” “cleft,” or “division.” The term is used by Mark (2:21) and by Matthew (9:16) to describe a tear in an old garment. John uses the word (7:43) to describe the division of opinion among the people in regard to Jesus. Paul uses the same word in reference to the snobbish groups which made the observance of the Lord’s Supper a mockery (11:18). In the expression that ye be perfectly joined together Paul uses a medical term. Barclay explains it as “a medical word which is used of knitting together bones that have been fractured, or joining together a joint that has been dislocated.”1 Paul desires that they come to a right understanding and a unity of opinion, or judgment.
2. Report of Dissension (1:11)
Paul had received a report from the household of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Chloe is not known except by the reference at this point. The fact that Paul refers to her serves three purposes. It indicates that these reports were no idle rumors or inconsequential buzzing on the “ecclesiastical grapevine.” It also suggests that Chloe was a woman of character and good standing. Further, the reference suggests that the church had elevated women to a place of dignity and respect.
The word Paul uses for contentions means bitter quarreling. The Greek (era) is “a term employed by Homer to mean battle-strife in the Iliad and ‘contention’ or ‘rivalry’ in the Odyssey.”2 An even stronger meaning of this word is given in the expression “when hate takes hold of me.”3 The divisions at Corinth were not slight differences of opinions. They were deep-seated quarrels that threatened the existence of the church.
3. The Divisions in the Church (1:12)
The divisions in the church were the result of a carnal attachment to human leaders. There was no disagreement among these leaders themselves. But disagreement arose when certain people insisted on the authority of one leader over another. Different ones were saying: I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Thus there appeared to be a fourfold division.
a. Party of Paul. The party of Paul probably was a combi nation 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 ex hibited the factious spirit also indicated that they may have de sired to use their seniority to exert priorities on the leadership of the church. Or they may have tended to make the freedom in Christ which Paul preached an excuse for unwarranted license. At any rate, Paul was not flattered by their false loyalty to him.
b. Party of Apollos. According to Acts 18:24, Apollos was an eloquent man, well-versed in Scripture. With the extreme emphasis on verbal expression in Corinth, it was natural that some would have preferred the eloquent Apollos to the less im pressive Paul (II Cor. 10:10). Apollos was an Alexandrian, and may have had a background of intellectual excitement, which, added to his oratorical ability, would have made him a magnetic preacher.
c. Party of Cephas. Those who followed the leadership of Peter were either Jewish converts who insisted that Christians should observe the Jewish law or they were Gentile converts who were legalistic in their approach to Christian living.
d. Party of Christ. While some scholars debate the matter, it seems valid to accept a fourth party called the “Christ party.” William Baird states three possible descriptions of this division. (1) The Christ party was a Judaizing faction made up of con verts of James, the brother of the Lord; (2) The Christ party was a libertine group, consisting of people who wanted complete ethical and religious freedom, with no apostolic authority ex erted over them; (3) The Christ party was a faction of Gnostics, who loved to parade their knowledge and demanded liberty in thought and act.4
4. One Christ and One Baptism (1:13-17)
Paul regarded the Church as the body of Christ (I Cor. 12: 12-27). As such the body was united and should not be torn limb from limb by the carnal quarreling of the church. To drive home his point the apostle asked several purely rhetorical questions that could be answered only in the negative.
a. Is Christ divided? (13) Is the work of Christ as Saviour and Lord parceled out “between several individuals, so that one possesses one piece of it, another, another?”5 To profess the name of Christ in the midst of disagreements, quarrels, and divisions is in reality to tear Christ to pieces. Divisions actually “ deny the lordship of Christ. As John Calvin states it: “For He reigns in our midst, only when He is the means of binding us together in an inviolable union.”6
b. The first question exalted Christ. In his second question Paul “implies his own comparative insignificance,”7 Was Paul crucified for you? Since no human personality could achieve man’s redemption, it was useless to quarrel about human lead ership. Only the death of Christ could accomplish man’s per sonal salvation. In view of Christ’s crucifixion, all of man’s quarreling ought to cease.
c. A third question climaxed the process, Or were ye bap tized in the name of Paul? “ ‘Into the name’ implies entrance into fellowship and allegiance, such as exists between the Re deemer and the redeemed.”8 The Corinthians had been baptized as Christians, not as followers of any human leader.
d. Paul himself had baptized only a few persons, 14-17. He was not reflecting on the act of baptism, nor did he imply that he had avoided baptizing freely because he had foreseen what would happen at Corinth. Nevertheless, he was glad that he had not made it a rule to baptize and thus had avoided the dangers of having his converts identify themselves with him. He was com missioned to preach, and the gospel of faith and grace that he proclaimed was as free from outer ritual and ceremony as it was devoid of legal observances.
With the centrality of the Cross in mind Paul could say: For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect (17). He preached the gospel without any strange oratorical flourishes and with no pretense to intellectual display. His approach was a straightforward declaration of the cross of Christ. He knew that any attempt to evangelize by worldly wisdom would empty the gospel of meaning until it would “dwindle to nothing, vanish under the weight of rhetorical ornament and dialectic subtlety.”9 For Paul the cross (stauros) described the death of Christ in the deepest possible humiliation. The cross was a stake or crossbeam to which condemned slaves or the most depraved and despised criminals were nailed. The apostle was well aware that a gospel based on such extreme humiliation was the absolute opposite of human wisdom. Yet he knew also that to preach any other message made the gospel void and inoperative.
B. HUMAN WISDOM VERSUS DIVINE POWER, 1:18-31
In the preceding paragraph (10-17) Paul had condemned the divisions in the church which had risen due to a false concept of loyalty to human leaders. He had stressed the cardinal fact that the cross of Christ made unity the normal result of true Christian fellowship. Now, by a casual reference to the nature of preaching, he passes to a different emphasis. He leaves temporarily the problem of divisions in the church and begins a discussion on the unchristian stress on human eloquence and wisdom. The idea of divisions is picked up again in the third chapter.
1. Preachina—Foolishness to Unbelievers (1:18-23”)
Without any equivocation Paul declares a basic principle of the redeeming gospel of Christ: For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God (18). At first glance it appears that Paul is advocating a rigid anti-intellectualism. But he was not placing a premium on ignorance. He did not intend “to ground religious knowledge in absurdity nor to reduce theological learning to a bare minimum.”10 In reality, Paul was attempting to show that true wisdom, the wisdom of God, is revealed in and through the cross of Christ. For “to know nothing but Christ and him crucified is to know everything significant.”11
To those who are even now in the process of perishing, the preaching of the cross is foolishness. The word foolishness (moria) refers to anything which is irrational, stupid, or worthless. On the other hand, to those who believe and accept it, the preaching of the cross becomes the power (dynamis) of God. Because it is power, “the word of the cross is, after all, the truest wisdom.”12 To illustrate his claim that God’s wisdom is actually a power that operates in human affairs, Paul uses several illustrations from history and from contemporary life.
a. The first illustration of God’s power as contrasted to human wisdom is taken from a reference in Isa. 29:14: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent (19). The allusion in Isaiah is to a political alliance with Egypt which was considered a masterpiece of human wisdom and diplomacy. But in God’s sight it was rebel lion. The invasion of Sennacherib reduced Judah to poverty and helplessness. In this fashion God showed that “the deliverance granted by Jehovah to His people would be His work, not that of the able politicians who directed the affairs of the kingdom.”13Not only in the past, but in the future God will continue to set aside the proud claims of man who seeks to shape his destiny apart from divine power.
b. A second illustration of the contradiction between divine power and human wisdom is taken from Isa. 33:18. Paul asks the penetrating question: Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? (20) The general reference is to the Assyrian conquerors who came with military power to overwhelm the Jews and to carry off the rewards of conquest. The wise probably refers to the proud, self-styled intellectual—the Greek sophist—who could argue any point with apparent sin cerity. The scribe would be the stubborn interpreter of Jewish law. The disputer is a term which includes both the self-confident philosopher and the self-satisfied Jew who relied upon human wisdom for salvation.
God does not look with indifference upon the proud pretensions of man: Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? (20) He makes all of man’s vaunted wisdom look foolish. Bishop Lightfoot writes that God renders man’s wisdom vain in two ways: “ (1) by exhibiting its intrinsic worthlessness and corrupt results, and (2) by the power of the Cross set in opposition to it and triumphing over it.”14
c. A third illustration of the failure of human wisdom is a sweeping indictment of all mankind: For after that in the wis dom of God the world hy wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe (21). Earlier forms of revelation had appealed to man through reason and understanding. Concerning the failure of human reason in submitting to God, Godet writes: “Man not having recognized God … by the healthy use of his understanding, God manifests Himself to him in another revelation which has the appearance of folly.”15 Man’s blighted reason is futile as a means of a personal relationship to God. Thus it pleased God to resolve that prob lem, by means of the apparent foolishness of preaching (Gk.keryma, “the message”) to save those that accept and believe.
d. A fourth contrast of divine power and human wisdom used by Paul was the contemporary attitude of the Jews and the Greeks (22-23). The Jews demanded practical signs and evi dences in ceremonial observances and in legal specifications. The Greeks insisted upon rational explanations and sought for speculative systems. In both instances the Jews and the Greeks were in fact demanding that God reveal himself in harmony with their particular ideas.
But instead of reducing God to man’s concept, Paul said: We preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumhlingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness (23). The essence of the gospel is the heralding of a message from God, not the accommodation of God to man’s wisdom. The message is that of the crucified Christ. The verb crucified is a present particple. The significance of this form is stated by Morris: “Not only was Christ once crucified, but He continues in the character of the crucified one. The crucifixion is permanent in its efficacy and its effects.”16
The nationalistic ideas of the Jews, who sought for a political leader, would not accept a crucified Messiah. Thus Christ became a stumblingblock, an occasion of insult, and a spiritual deathtrap. The Greeks sought for a universe in which harmony, rationality, and beauty were the ruling forces. So the Cross with its apparent ugliness, folly, and tragedy was unmitigated foolishness.
2. Preachinq—God’s Power to Believers (1:24-25)
To those who know by personal experience the call of God there is one grand, overarching fact about Christ—He is both the wisdom and the power … of God. From the order of the wording, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God (24), it is apparent that one must experience God’s redeeming power in salvation from sin before he realizes the wisdom of God. Jesus Christ is God’s power because He saves from sin. He is God’s wisdom because in Him God’s nature, purposes, and designs are revealed to man. Christ hanging on the Cross may appear to be a scandal, an embarrassment, an utter foolishness. But this climactic act of God’s love, grace, and mercy, although it appears to be weak, is more powerful than any wisdom or force that man can produce.
In 1:1-25 there is the picture of “A Dynamic Church in a Secular World.” (1) Challenged by a holy calling, 1-2; (2) Unified by a common purpose, 10; (3) Inspired by a saving message, 22-25.
3. Preaching—God’s Method of Deliverance (1:26-31)
To reinforce his assertion that human wisdom stands in opposition to divine power, Paul asks that the people make a roll call of their group. If they do this, they will discover that most of them have come from the lower class of society, for not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called (26). This does not mean that God does not call all men to repentance and to redemption. All are called, and occasionally a person of high standing will respond.
As Barclay points out, even in NT times people from the highest ranks of society became Christians.17
There was Dionysius at Athens (Acts 17:34); Sergius Paulus, the proconsul of Crete (Acts 13:6-12); the noble ladies at Thessa-lonica and Berea (Acts 17:4, 12); Erastus, the chamberlain, 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. … 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 Roman Emperor, saying that the Christians came from every rank in society.18
And in A.D. 312, King Constantine formally accepted Christianity as his religion.
But such people as those were the exception. The great mass of Christians was composed of slaves, freedmen, simple and humble folk. Barclay quotes from the writings of Celsus, who, about A.D. 178, described the Christians as follows: “We see them in their own houses, wool dressers, cobblers and fullers, the most uneducated and vulgar [common] persons.”19 Thus not many wise men, or lovers of human wisdom and understanding, were believers; nor did the mighty, the leading and outstanding people, accept Christ; neither did the nobles, or those of royal rank or noble birth, submit to Christ, except in rare instances.
Paul emphasizes the low social status of most converts three times in 27 and 28—the foolish things of the world … the weak things of the world … the base things of the world. Adam Clarke suggests that foolish things refer to illiterate men who confounded the greatest of Greek philosophers; weak things to those without secular power or authority; and base things to those “who were considered base and despicable in the eyes of the Jews, who counted them as no better than dogs.”20
Thus the very nature of the converts indicated that no flesh should glory in his presence (29). The wise, the powerful, the well-born may boast about their social distinctions. In contrast, the Christians may glory in Christ because in Him they have experienced true wisdom, riches, and power. They may be counted as nonentities, but they represent God’s highest wisdom and power. Because they are actually in Christ they participate in all that God is.
Thus Christ is the Christian’s wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification,21 and redemption (30). Christ became everything to the Christian because of His incarnation, death, and resurrection. Christ is wisdom in that He reveals and imparts the counsel, purpose, and effects of God’s redemptive work. One commentator summarized the totality of the meaning of Christ in these words: “What we are and have we are and have received from God through Christ. United to Christ we are righteous and holy, since all those blessings are founded in His work. … Redemption, often used of the liberation of slaves through he payment of a ransom, indicates the way Christ delivers us … by His sacrifice, His death on the cross. In surrendering Himself He brings us knowledge, righteousness and holiness.”22
The grand Object of all preaching is Jesus Christ. He should be the central Figure in all of our worship. Thus there can be no reason to be proud or conceited about any human talents or abilities. What had grieved the apostle most was the divisions caused by extolling human names alongside the name of Christ. The knowledge that “we are indebted to the Lord for every good thing should keep us from glorying in self or anyone else.”23 He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord(31).
C. PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE VERSUS DIVINE REVELATION, 2:1-16
Paul had made a choice in his method of preaching. No doubt his mind was as active and alert as were his physical labors. He was a man of broad scholarship and wide learning. But somewhere along the line of his ministerial apprenticeship he had made a choice between framing the gospel message in human, personal wisdom or stating it according to divine revelation. Because of this deliberate choice to proclaim the gospel as a divine revelation, Paul’s preaching had a number of significant characteristics.
1. His Preaching Was Simple (2:1)
When Paul preached, he came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, but simply proclaimed the message given to him. Simplicity does not mean shallowness. Nor does it indicate an absence of mental ability or of arduous study and careful preparation. Simplicity means stating truth in clear, direct, and understandable language. Paul avoided a display of distracting oratorical tricks. His preaching was devoid of subtle philosophical suggestions. There was no theological double-talk and nothing mysterious or hidden. God had given him a message and he delivered the testimony of God.
2. His Preaching Was Christ-centered (2:2)
Paul deliberately excluded from his message everything except the revelation of the atoning work of Christ. In his preaching “he intentionally set aside the different elements of human knowledge by which he might have been tempted to prop up the preaching of salvation.”24
The apostle fulfilled the ideal of preaching suggested by Morris: “Preaching the gospel is not delivering edifying discourses, beautifully put together. It is bearing witness to what God has done in Christ for man’s salvation.”25 When he preached Jesus Christ, and him crucified Paul selected the one point that was the most criticized by the Jews and Greeks.
3. Concern, Power, and Purpose (2:3-5)
Paul makes a rather puzzling statement regarding his feelings when he first came to Corinth. He says, And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling (3). Paul did not have a craven fear of physical violence or an overly sensitive attitude toward popular opinion. Rather, he came to Corinth with a sense of utmost concern because of the gigantic task of preaching the gospel in a completely corrupt city. Coupled with the overwhelming task of evangelizing Corinth there may have been an awareness of the personal physical ailment to which he refers in II Cor. 12:7 or he may have been somewhat apprehensive about his unimpressive physical appearance (II Cor. 2:10). At any rate, Paul was neither reluctant to come to Corinth nor was he ashamed of the gospel. But he was mightily concerned about the seriousness of his mission. He had a “trembling anxiety to perform a duty.”26
Paul’s preaching was powerful. It was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power (4). His use of words, his arrangement of ideas, and his content were not designed to gain mere assent or applause. He knew the reputation of Corinth, where the “spurious art of persuading without instructing”27 was held in such high repute. The word demonstration (apodeixis) is used only here in the NT. Literally, a demonstration is a “showing forth” or “a proof.”28 As Paul uses the term, “it has the force of a proof, not an exhibition, but that which carries conviction.”29 In reality it is God’s “power to save man and give a new direction to his life.”30 Paul wanted results—converts. He knew that a spiritual work must be done by spiritual means. So he simply preached the gospel.
The purpose of Paul’s preaching was to establish the converts in faith, to ground them in divine power. An experience based only upon moving speeches or clever arguments may be removed by the same kind of message from another person. But he who accepts the gospel of the cross of Christ is established in divine love and power by the Holy Spirit.
4. Human Knowledge Versus Divine Revelation (2:6-9)
Paul was certain that he spoke the truth when he preached the gospel. He consistently showed the practical benefits of divine wisdom and the emptiness of human wisdom. For him the wisdom (understanding) that came from God was knowable only by personal experience. In this sense wisdom is more than knowledge, insight, or prudence regarding the cross of Christ.
Paul referred to speaking wisdom among them that are perfect (6). Most writers translate the word perfect in this statement to indicate mature Christians. Trench says: “This image of full, completed growth, as contrasted with infancy and childhood, underlies the ethical use of teleioi [perfect] by St. Paul.”31 Godet makes a sharp distinction between the perfect man and the believer in general when he writes: “The word perfect has therefore a meaning much narrower than believer. It denotes the state of the mature man, in opposition to the infant.”32
Paul had no faith in man’s wisdom in relation to redemption. So the gospel message was not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes (rulers) of this world, that come to nought. The wisdom of God reveals His purposes and plan in redemption, while the wisdom of human leaders inevitably becomes ineffective and inoperative. Man’s knowledge cannot bring about the redemption of the race, nor can it achieve peace, prosperity, and permanent security for us.
When Paul referred to the wisdom of God in a mystery (7), he was not referring to a puzzle or to an event which man finds difficult to solve. In Paul’s vocabulary God’s wisdom was a mystery (mysterion) in the sense that human reason was unable to penetrate or to discover it. Paul also used the term mystery in the sense of something hidden from the person not initiated into the group. Once initiation has taken place, all the things formerly unknown are now crystal-clear. Thus the wisdom of God is a hidden wisdom, meaning that men who reject Christ cannot understand it.
Moreover, God’s wisdom was ordained before the world. He had marked out beforehand the method of man’s redemption. It was not a hasty postscript added because of unexpected circumstances. This divine wisdom was something which none of the princes of this world knew (8). Despite their eminence as leaders in society, the men of authority and honor did not discern the true nature of redemption.
If the leaders had been aware of who Christ really was, they would not have crucified Him (8). Lord of glory is a unique and wonderful title. It suggests both the essential nature of Jesus Christ and the environment He creates. At this point Paul presents a sharp contrast between the humiliation of the Cross and the “intrinsic majesty and glory of the Crucified.”33 This exalted title shows Paul’s understanding of the centrality of Christ in man’s redemption.
Not only do believers find true wisdom and personal spiritual power in Christ. The best is yet to be. For no human powers of sense or of imagination are able to conceive of the things which God hath prepared for them that love him (9). The word love (agapao) refers not only to love expressed in affection but love shown in unselfish service, love in harmony with the nature of Christ.
5. Spiritual Man Versus the Natural Man (2:10-16)
One of the unique aspects of the Christian gospel is its simple yet sharp classification of men as spiritual and natural. The natural man lives according to human reason or human impulses. The spiritual man is given life by the Holy Spirit and is directed by the Holy Spirit.
a. The spiritual man (2:10-13). The only person who can tell us the truth about God is the Holy Spirit. Regarding spiritual facts Paul writes: But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit (10). The statement, The Spirit searcheth all things, does not mean that He investigates or inquires into all things. The phrase means that the Holy Spirit possesses “complete and accurate knowledge.”34 The revelation of God is made by the Holy Spirit. “The deep things of God designate God’s essence, then His attributes, volitions, and plans.”35 Vine states that they are “the counsels and purposes of God, as well as all that pertains to His nature and attributes.”36
Paul presents two kinds of truth and two kinds of people. There is spiritual truth which comes through the Holy Spirit, and is understood by spiritual people. Then there is natural wisdom which is opposed to spiritual truth. Spiritual men accept and understand spiritual truth, which the natural man does not. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God (12). This spirit of the world is man in his natural state; it is the principle which pervades mankind in its alienation from God. In contrast to the spirit of the world is the spirit which is of God; that is, the Holy Spirit, who is given by God to believers,37 or “the spirit of true faith and trust toward God, the spirit of humility and love.”38 The Spirit of God is given to man, that he might understand and experience the blessings of salvation.
The person who has received the Spirit of God does two things. First, he teaches the things God has revealed to him, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth (13). As God has revealed himself to man, He now enables man to present the revealed truth to other men. Thus divine truth does not depend upon human contrivance in its presentation. Moreover, God gives words as well as ideas. Godet interprets the statement as a contrast between divine revelation and human inspiration when he writes: “By revelation God communicates Himself to man; inspiration bears on the relation of man to man.”39 The Holy Spirit enables all who minister the gospel to do so effectively.
The spiritual man also makes a practice of comparing spiritual things with spiritual. Commentators have given two meanings to this phrase: (1) joining or combining spiritual things (ideas, revelations) with spiritual words; (2) interpreting, adapting, or applying with discernment spiritual teachings to spiritual men. In either case, Paul wants to make the point that human learning and human salvation are not sufficient to present the gospel. Salvation truth is a revealed message which is taught under the direction of the Spirit.
Verses 1-13 suggest “How to Have Spiritual Victory in Difficult Times.” (1) Be faithful in witnessing, 1-3; (2) Rely on the Spirit, 4-5; (3) Be sure that you speak for God, 6-13.
b. The natural man (2:14). In contrast to the spiritual man is the natural man. The word for natural (psychikos) always denotes “the life of the natural world and whatever belongs to it, in contrast to the supernatural world, which is characterized by pneuma (spirit).”40 Thus the natural man is “one who possesses … simply the organ of purely human cognition, but has not yet the organ of religious cognition in the … spirit.”41 The natural man has only the common powers of man separated from God; as such he receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God … neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Since the natural abilities of man “are altogether corrupt because of sin, every activity of his soul and mind will be darkened accordingly.”42 Spiritual things are foolishness to the natural man, for such a man lives as if the totality of life were in physical things; he lives only for this world. His values are based on the material and the physical, and he judges everything in the light of these terms. Such a man simply cannot understand spiritual things. He who thinks only in terms of sexual gratification cannot understand the meaning of chastity; a person dedicated to piling up material possessions cannot grasp the meaning of generosity; a man motivated by a lust for power cannot know the meaning of sacrificial service; an individual whose life is directed by worldly attitudes cannot appreciate inner, spiritual impulses. Because the natural man does not open his life to the Holy Spirit, he counts all spiritual life and values as foolishness.
c. The mind of Christ (2:15-16). Because of the presence of the Holy Spirit, he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man (15). This passage does not grant a license for the Christian to sit in judgment on the activities of others. Nor does it mean that a spiritual man is immune to criticism or evaluation by the world. The passage means that the Christian has a spiritual capacity to sift, to investigate, to examine, to discern all things within the framework of the divine revelation of redemption. On the other hand, the natural man does not have an ability to subject the Christian way of life to examination and judgment, for he is completely unacquainted with the meaning of spiritual life.
In v. 16, Paul adapts a quotation from Isa. 40:13, which also appears in modified form in Rom. 11:34. God’s ways and methods are beyond the understanding of man. It is thus futile for the natural man to attempt to understand the operation of divine redemption. What supreme egotism it would be for a man to attempt to instruct the Lord! In contrast, the indwelling Spirit reveals Christ and the power of God to redeem. The spiritual man, because he has the mind of Christ, does not evaluate things from the point of view of the world. The Christian sees things in the light of the revelation of God in Christ.
D. CARNAL CHILDREN VERSUS SPIRITUAL TEMPLES, 3:1-23
Paul delicately, yet relentlessly, presents the claims of the gospel to the Corintliians. In his contrast of the spiritual man and the natural man he had written in broad, general principles. Now he becomes direct and specific. For Paul knew well that finally the truth must be driven home and ultimately basic issues must be faced if Christianity is to be significant in man’s life. So he presents the issue: Are the Corinthians to remain as carnal children or will they become spiritual temples?
1. The Carnal Christian (3:1-9)
Paul could not speak to these people as Spirit-filled believers. Thus a distinction is made within the ranks of the church. All believers receive the Holy Spirit when they have faith and believe (Eph. 1:13). Spiritual life is possible only in and through the Holy Spirit. But not all Christians are Spirit-filled and Spirit-directed. Some Christians are carnal. But even though he labels the Corinthians as being carnal, Paul is quick to remind them that they should be God’s temples.
a. The reality of the carnal Christian (3: l-3a). Paul is about to level a most severe charge at the Corinthians. Yet he does so in a spirit of love, for he identifies himself with them by calling them brethren, or “fellow-Christians.”43 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ (1). Paul was not able to speak to these people as Spirit-filled because, even though converted, they were carnal (sarkinos). The word means “people still fleshly in their way of thinking and acting and not able, like a truly spiritual man, to judge aright all things.”44 Another scholar interprets this word carnal as “what a man cannot help being, but a state to be subordinated to the higher law of the Spirit, and enriched and elevated by it.”45
The presence of original sin does not involve personal guilt. Only after the Christian is enlightened by the Holy Spirit does he bear guilt for the continued presence of this state of sin.
These Christians were babes; they were “still weak in grace, although eminent in gifts.”46 In the beginning they were called “saints” they were in Christ, and were expected to develop and grow. Thus Paul, in his first ministry among them, could not teach or treat them as mature Christians.
Looking back on their early, infantile state of grace, Paul said: I have fed you with milk, and not with meat (2). Milk and meat are both nourishing foods. But normally milk is for the infant of delicate and undeveloped body, while meat is for the strong and mature person who needs strength to do rugged work. Paul was not referring to two sets of doctrine, one for weak Christians and another for mature Christians. His gospel was the same for all. But there are different methods and varying purposes in preaching. Milk thus is a symbol of the simple declaration of the gospel to sinners. It is missionary or evangelistic preaching. Meat, on the other hand, suggests the kind of preaching which shows the possibilities of grace, which lays out the obligations and duties of the Christian life, which presents the grand scope of personal redemption and the worldwide ministry of the Holy Spirit. Paul, in the beginning, dealt gently with the Corinthians, like a nursemaid with a baby. His reason for the nursemaid approach was that ye were not able to bear it. The deficiency was in the people’s ability to receive the full gospel menu, not in Paul’s inability to present it.
But Paul was not willing to remain a nursemaid. He was a prophet. So he levels a severe charge at them in the words: Neither yet now are ye able. The Corinthians had not grown. Instead of developing in grace and humility, they were proud of their gifts and abilities; instead of expressing a strong spirit of unity, they were full of discord and dissension; instead of a sharp sensitivity to sin, they were tolerating the worst sins in their group; instead of glorifying Christ, they were bickering among themselves; they were misusing the Lord’s Supper and denying the resurrection. While Paul did not attach serious blame to their initial state of weakness because of their natural carnal tendencies, he now makes a direct charge, telling them that the reason for their actions is the persistence of the carnal mind: For ye are yet carnal(3).
The word for carnal in this indictment is sarkikos, a severe term, “signifying sensual … under the control of the fleshly nature instead of being governed by the Spirit of God.”47 Another interpretation of the term is, “Under the dominion of sinful flesh.”48 They were carnal by act. This is the persistent threat to spiritual growth. In the beginning of the Christian life people are carnal because of “the hurtful persistence of the state of nature.”49 But the Christian life is not static. One either develops into a mature Christian through the elimination of carnal tendencies or he invariably settles down to a state of deliberate babyhood. Godet describes the difference between the normal carnal weakness of new Christians and the prolonged state of carnal living: “The matter in question is no more a simple state of weakness which continues in spite of regeneration, but a course of conduct which attacks the new life and tells actively against it.”50 The problem of the church at Corinth was the glaring reality of a carnal spirit. All their problems grew out of this.
b. The characteristics of the carnal Christian (3:3b-9). Paul lists several characteristics of the carnal state in vv. 3-9. This list does not exhaust all the expressions of such a state. But it helps Paul to get to the first of the major problems at Corinth, that of divisions.
(1) Envy (3:3) The word for envying (zelos) is usually rendered “jealousy.” It is that spirit which makes a person tear down another in order to exalt himself. Jealousy refuses to recognize the talents or gifts of others, yet boasts of these same things when one possesses them himself.
(2) Strife (3:3). Jealousy and envy lead to strife (eris). In classical Greek the word was very powerful. In this context it is used to suggest the nature of a person “when hate takes hold upon him.”51 Jealousy and strife point to unhealthy and unchristian rivalries. Barclay writes: “If man is at variance with his fellow men, if he is a quarrelsome, competitive, argumentative, trouble-making creature, he may be a diligent church attender, he may even be a church office-bearer, but he is not a man of God.”52 The Corinthians were walking as men; that is, they were living like people who had never experienced the grace of God.
(3) False loyalties (3:4-5). Another characteristic of the carnal man is false loyalties. The result of jealousy and strife is usually an open and practical expression. In this case it was manifested in a misplaced loyalty to human leadership: For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? (4) The exaltation of human personality to a point of divisions is an act of fallen humanity. “Their divisions were a standing witness to their worldly mentality, not to their spiritual perception.”53 The apostle asks: Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? (5) Apollos and Paul were not little gods to be served; they, like all Christians, were the servants of the Lord. They were to be the instruments, not the objects of faith.54 What God gave to Paul and to Apollos, He gave to every man—a witness to the living power of the gospel of Christ.
(4) False loyalty rebuked (3:6-9). By using an illustration from agricultural practices Paul rebuked false loyalty to human leadership: I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase (6). Paul was the missionary who first preached to the Corinthians. He had founded their church. Apollos was a fellow preacher who succeeded Paul as the pastor at Corinth. He nourished and sustained the Christians with the preaching of the gospel. Both the verbs, planted and watered, are in the aorist tense, indicating a past action completed and done with. The third verb, gave, is in the imperfect tense, indicating a continual action, or a process going on all the time. So it was God who was causing the increase. Men come and go in God’s work. Each makes a contribution to the process of planting or nourishing. But God works throughout the entire process.
Since God produces the growth, it follows that neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth (7). Paul and Apollos were servants and instruments of God’s salvation. They neither desired nor deserved personal devotion. Planting and watering are necessary in the growing process, but without the fruit these activities are meaningless. And it is God who produces the fruit. Moreover, he that planteth and he that watereth are one (8). Paul and Apollos were themselves unified. They were not quarreling with each other about credit for success or about the number of followers they had. To consider them rivals was absurd as well as carnal. Yet God would reward them. For every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. But their reward is not human loyalty; it is, rather, divine approval. The word for reward (mysthos) was used primarily of wages paid for work, but came to mean any reward or recognition for services. Labour (fcopos) suggests difficult work involving weariness and intense exertion.
In finishing this section on the nature of growth in the Christian community Paul states: “For we are fellow workmen for God; you are God’s field, God’s building” (9, RSV). God alone calls men. These men are His servants and work for Him. But the Church also belongs to God. Thus the Corinthians are like a field or a vineyard which God owns and which is planted and cultivated by God’s workers. If the Corinthians are in fact God’s vineyard, they have a double motive to deter them from false loyalties: “ (1) they are misusing God’s ministers who because of their very office belong to God; (2) they are thereby untrue to themselves who as the very product of this ministry also belong to God.”55 The Church is God’s building (oikodome). The word is used in two ways. It sometimes describes a finished structure (Matt. 24:11); it may also be used for the process of building, as a building in the course of construction. It is this second meaning that Paul uses here. It is out of this figure of God’s people as a building in the process of construction that the question arises: Are the Corinthians going to be carnal babes or spiritual temples?
2. Christ as the Foundation (3:10-15)
From 11-15, Maclaren preached on “The Testing Fire.” (1) The patchwork structure—wood, hay, stubble, 12; (2) The testing fire, 13; (3) The fate of the two builders, 14-15.
The carnal man tends to build on human wisdom. He proceeds by purely human designs. He hopes to do all the work and receive all the credit. A true servant, on the other hand, realizes that God designs the building program and each man makes a contribution. Paul regarded himself as an evangelist-missionary. As such he started churches, that is, laid the foundations upon which others built. He suggests four things in this short passage about the Christian and the churches as God’s buildings.
a. Paul laid only the foundation (3:10). The apostle writes, According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. Paul was the skilled craftsman, the masterbuilder (architekton), who laid the foundation. He was not the designer, for God was that. Neither was Paul an overseer, directing the activity of other workmen. He did the work himself. Moreover, Paul was a wise builder. As such, however, he did not claim any particular or unique wisdom for himself. He was wise in the sense that he preached the gospel of Christ and centered the experience of the Corinthians squarely upon the crucified Saviour.
Paul realized that, in the very nature of the life of the church, someone else would build on the foundation. The foundation is laid once and for all—in Christ—but the building process continues. The expression buildeth thereon means that another “does the up-building.” When Paul said that he laid the foundation, the aorist tense is used to indicate a completed act. When referring to building, he uses the present durative “to indicate the work of building which goes on indefinitely and is going on even now as Paul writes these lines.”56
b. Christ the only Foundation (3:11). The master craftsman is a servant. As such he does not select the type, shape, or the material of the foundation. All these are settled once and for all”For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. No man may begin anywhere else than in Christ Jesus. No man may improve on Christ as the Foundation. And no man may end anywhere else than in Christ. Jesus Christ was the Foundation, the only true Gospel.
c. The test of building (3:12-15). In reference to the testing, or inspection of the building, several things are clear. First, there are alternative materials that may be used. Paul mentions gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble (12). The material is of two distinct and opposite kinds, “rich and durable or paltry and perishing.”57 One type suggests maturing, stable Christians grounded on sound doctrines and rich experience. The other type is the flimsy straw of human opinion, the random bits of wooden human wisdom. This suggests immature, unstable church members.
Second, Paul states that every man’s work shall be made manifest… and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is (13). The result and true nature of every man’s work will be openly exhibited in the great day of judgment so often mentioned by Paul. Three verbs are used to indicate the nature of the open manifestations of man’s work—declare, revealed, and try. To declare is to make plain or evident. To reveal is to disclose or to uncover. To try (test) is to determine whether it is genuine or false.
The method of testing is by fire. This does not mean a purgatorial or disciplinary period for the Christian. It is the work that is tested, not the character of the worker. Man’s work will be reviewed in the light of the judgment—that is, in relation to the holiness of God. To remind these carnal Christians that all man’s work would be judged by God was to remind them that their quarreling and disputing about human leadership was wrong.
Third, Paul states that, if a man’s gospel work is of a character that can endure the evaluation of God, he shall receive a reward (14). The nature of the reward is not indicated, but it seems evident that the reward is not personal salvation or eternal life, for these are given to all believers. Some particular reward of sharing the honor and glory of God seems to be indicated for the faithful servant who builds eternally by building on Christ and Him crucified (cf. Rev. 3:31; 22:5).
On the other hand, it is possible to build with materials that are not lasting. In this case a man loses his reward: If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire (15). A careless builder will not receive the reward of his work, in personal satisfaction, divine approval, or divine honor. The faithless builder is like a workman who is either denied the normal compensation or is fined for faulty construction. It is possible for a slovenly workman to be saved personally, but only like someone who escapes from a house on fire. Paul is presenting the danger of attempting to do spiritual work with carnal, selfish, or inferior motives. Good men who work with tainted motives or twisted methods may be saved, but their work crumbles. Those who try to build only upon natural talents, human skills, or personal charm will see their work go up in smoke.
The doctrine of purgatory is not taught in the passage under consideration. One writer gives an acceptable explanation of the idea of a man’s work being tried by fire in these words: “The fire … is not purgatory … but probatory, not restricted to these who die in venial sin: not the supposed intermediate class between those entering heaven at once and those dying in mortal sin who go to hell, but universal, testing the godly and ungodly alike (2 Cor. 5:10; cf. Mark 9:44).”58 Godet summarized the objections to any reference to purgatory in these passages as follows: “1. that the fire is allegorical like the building; 2. that it is only teachers who are in question; 3. that the trial indicated is a means of valuation, not of purification; 4. that this fire is lighted at Christ’s coming, and consequently does not yet burn in the interval between the death of Christians and that advent; 5. that the salvation of the worker, of which Paul speaks, takes places not by, but in spite of the fire,”59
In 3:1-15, Paul draws a disturbing picture of “The Carnal Christian.” (1) Infantile appetites, 1-2; (2) Juvenile attitudes, 3-4; (3) Faulty activities, 10-15.
3. Spirit-filled Temples Versus Carnal Men (3:16-23)
For Paul, Christians are not only buildings; they are a particular kind of building—temples. All religious groups in Paul’s day spoke of the temple of a god. But the pagan temple featured an image of a god. The Jewish Temple pointed to a symbol of God’s presence in the ark of the covenant, the altar, and the incense. Paul made a drastic contrast to both of these temples when he asked: Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? (16) The question is either a gentle reminder or a mild rebuke, for the Corinthians should have been aware of their spiritual status. Temple (naos) points to the shrine of the Temple, the inner sanctuary. The Church, the body of Christian believers, is God’s temple, and God’s Spirit dwells in it (cf. Eph. 2:20-22). However, here as elsewhere (6:19; II Cor. 6:16) the reference is also clearly to the individual believer.
There is stern warning in that, if any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy (17). If any man “destroys”—so reads the best Greek text—the Church of God by corrupt practices, or by false doctrines, then that man will be destroyed by the judgment of God. God’s holiness is to be reflected in His Church—the temple of God is holy. The Church is thus to be separated from the world and be free from the dissensions and moral laxity so evident in the church at Corinth.
The Corinthians could be either temples or foolish, carnal men. Paul relentlessly warns those who assume a role of being “wise with this world’s wisdom” (Moffatt). The reference may be to human pride in mere debating skill. To those who pretend to be worldly-wise Paul issues a blunt challenge: Let him become a fool, that he may be wise (18). The man who is conceited or has fallen into self-deception is to make a true evaluation of human wisdom. When he sees this wisdom in relation to divine revelation, let him renounce human wisdom and cast it aside insofar as personal redemption is concerned. When he discards the deceptive wisdom of this world, he will appear to be a fool. In reality, though, he has become wise. For only by this act of turning from worldly wisdom to divine power can a man actually attain true wisdom. To drive home the idea of the inability of human planning to redeem man, Paul repeats the now familiar phrase: For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God (19).
Paul’s low estimate of human wisdom is not a private opinion. He quotes the ancient scriptures to support his conviction. His first citation is from Job 5:13, in a variation of the text, as follows: He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. Literally, the verse means that He closes His fist upon men of unscrupulous conduct or of slippery manipulations. The second quotation is from Ps. 94:11, which Paul uses to suggest that God knows the patterns of thought, the processes of reasoning, the very essence of human thinking. Knowing such thinking completely, God regards it as vain (20). Human thought is fruitless in the sense that it is unable to produce anything of spiritual value that redeems man from sin.
Since human wisdom is foolishness with God, it is a waste and a folly to quarrel about the fancied superiority of one human leader over another. Therefore let no man glory in men (21). To boast of supreme loyalty to men as the Corinthians were doing was wrong, because it led to the exaltation of man instead of the exaltation of Christ. This practice of making a fetish of man was not only wrong; it was self-defeating. Paul said: For all things are yours (21). As all things belong to Christ and are under Him, so the Christian enjoys a joint ownership with Christ. Why then settle for less? Why limit their spiritual potential by an unchristian devotion to one man?
For whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours (22). All that Paul taught, all that Apollos preached, all that Peter witnessed to, were part of the rich heritage of the Christian. But Paul did not stop at this point. He expanded the realm of the Christian to include an understanding and appreciation of the world as God’s creation. All the blessedness of spiritual life is theirs also. Even death, the last enemy to be faced, is in reality a blessed end in that the Christian falls asleep in Jesus.
Paul’s eyes are not dim nor is his mind cloudy. He soars beyond the limits of time and space to declare that both things present (contemporary happenings) and things to come (future events) are under the sovereign control of Christ. And since the Christian is Christ’s, all things belong to him. And ye are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s (23). The petty quarrels of the Corinthians were reduced to insignificance in the light of the possibilities of grace through Christ. Since Christ was God revealed, He would unite all believers in God.
E. STEWARDSHIP VERSUS HARSH LEADERSHIP, 4:1-21
Paul soared to the heights of spiritual understanding in presenting the unlimited possibilities of life in Christ. But he was not one to get lost in oratorical and inspirational ecstasy. He descended abruptly from the heights to wrestle with the problem at hand. The problem facing the Corinthians was their insistence on evaluating preachers from a human standpoint rather than regarding them as servants and stewards. All except the last verse of this chapter deals with the nature of apostolic stewardship. In the closing verse the option is given—dedicated stewardship or harsh leadership. Paul’s concern was to present the proper evaluation of an apostolic leader.
1. The Mission of the Apostle (4:1-5)
The mission of Paul and of all who were called to preach the gospel was built upon four elements: service, stewardship, faithfulness, and a sensitivity to the judgments of God. While all of these are related, there are shades of difference between them.
a. Service (4:1). Paul and Apollos were not to be regarded as leaders of different gospels. They were both ministers of Christ. The word ministers (hyperetas) means “servants.” Originally the term referred to the oarsmen who helped propel boats through the waters of the sea. The word suggests the toil and sustained labor involved in the work of the gospel.
b. Stewardship (4:1). Paul and Apollos were also stewards of the mysteries of God. A steward (oikonomos) was literally a “house-manager.” Often he was a respected and efficient slave to whom the businessman or landowner had turned over the management of the estate. As such, the steward had authority over the helpers or the staff. He assigned work and distributed sup plies. He was the superintendent over the operation of the entire enterprise. Yet he was always aware that he was a slave and was under obligation to initiate and to carry out the desires of the owner.
The term mysteries refers to the whole plan of salvation (cf. comment on 2:7). Paul and Apollos did not possess secret knowledge hidden to all but a choice few. They were teachers and preachers of the revealed truth about salvation in and through Jesus Christ.
c. Faithfulness (4:2). This is the prime qualification of an apostle: Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful. When all is said and done, the main requirement for a man who teaches or preaches is faithfulness to God and to the truth. Not eloquence in words, not brilliance in thinking, not magnetism in appearance—but day-by-day faithfulness is the demand.
d. Man’s judgment, self-judgment, and God’s judgment (4: 3-5). Paul stated that it mattered little what evaluation the Corinthians made of him. He was always compassionate, considerate, and courteous. But he was almost totally indifferent to the reactions of men to him personally when it came to the issue of preaching the gospel. Such judgments had no influence upon his belief or conduct. The reason was simple: as a steward he was directly responsible to Christ.
Nor did Paul depend upon self-judgment. He did not omit self-criticism (cf. 9:15; 15:9), and he was painfully aware of his shortcomings. Yet he said: I judge not mine own self (3). Self-judgment is dangerous because a person so easily sanctions his own views, approves his own conduct, or rationalizes his own mistakes. For I know nothing by myself (4) is better rendered, “I know nothing against myself.” Paul could recall nothing in his Christian life which condemned him. Nor was he aware of anything that was held against him or his ministry. However, he did not feel acquitted because of a clear conscience. He knew full well that often an unaccusing conscience does not indicate freedom from guilt. In Paul’s case, his clear conscience and the absence of private condemnation came as a witness from the Lord—and the Lord was the final Judge.
Further, if Jesus Christ is the final Judge, the Corinthians should judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts (5). The idea was that the Corinthians should not “anticipate the great judgment … by any preliminary investigation … which might be futile and incomplete.”60 In the time of the final judgment God would reveal the things kept secret in this life, including the inner feelings and motives which determine the true quality of an act. At the final judgment shall every man have praise of God. Thus people should be careful neither to heap premature praise on favorite preachers nor to pour scorn upon people who were not to their particular liking. God is the only One qualified to judge. He alone can dispense well-founded praise or punishment.
In vv. 3-5, Maclaren finds “The Three Tribunals.” (1) The lowest—man’s judgment, 3a; (2) The higher court of conscience, 3b-4b; (3) The supreme court of final appeal, 4c-5.
2. Carnal Pride Versus Apostolic Humility (4:6-21)
Up to this point Paul had been as diplomatic and courteous as possible, although he had taken every avenue to show the Corinthians the error of their practice. But now diplomacy is laid aside. Paul levels a frontal attack. He charges the Corinthians with a display of carnal pride.
a. A fourfold object lesson (4:6-8). Because of their carnal pride, Paul used himself and Apollos as a kind of object lesson: And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes (6). Instead of naming outright those who were responsible for the quarreling and divisions in Corinth, Paul had changed the form of his approach. But this veiled allusion to himself and Apollos still carried a pointed message to the unnamed party leaders who were the center of difficulty at Corinth.
The message in this illustration had several features. First, that they might learn … not to think of men above that which is written. Some commentators interpret this phrase as a warning against going “beyond the terms of the commission entrusted to a teacher.”61 Others think that Paul is using a general reference to the OT, which consistently elevates God, not man.62 The Corinthian emphasis on the importance of teachers meant they were placing too much confidence in man.
A second note was a warning against being puffed up for one against another. In the original Greek the word for puffed up means to “make proud or arrogant, or conceited,” or “groundlessly inflated by his fleshly mind.”63 God-anointed leadership is a wonderful and necessary part of the church. But attachment to leadership should never result in the formation of cliques nor degenerate into undue loyalty. To select a leader and to elevate him to the point of opposing him to other leaders is the result of carnal pride.
A third part of Paul’s object-lesson message is contained in three sharp questions. These questions were designed to shock proud and foolish people into a sense of Christian humility. The first question is: For who maketh thee to differ from another? (7) The verb maketh … to differ (diakrinei) means two things: “to put a difference between” and “to regard as superior.” In either case the question here is: “Who gives you the exalted powers of discrimination so that you put one teacher against another?” The obvious answer is that such a claim arises from carnal pride. A second question: What hast thou that thou didst not receive? is a rhetorical one which reminds them that all gifts and abilities come from God. If man owes everything he has to God’s grace, self-conceit is ruled out. A third question completely punctures their proud bubble of conceit: Why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it? Since the grace of God is the source of all spiritual gifts, boasting is completely out of place.
The final phase of this object lesson contains severe irony and biting sarcasm. Hear Paul as he assails these proud, carnal Corinthians: Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us (8). The verb ye are full is one which is normally used in reference to food. It means to satisfy. The Corinthians felt a sense of spiritual preeminence. They did not “hunger and thirst after righteousness” (Matt. 5:6). They were not “poor in spirit,” but were already “rich,” and acting like kings.
They had achieved this self-exalted spiritual state without the help or the presence of Paul. He had preached to them and nourished them, but they had forgotten this. In their carnal state they acted as if they had far surpassed their spiritual guide. Paul comments sadly: And I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you. The apostle thus shows his continuing spiritual concern for them. He looks toward the day when all divisions among them will be cured, when God’s people will be united in the presence of Christ.
b. Apostolic humility (4:9-13). Paul’s severity was always followed by tenderness. Because his bluntness grew out of compassionate concern, he tempered his direct challenge with a sobering picture of apostolic humility. This was not a pious pose of public self-effacement. The attitude Paul spoke of was a principle of his ministry that was reflected in both public and private activity. It is found only in the pure in heart, who seek first God’s kingdom and righteousness.
Paul presents first a contrast between true apostolic humility and the smug self-satisfaction and rivalries of the Corinthians. For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death (9). The verb hath set forth (apodeiknumi) literally means “to display” or “to show publicly.” In its technical sense, the word was used in reference to the spectacle of exhibiting gladiators in the arena for the entertainment of the people. It was also used in regard to the public execution of criminals for the entertainment of a bloodthirsty mob.
Another picture which rebuked the carnal pride of the Corinthians was Paul’s statement: For we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men. The word spectacle means “theatre.” While it was often used of the place of an exhibition, it was also used of persons exhibited. Here Paul uses the word to depict the humble role of the apostle. The picture is that of a Roman general who had won a great military victory. On such occasions the victorious general paraded through the city, displaying all the booty and plunder he had taken. The whole procession was called a “triumph.” The end of the triumphal parade was made up of a band of bound captives who were doomed to die. The procession ended at the arena, where the prisoners were thrown into the pit to fight with the beasts until they died. Not only had the world heard of the tragic end of the doomed apostles, but even the angels were aware of the sufferings of the servants of God.
A third contrasting picture between Corinthian pride and apostolic humility is etched in a series of penetrating observations. The first is drawn in these words: We are fools for Christ’s sake, but ye are wise in Christ (10). Paul was regarded as foolish and stupid because he preached the gospel of a crucified Redeemer. The Corinthians regarded themselves as extremely prudent. In their proud self-estimate they thought of themselves as possessing extraordinary powers of wisdom and gifts. Another etching is found in the declaration, We are weak, but ye are strong. Paul refused to modify the gospel by cheap means which impress men. He was content to rely upon the power of God. But the Corinthians felt that their display of worldly wisdom and their exhibition of personal gifts made them stronger than the apostle who preached the gospel of Christ. A third etching is: Ye are honourable, but we are despised. The word honourable (endoxos) means “enveloped in glory.” In this picture Paul suggests that the Corinthians act as if they already had halos on their heads, with men bowing before them and accepting their teaching without question. The apostles, on the other hand, are like men disgraced, deprived of even normal human respect.
The fourth picture is a series of graphic glimpses of the apostolic ministry. Paul does not need to apply the truth to the Corinthians. The pictures speak sharply enough without personal application.
Of the apostles Paul says: We both hunger, and thirst (11). In contrast to the Corinthians, who seemed to have arrived at a superior state of spirituality as well as a secure status of material prosperity, the apostles still suffer without respite. In their extensive travels they often went hungry and thirsty. Are naked (gymniteuo) means to be scantily clad. Because of their traveling and the lack of funds, their sandals were often tattered and their clothing frayed.
Are buffeted (kolaphizo) means beaten with the fists or lashed with a whip. Such cuffing, striking, and lashing was usually reserved for slaves. It refers to “uncalled-for, vulgar, physical abuse.”64 And have no certain dwellingplace indicates that they had no security. They were not welcomed in many places but were regarded as vagrants. Their wandering, however, was not the aimless wandering of a tramp, but was the deliberate forsaking of the comforts of home for a cause.
In the statement, And labour, working with our own hands (12), the word labour (kopiao) suggests not only the idea of work, but of prolonged labor to the point of weariness. The idea of working for a living is particularly significant in view of the fact that the Greeks despised all manual labor, regarding it as the duty of slaves or of those who were mentally unfit for anything else. The apostle referred to his work, not as a mark of shame, but as a matter involved in his commission.
Paul had gone from generalities (vv. 9-10) to specific details about the physical hardships of the apostolic ministry (ll-12a). Now he paints the most graphic picture of all—a portrayal of the inner response to the ill treatment they received. Being reviled, we bless. Being sneered at and treated with contempt, they wished their tormentors well. Being persecuted, we suffer it. When they were mistreated and abused, the apostles maintained their poise and did not yield to either discouragement or retaliation. This idea of patient endurance without revenge was a sharp thrust at the petty quarreling of the Corinthians. Being defamed, we intreat (13). When the apostles were the object of evil speaking, they responded with a gentle request for fair treatment instead of replying by violent rebuttal or stinging denunciation.
In summarizing this unforgettable picture of apostolic humility Paul refers to the early preachers as the filth of the world, and…the offscouring of all things. The word filth denotes the scum and refuse, the rubbish of humanity. Offscouring refers to the accumulated dirt which is removed by scrubbing a filthy object. In the minds of the worldly-wise the apostles represented the litter of sweepings, the rubbish to be removed, the filth to be rubbed off. And this treatment was not temporary, for Paul said it continued unto this day.
c. Father in the faith (4:14-21). Paul was a man of deep emotions as well as of strong convictions. Thus the mood of his letters often changes rapidly. He passes quickly from stern rebuke to tender encouragement to the Corinthians.
The first expression of fatherly concern was the assurance, I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you (14). The verb warn (noutheteo) conveys the ideas of criticism in love, or admonishing. Paul does not speak as a stern stranger or an impersonal critic. He speaks with the tenderness of a father who is concerned with the welfare of his son.
Another expression of fatherly concern is found in the distinction between teacher and father: For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers (15). The instructors (paidagogous) were slaves who directed the learning and conduct of the child. The tutor took the child to school, sometimes taught him, and generally looked after him. He was a guardian. But a guardian can never have the same love for a son as does a father. Paul regards himself as the spiritual father of the Corinthians. Two things were included in the idea of this spiritual fatherhood. First, his affection for them was great. Second, they owed more to Paul than to anyone else. Thus he could say: Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers (lit, imitators) of me (16).
Paul’s fatherly concern is indicated also by his intention to send Timothy to them (17). Timothy stood in a comparable relationship to Paul as did the people at Corinth. But there was one difference. Timothy was loyal to the apostle and to the gospel that he preached. So Timothy would be sent to be a personal reminder of Paul’s early ministry and also would call their attention to Paul’s ways which be in Christ. Timothy would show them Christian humility and would dissipate the idea that Paul was the leader of a party in opposition to other church leaders.
A final expression of Paul’s fatherly spiritual concern is the announcement of his intention to visit them. Some of the Corinthians assumed that he was afraid to face them and they had become puffed up (18, arrogant) in their reaction to him. But he declares that all such claims are groundless: I will come to you shortly, if the Lord will (19). Paul’s hesitation in coming to Corinth was not a matter of personal reluctance to face them. He had delayed his visit because he felt subject to divine direction and was not free to come at the time of this writing. A man under divine instructions must exercise restraint.
But Paul assures them that when he comes he will not ignore their proud pretensions and their conceited interpretations of the gospel. His speech will not be the speech of the worldly-wise, but will be in the prophetic power which produces spiritual results and Christlike character. For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power (20). God’s kingdom is a spiritual Kingdom and uses spiritual power. Its energies and activities are not based on human logic, brilliant discourses, or emotional eloquence. God’s kingdom is spiritual truth presented in a spirit of humility and producing spiritual results.
Finally, Paul faced them squarely with the issue. It is not when he will visit them, but how he will come. Shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness? (21) The rod stands as a symbol of rebuke and discipline administered by a tutor. The phrase in love indicates the parental approach that Paul prefers to take.
“God’s Standards for Effective Service” are: (1) Faithful stewardship, 1-2; (2) Charitable judgment, 4-5; (3) Humble sacrifice, 9-13; (4) Spiritual power, 17, 20.