| |
Easton's Bible Dictionary
was written from Ephesus ( 1
Corinthians 16:8 ) about the time of the Passover in the third year of the
apostle Paul's sojourn there ( Acts
19:10 ; 20:31
), and when he had formed the purpose to visit Macedonia, and then return to Corinth
(probably A.D. 57).
The news which had reached him, however, from Corinth frustrated his plan. He
had heard of the abuses and contentions that had arisen among them, first from
Apollos ( Acts
19:1 ), and then from a letter they had written him on the subject, and also
from some of the "household of Chloe," and from Stephanas and his two friends
who had visited him ( 1
Corinthians 1:11 ; 16:17
). Paul thereupon wrote this letter, for the purpose of checking the factious
spirit and correcting the erroneous opinions that had sprung up among them, and
remedying the many abuses and disorderly practices that prevailed. Titus and a
brother whose name is not given were probably the bearers of the letter ( 2
Corinthians 2:13 ;
8:6 ,
8:16 - 18
).
The epistle may be divided into four parts:
(1) The apostle deals with the subject of the lamentable
divisions and party strifes that had arisen among them (1
Corinthians 1 - 4).
(2) He next treats of certain cases of immorality that had become notorious among
them. They had apparently set at nought the very first principles of morality
(1
Corinthians 5 ; 6).
(3) In the third part he discusses various questions of doctrine and of Christian
ethics in reply to certain communications they had made to him. He especially
rectifies certain flagrant abuses regarding the celebration of the Lord's supper
(1
Corinthians 7 - 14).
(4) The concluding part (1
Corinthians 15 ; 16)
contains an elaborate defense of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead,
which had been called in question by some among them, followed by some general
instructions, intimations, and greetings. |
This epistle "shows the powerful self-control of the apostle in spite of his physical
weakness, his distressed circumstances, his incessant troubles, and his emotional
nature. It was written, he tells us, in bitter anguish, 'out of much affliction
and pressure of heart...and with streaming eyes' ( 2
Corinthians 2:4 ); yet he restrained the expression of his feelings, and wrote
with a dignity and holy calm which he thought most calculated to win back his
erring children. It gives a vivid picture of the early church...It entirely dissipates
the dream that the apostolic church was in an exceptional condition of holiness
of life or purity of doctrine." The apostle in this epistle unfolds and applies
great principles fitted to guide the church of all ages in dealing with the same
and kindred evils in whatever form they may appear.
This is one of the epistles the authenticity of which has never been called in
question by critics of any school, so many and so conclusive are the evidences
of its Pauline origin.
The subscription to this epistle states erroneously in the Authorized Version
that it was written at Philippi. This error arose from a mistranslation of 1
Corinthians 16:5 , "For I do pass through Macedonia," which was interpreted
as meaning, "I am passing through Macedonia." In 1
Corinthians 16:8 he declares his intention of remaining some time longer in
Ephesus. After that, his purpose is to "pass through Macedonia."
Hitchcock's Dictionary of Bible Names
(no entry)
Smith's Bible Dictionary
was written by the apostle St. Paul toward the close of his nearly three-years
stay at Ephesus, ( Acts 19:10 ; 20:31 ) which, we learn from ( 1 Corinthians 16:8
) probably terminated with the Pentecost of A.D. 57 or 58. The bearers were probably
(according to the common subscription) Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus. It
appears to have been called forth by the information the apostles had received
of dissension in the Corinthian church, which may be thus explained: --The Corinthian
church was planted by the apostle himself, ( 1 Corinthians 3:6 ) in his second
missionary journey. ( Acts 18:1 ) seq. He abode in the city a year and a half.
( Acts 18:11 ) A short time after the apostle had left the city the eloquent Jew
of Alexandria, Apollos, went to Corinth, ( Acts 19:1 ) and gained many followers,
dividing the church into two parties, the followers of Paul and the followers
of Apollos. Later on Judaizing teachers from Jerusalem preached the gospel in
a spirit of direct antagonism to St. Paul personally. To this third party we may
perhaps add a fourth, that, under the name of "the followers of Christ," ( 1 Corinthians
2:12 ) sought at first to separate themselves from the factious adherence to particular
teachers, but eventually were driven by antagonism into positions equally sectarian
and inimical to the unity of the church. At this momentous period, before parties
had become consolidated and that distinctly withdrawn from communion with one
another, the apostle writes; and in the outset of the epistle, 1 Corinthians 1-4:21,
we have this noble and impassioned protest against this fourfold rending of the
robe of Christ.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
ko-rin'-thi-anz:
I. AUTHENTICITY OF THE TWO EPISTLES
1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians and Romans, all belong to the period of Paul's
third missionary journey. They are the most remarkable of his writings, and are
usually distinguished as the four great or principal epistles; a distinction which
not only is a tribute to their high originality and intrinsic worth, but also
indicates the extremely favorable opinion which critics of almost all schools
have held regarding their authenticity. Throughout the centuries the tradition
has remained practically unbroken, that they contain the very pectus Paulinum,
the mind and heart of the great apostle of the Gentiles, and preserve to the church
an impregnable defense of historical Christianity. What has to be said of their
genuineness applies almost equally to both.
1. External Evidence
The two epistles have a conspicuous place in the most ancient lists of Pauline
writings. In the Muratorian Fragment (circa 170) they stand at the head of the
nine epistles addressed to churches, and are declared to have been written to
forbid heretical schism (primum omnium Corinthiis schisma haeresis intredicens);
and in Marcion's Apostolicon (circa 140) they stand second to Gal. They are also
clearly attested in the most important writings of the subapostolic age, e.g.
by Clement of Rome (circa 95), generally regarded as the friend of the apostle
mentioned in Philippians 4:3; Ignatius (Ad Ephes., chapter xviii, second decade
of 2nd century); Polycarp (chapters ii, vi, xi, first half of 2nd century), a
disciple of John; and Justin Martyr (born at close of let century); while the
Gnostic Ophites (2nd century) were clearly familiar with both epistles (compare
Westcott, Canon, passim, and Index II; also Charteris, Canonicity, 222-224, where
most of the original passages are brought together). The witness of Clement is
of the highest importance. Ere the close of the let century he himself wrote a
letter to the Corinthians, in which (chapter xlvii, Lightfoot's edition, 144)
he made a direct appeal to the authority of 1 Corinthians: "Take up the letter
of Paul the blessed apostle; what did he write to you first in the beginning of
the gospel? Verily he gave you spiritual direction regarding himself, Cephas,
and Apollos, for even then you were dividing yourselves into parties." It would
be impossible to desire more explicit external testimony.
2. Internal Evidence
Within themselves both epistles are replete with marks of genuineness. They are
palpitating human documents, with the ring of reality from first to last. They
admirably harmonize with the independent narrative of Acts; in the words of Schleiermacher
(Einltg., 148), "The whole fits together and completes itself perfectly, and yet
each of the documents follows its own course, and the data contained in the one
cannot be borrowed from those of the other." Complex and difficult as the subjects
and circumstances sometimes are, and varying as the moods of the writer are in
dealing with them, there is a naturalness that compels assent to his good faith.
The very difficulty created for a modern reader by the incomplete and allusive
character of some of the references is itself a mark of genuineness rather than
the opposite; just what would most likely be the ease in a free and intimate correspondence
between those who understood one another in the presence of immediate facts which
needed no careful particularization; but what would almost as certainly have been
avoided in a fictitious composition. Indeed a modicum of literary sense suffices
to forbid classification among the pseudepigrapha. To take but a few instances
from many, it is impossible to read such passages as those conveying the remonstrance
in 1 Corinthians 9, the alternations of anxiety and relief in connection with
the meeting of Titus in 2 Corinthians 2 and 7, or the ever-memorable passage which
begins at 2 Corinthians 11:24 of the same epistle: "Of the Jews five times received
I," ere, without feeling that the hypothesis of fiction becomes an absurdity.
No man ever wrote out of the heart if this writer did not. The truth is that theory
of pseudonymity leaves far more difficulties behind it than any it is supposed
to solve. The unknown and unnamable literary prodigy of the 2nd century, who in
the most daring and artistic manner gloried in the fanciful creation of those
minute and life-like details which have imprinted themselves indelibly on the
memory and imagination of mankind, cannot be regarded as other than a chimera.
No one knows where or when he lived, or in what shape or form. But if the writings
are the undoubted rescripts of fact, to whose life and personality do they fit
themselves more exquisitely than to those of the man whose name stands at their
head, and whose compositions they claim to be? They suit beyond compare the apostle
of the missionary journeys, the tender, eager, indomitable "prisoner of the Lord,"
and no other. No other that has even been suggested is more than the mere shadow
of a name, and no two writers have as yet seriously agreed even as to the shadow.
The pertinent series of questions with which Godet (Intro to New Testament; Studies
on the Epistles, 305) concludes his remarks on the genuineness may well be repeated:
"What use was it to explain at length in the 2nd century a change in a plan of
the journey, which, supposing it was real, had interest only for those whom the
promised visit of the apostle personally concerned? When the author speaks of
five hundred persons who had seen the risen Christ, of whom the most part were
still alive at the time when he was writing, is he telling his readers a mere
story that would resemble a bad joke? What was the use of discussing at length
and giving detailed rules on the exercise of the glossolalia at a time when that
gift no longer existed, so to say, in the church? Why make the apostle say: 'We
who shall be alive (at the moment of the Parousia)' at a time when everyone knew
that he was long dead? In fine, what church would have received without opposition
into its archives, as an epistle of the apostle, half a century after his death,
a letter unknown till then, and filled with reproaches most severe and humiliating
to it?"
3. Consent of Criticism
One is not surprised, therefore, that even the radical criticism of the 19th century
cordially accepted the Corinthian epistles and their companions in the great group.
The men who founded that criticism were under no conceivable constraint in such
a conclusion, save the constraint of obvious and incontrovertible fact. The Tubingen
school, which doubted or denied the authenticity of all the rest of the epistles,
frankly acknowledged the genuineness of these. This also became the general verdict
of the "critical" school which followed that of Tubingen, and which, in many branches,
has included the names of the leading German scholars to this day. F. C. Baur's
language (Paul, I, 246) was: "There has never been the slightest suspicion of
unauthenticity cast on these four epistles, and they bear so incontestably the
character of Pauline originality, that there is no conceivable ground for the
assertion of critical doubts in their case." Renan (St. Paul, Introduction, V)
was equally emphatic: "They are incontestable, and uncontested."
4. Ultra-Radical Attack (Dutch School)
Reference, however, must be made to the ultra-radical attack which has gathered
some adherents, especially among Dutch scholars, during the last 25 years. As
early as 1792 Evanson, a retired English clergyman, rejected Rome on the ground
that, according to Acts, no church existed in Rome in Paul's day. Bruno Bauer
(1850-51-52) made a more sweeping attack, relegating the whole of the four principal
epistles to the close of the 2nd century. His views received little attention,
until, in 1886 onward, they were taken up and extended by a series of writers
in Holland, Pierson and Naber, and Loman, followed rapidly by Steck of Bern, Volter
of Amsterdam, and above all by Van Manen of Leyden. According to these writers,
with slight modifications of view among themselves, it is very doubtful if Paul
or Christ ever really existed; if they did, legend has long since made itself
master of their personalities, and in every case what borders on the supernatural
is to be taken as the criterion of the legendary. The epistles were written in
the 1st quarter of the 2nd century, and as Paul, so far as he was known, was believed
to be a reformer of anti-Judaic sympathies, he was chosen as the patron of the
movement, and the writings were published in his name. The aim of the whole series
was to further the interests of a supposed circle of clever and elevated men,
who, partly imbued with Hebrew ideals, and partly with the speculations of Greek
and Alexandrian philosophy, desired the spread of a universalistic Christianity
and true Gnosis. For this end they perceived it necessary that Jewish legalism
should be neutralized, and that the narrow national element should be expelled
from the Messianic idea. Hence, the epistles The principles on which the main
contentions of the critics are based may be reduced to two:
(1) that there are relations in the epistles so difficult
to understand that, since we cannot properly understand them, the epistles are
not trustworthy; and
(2) that the religious and ecclesiastical development is so great that not merely
20 or 30 years, but 70 or 80 more, are required, if we are to be able rationally
to conceive it: to accept the situation at an earlier date is simply to accept
what cannot possibly have been. |
It is manifest that on such principles it is possible to establish what one will,
and that any historical literature might be proved untrustworthy, and reshaped
according to the subjective idiosyncrasies of the critic. The underlying theory
of intellectual development is too rigid, and is quite oblivious of the shocks
it receives from actual facts, by the advent in history from time to time of powerful,
compelling, and creative personalities, who rather mould their age than are moulded
by it. None have poured greater ridicule on this "pseudo-Kritik" than the representatives
of the advanced school in Germany whom it rather expected to carry with it, and
against whom it complains bitterly that they do not take it seriously. On the
whole the vagaries of the Dutch school have rather confirmed than shaken belief
in these epistles; and one may freely accept Ramsay's view (HDB, I, 484) as expressing
the modern mind regarding them, namely, that they are "the unimpeached and unassailable
nucleus of admitted Pauline writings." (Reference to the following will give a
sufficiently adequate idea of the Dutch criticism and the replies that have been
made to it: Van Manen, EB, article "Paul," and Expository Times, IX, 205, 257,
314; Knowling, Witness of the Epistles; Clemen, Einheitlichkeit der p. B.; Sanday
and Headlam, Romans, ICC; Godet, Julicher and Zahn, in their Introductions; Schmiedel
and Lipsius in the Hand-Commentar.) |
II. TEXT OF 1 AND 2 CORINTHIANS
Integrity of 1 Corinthians: The text of both epistles comes to us in the most
ancient VSS, the Syriac (Peshito), the Old Latin, and the Egyptian all of which
were in very early use, undoubtedly by the 3rd century. It is complete in the
great Greek uncials: Codex Sinaiticus (original scribe) and a later scribe, 4th
century, Codex Vaticanus (B, 4th century), Codex Alexandrinus (A, 5th century,
minus two verses, 2 Corinthians 4:13; 12:7), and very nearly complete in Codex
Ephraemi (C, 5th century), and in the Greek-Latin Claromontanus (D, 6th century);
as well as in numerous cursives. In both cases the original has been well preserved,
and no exegetical difficulties of high importance are presented. (Reference should
be made to the Introduction in Sanday and Headlam's Romans, ICC (1896), where
section 7 gives valuable information concerning the text, not only of Roman, but
of the Pauline epistles generally; also to the recent edition (Oxford, 1910),
New Testament Graecae, by Souter, where the various readings of the text used
in the Revised Version (British and American) (1881) are conveniently exhibited.)
On the whole the text of 1 Corinthians flows on consistently, only at times, in
a characteristic fashion, winding back upon itself, and few serious criticisms
are made on its unity, although the case is different in this respect with its
companion epistle Some writers, on insufficient grounds, believe that 1 Corinthians
contains relics of a previous epistle (compare 1 Corinthians 5:9), e. g. in 1
Corinthians 7:17-24; 9:1-10:22; 15:1-55.
III. PAUL'S PREVIOUS RELATIONS WITH CORINTH
1. Corinth in 55 AD
When, in the course of his 2nd missionary journey, Paul left Athens (Acts 18:1),
he sailed westward to Cenchrea, and entered Corinth "in weakness, and in fear,
and in much trembling" (1 Corinthians 2:3). He was doubtless alone, although Silas
and Timothy afterward joined him (Acts 18:5; 2 Corinthians 1:19). The ancient
city of Corinth had been utterly laid in ruins when Rome subjugated Greece in
the middle of the 2nd century BC. But in the year 46 BC Caesar had caused it to
be rebuilt and colonized in the Roman manner, and during the century that had
elapsed it had prospered and grown enormously. Its population at this time has
been estimated at between 600,000 and 700,000, by far the larger portion of whom
were slaves. Its magnificent harbors, Cenchrea and Lechaeum, opening to the commerce
of East and West, were crowded with ships, and its streets with travelers and
merchants from almost every country under heaven. Even in that old pagan world
the reputation of the city was bad; it has been compared (Baring-Gould, Study
of Paul, 241) to an amalgam of new-market, Chicago and Paris, and probably it
contained the worst features of each. At night it was made hideous by the brawls
and lewd songs of drunken revelry. In the daytime its markets and squares swarmed
with Jewish peddlers, foreign traders, sailors, soldiers, athletes in training,
boxers, wrestlers, charioteers, racing-men, betting-men, courtesans, slaves, idlers
and parasites of every description. The corrupting worship of Aphrodite, with
its hordes of hierodouloi, was dominant, and all over the Greek-Roman world, "to
behave as a Corinthian" was a proverbial synonym for leading a low, shameless
and immoral life. Very naturally such a polluted and idolatrous environment accounts
for much that has to be recorded of the semi-pagan and imperfect life of many
of the early converts.
2. Founding of the Church
Paul was himself the founder of the church in Corinth (1 Corinthians 3:6,10).
Entering the city with anxiety, and yet with almost audacious hopefulness, he
determined to know nothing among its people save Jesus Christ and Him crucified
(1 Corinthians 2:2). Undoubtedly he was conscious that the mission of the Cross
here approached its crisis. If it could abide here, it could abide anywhere. At
first he confined himself to working quietly at his trade, and cultivating the
friendship of Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:2); then he opened his campaign in
the synagogue where he persuaded both Jews and Greeks, and ultimately, when opposition
became violent, carried it on in the house of Titus Justus, a proselyte. He made
deep impressions, and gradually gathered round him a number who were received
into the faith (Acts 18:7,8; 1 Corinthians 1:14-16). The converts were drawn largely
but not entirely from the lower or servile classes (1 Corinthians 1:26; 7:21);
they included Crispus and Sosthenes, rulers of the synagogue, Gaius, and Stephanas
with his household, "the firstfruits of Achaia" (1 Corinthians 16:15). He regarded
himself joyfully as the father of this community (1 Corinthians 4:14,15), every
member of which seemed to him like his own child. |
IV. DATE OF THE EPISTLE
After a sojourn of eighteen months (Acts 18:11) in this fruitful field, Paul departed,
most probably in the year 52 (compare Turner, article "Chron. New Testament,"
HDB, I, 422), and, having visited Jerusalem and returned to Asia Minor (third
journey), established himself for a period of between two and three years (trietia,
Acts 20:31) in Ephesus (Acts 18:18 onward). It was during his stay there that
his epistle was written, either in the spring (pre- Pentecost, 1 Corinthians 16:8)
of the year in which he left, 55; or, if that does not give sufficient interval
for a visit and a letter to Corinth, which there is considerable ground for believing
intervened between 1 Corinthians and the departure from Ephesus, then in the spring
of the preceding year, 54. This would give ample time for the conjectured events,
and there is no insuperable reason against it. Pauline chronology is a subject
by itself, but the suggested dates for the departure from Ephesus, and for the
writing of 1 Corinthians, really fluctuate between the years 53 and 57. Harnack
(Gesch. der altchrist. Litt., II; Die Chron., I) and McGiffert (Apos Age) adopt
the earlier date; Ramsay (St. Paul the Traveler), 56; Lightfoot (Bib. Essays)
and Zahn (Einl.), 57; Turner (ut supra), 55. Many regard 57 as too late, but Robertson
(HDB, I, 485-86) still adheres to it.
V. OCCASION OF THE EPISTLE
1. A Previous Letter
After Paul's departure from Corinth, events moved rapidly, and far from satisfactorily.
He was quite cognizant of them. The distance from Ephesus was not great--about
eight days' journey by sea--and in the constant coming and going between the cities
news of what was transpiring must frequently have come to his ears. Members of
the household of Chloe are distinctly mentioned (1 Corinthians 1:11) as having
brought tidings of the contentions that prevailed, and there were no doubt other
informants. Paul was so concerned by what he heard that he sent Timothy on a conciliatory
mission with many commendations (1 Corinthians 4:17; 16:10), although the present
epistle probably reached Corinth first. He had also felt impelled, in a letter
(1 Corinthians 5:9) which is now lost, to send earnest warning against companying
with the immoral. Moreover, Apollos, after excellent work in Corinth, had come
to Ephesus, and was received as a brother by the apostle (1 Corinthians 3:5,6;
16:12). Equally welcome was a deputation consisting of Stephanas, Fortunatus and
Achaicus (1 Corinthians 16:17), from whom the fullest information could be gained,
and who were the probable bearers of a letter from the church of Corinth itself
(1 Corinthians 7:1), appealing for advice and direction on a number of points.
2. Letter from Corinth
This letter has not been preserved, but it was evidently the immediate occasion
of our epistle, and its tenor is clearly indicated by the nature of the apostle's
reply. (The letter, professing to be this letter to Paul, and its companion, professing
to be Paul's own lost letter just referred to, which deal with Gnostic heresies,
and were for long accepted by the Syrian and Armenian churches, are manifestly
apocryphal. (Compare Stanley's Corinthians, Appendix; Harnack's Gesch. der altchrist.
Litt., I, 37-39, and II, 506-8; Zahn, Einleitung., I, 183-249; Sanday, Encyclopedia
Biblica, I, 906-7.) If there be any relic in existence of Paul's previous letter,
it is possibly to be found in the passage 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1; at all events
that passage may be regarded as reminiscent of its style and message.) So that
1 Corinthians is no bow drawn at a venture. It treats of a fully understood, and,
on the whole, of a most unhappy situation. The church had broken into factions,
and was distracted by party cries. Some of its members were living openly immoral
lives, and discipline was practically in abeyance. Others had quarrels over which
they dragged one another into the heathen courts. Great differences of opinion
had also arisen with regard to marriage and the social relations generally; with
regard to banquets and the eating of food offered to idols; with regard to the
behavior of women in the assemblies, to the Lord's Supper and the love-feasts,
to the use and value of spiritual gifts, and with regard to the hope of the resurrection.
The apostle was filled with grief and indignation, which the too complacent tone
of the Corinthians only intensified. They discussed questions in a lofty, intellectual
way, without seeming to perceive their real drift, or the life and spirit which
lay imperiled at their heart. Resisting the impulse to visit them "with a rod"
(2 Corinthians 4:21), the apostle wrote the present epistle, and dispatched it,
if not by the hands of Stephanas and his comrades, most probably by the hands
of Titus. |
VI. CONTENTS
1. General Character
In its general character the epistle is a strenuous writing, masterly in its restraint
in dealing with opposition, firm in its grasp of ethical and spiritual principles,
and wise and faithful in their application. It is calm, full of reasoning, clear
and balanced in judgment; very varied in its lights and shadows, in its kindness,
its gravity, its irony. It moves with firm tread among the commonest themes, but
also rises easily into the loftiest spheres of thought and vision, breaking again
and again into passages of glowing and rhythmical eloquence. It rebukes error,
exposes and condemns sin, solves doubts, upholds and encourages faith, and all
in a spirit of the utmost tenderness and love, full of grace and truth. It is
broad in its outlook, penetrating in its insight, unending in its interest and
application.
2. Order and Division
It is also very orderly in its arrangement, so that it is not difficult to follow
the writer as he advances from point to point. Weizsacker (Apos Age, I, 324-25)
suggestively distinguishes the matter into
(1) subjects introduced by the letter from Corinth, and
(2) those on which Paul had obtained information otherwise. |
He includes three main topics in the first class: marriage, meat offered to idols
and spiritual gifts (there is a fourth--the logia or collection, 1 Corinthians
16:1); six in the second class: the factions, the case of incest, the lawsuits,
the free customs of the women, the abuse connected with the Supper and the denial
of the resurrection. It is useful, however, to adhere to the sequence of the epistle
In broadly outlining the subject-matter we may make a threefold division:
3. Outline
(1) chapters 1-6;
After salutation, in which he associates Sosthenes with himself, and thanksgiving
for the grace given to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 1:1-9), Paul immediately
begins (1 Corinthians 1:10-13) to refer to the internal divisions among them,
and to the unworthy and misguided party cries that had arisen. (Many theories
have been formed as to the exact significance of the so-called "Christus-party,"
a party whose danger becomes more obvious in 2 Corinthians. Compare Meyer- Heinrici,
Comm., 8th edition; Godet, Intro, 250; Stanley, Cor, 29-30; Farrar, Paul, chapter
xxxi; Pfleiderer, Paulinism, II, 28-31; Weiss, Intro, I, 259-65; Weizsacker, Apos
Age, I, 325-33, and 354. Weizsacker holds that the name indicates exclusive relation
to an authority, while Baur and Pfleiderer argue that it was a party watchword
(virtually Petrine) taken to bring out the apostolic inferiority of Paul. On the
other hand a few scholars maintain that the name does not, strictly speaking,
indicate a party at all but rather designates those who were disgusted at the
display of all party spirit, and with whom Paul was in hearty sympathy. See McGiffert,
Apos Age, 295-97.) After denouncing this petty partisanship, Paul offers an elaborate
defense of his own ministry, declaring the power and wisdom of God in the gospel
of the Cross (1:14-2:16), returning in chapter 3 to the spirit of faction, showing
its absurdity and narrowness in face of the fullness of the Christian heritage
in "all things" that belong to them as belonging to Christ; and once more defending
his ministry in chapter 4, making a touching appeal to his readers as his "beloved
children," whom he had begotten through the gospel. In chapter 5 he deals with
the case of a notorious offender, guilty of incest, whom they unworthily harbor
in their midst, and in the name of Christ demands that they should expel him from
the church, pointing out at the same time that it is against the countenancing
of immorality within the church membership that he specially warns, and had previously
warned in his former epistle Ch 6 deals with the shamefulness of Christian brethren
haling one another to the heathen courts, and not rather seeking the settlement
of their differences within themselves; reverting once more in the closing verses
to the subject of unchastity, which irrepressibly haunts him as he thinks of them.
(2) chapters 7-10; and
In 1 Corinthians 7 he begins to reply to two of the matters on which the church
had expressly consulted him in its ep., and which he usually induces by the phrase
peri de, "now concerning." The first of these bears (chapter 7) upon celibacy
and marriage, including the case of "mixed" marriage. These questions he treats
quite frankly, yet with delicacy and circumspection, always careful to distinguish
between what he has received as the direct word of the Lord, and what he only
delivers as his own opinion, the utterance of his own sanctified common-sense,
yet to which the good spirit within him gives weight. The second matter on which
advice was solicited, questions regarding eidolothuta, meats offered to idols,
he discusses in chapter 8, recurring to it again in chapter 10 to end. The scruples
and casuistries involved he handles with excellent wisdom, and lays down a rule
for the Christian conscience of a far-reaching kind, happily expressed: "All things
are lawful; but not all things are expedient. All things are lawful; but not all
things edify. Let no man seek his own, but each his neighbor's good" (10:23,14).
By lifting their differences into the purer atmosphere of love and duty, he causes
them to dissolve away. Chapter 9 contains another notable defense of his apostleship,
in which he asserts the principle that the Christian ministry has a claim for
its support on those to whom it ministers, although in his own case he deliberately
waived his right, that no challenge on such a matter should be possible among
them. The earlier portion of chapter 10 contains a reference to Jewish idolatry
and sacramental abuse, in order that the evils that resulted might point a moral,
and act as a solemn warning to Christians in relation to their own rites.
(3) chapter 11 through end.
The third section deals with certain errors and defects that had crept into the
inner life and observances of the church, also with further matters on which the
Corinthians sought guidance, namely, spiritual gifts and the collection for the
saints. 1 Corinthians 11:1-16 has regard to the deportment of women and their
veiling in church, a matter which seems to have occasioned some difficulty, and
which Paul deals with in a manner quite his own; passing thereafter to treat of
graver and more disorderly affairs, gross abuses in the form of gluttony and drunkenness
at the Lord's Supper, which leads him, after severe censure, to make his classic
reference to that sacred ordinance (verse 20 to end). Chapter 12 sets forth the
diversity, yet true unity, of spiritual gifts, and the confusion and jealousy
to which a false conception of them inevitably leads, obscuring that "most excellent
way," the love which transcends them all, which never faileth, the greatest of
the Christian graces, whose praise he chants in language of surpassing beauty
(chapter 13). He strives also, in the following chapter, to correct the disorder
arising from the abuse of the gift of tongues, many desiring to speak at once,
and many speaking only a vain babble which no one could understand, thinking themselves
thereby highly gifted. It is not edifying: "I had rather," he declares, "speak
five words with my understanding, that I might instruct others also, than ten
thousand words in a tongue" (1 Corinthians 14:19). Thereafter follows the immortal
chapter on the resurrection, which he had learned that some denied (1 Corinthians
15:12). He anchors the faith to the resurrection of Christ as historic fact, abundantly
attested (verses 3-8), shows how all-essential it is to the Christian hope (verses
13-19), and then proceeds by reasoning and analogy to brush aside certain naturalistic
objections to the great doctrine, "then they that are Christ's, at his coming"
(verse 23), when this mortal shall have put on immortality, and death be swallowed
up in victory (verse 54). The closing chapter gives directions as to the collection
for the saints in Jerusalem, on which his heart was deeply set, and in which he
hoped the Corinthians would bear a worthy share. He promises to visit them, and
even to tarry the winter with them. He then makes a series of tender personal
references, and so brings the great epistle to a close. |
|
VII. DISTINGUISHING FEATURES
It will be seen that there are passages in the epistle of great doctrinal and
historical importance, especially with reference to the Person of Christ, the
Holy Spirit, the Eucharist and the Resurrection; also many that illuminate the
nature of the religious meetings and services of the early church (compare particularly
on these, Weizsacker, Apos Age, II, 246). A lurid light is cast on many of the
errors and evils that not unnaturally still clung to those who were just emerging
from paganism, and much allowance has to be made for the Corinthian environment.
The thoroughness with which the apostle pursues the difficulties raised into their
relations and details, and the wide scope of matters which he subjects to Christian
scrutiny and criterion, are also significant. Manifestly he regarded the gospel
as come to fill, not a part, but the whole, of life; to supply principles that
follow the believers to their homes, to the most secluded sanctum there, out again
to the world, to the market-place, the place of amusement, of temptation, of service,
of trial, of worship and prayer; and all in harmony with knowing nothing "save
Jesus Christ, and him crucified." For Paul regards that not as a restriction,
but as a large and expansive principle. He sets the cross on an eminence so high
that its shadow covers the whole activities of human life.
1. Party Spirit
Three broad outstanding features of a practical kind may be recognized. The first
is the earnest warning it conveys against a factious spirit as inimical to the
Christian life. The Corinthians were imbued with the party spirit of Greek democracy,
and were infected also by the sporting spirit of the great games that entered
so largely into their existence. They transferred these things to the church.
They listened to their teachers with itching ears, not as men who wished to learn,
but as partisans who sought occasion either to applaud or to condemn. Paul recognizes
that, though they are not dividing on deep things of the faith, they are giving
way to "schisms" of a pettier and perhaps even more perilous kind, that appeal
to the lowest elements in human nature, that cause scandal in the eyes of men
and inflict grievous wounds on the Body of Christ. In combating this spirit he
takes occasion to go below the surface, and to reveal the foundations of true
Christian unity. That must simply be "in Christ." And this is true even if the
divergence should be on higher and graver things. Any unity in such a case, still
possible to cherish, must be a unity in Christ. None can be unchurched who build
on Him; none severed from the true and catholic faith, who confess with their
lips and testify with their lives that He is Lord.
2. Christian Conscience
The epistle also renders a high ethical service in the rules it lays down for
the guidance of the Christian conscience. In matters where the issue is clearly
one of the great imperatives, the conflict need never be protracted. An earnest
man will see his way. But beyond these, or not easily reducible to them, there
are many matters that cause perplexity and doubt. Questions arise regarding things
that do not seem to be wrong in themselves, yet whose abuse or the offense they
give to others, may well cause debate. Meat offered to idols, and then brought
to table, was a stumbling-block to many Corinthian Christians. They said: "If
we eat, it is consenting to idolatry; we dare not partake." But there were some
who rose to a higher level. They perceived that this was a groundless scruple,
for an idol is nothing at all, and the meat is not affected by the superstition.
Accordingly, their higher and more rational view gave them liberty and left their
conscience free. But was this really all that they had to consider? Some say:
"Certainly"; and Paul acknowledges that this is undoubtedly the law of individual
freedom. But it is not the final answer. There has not entered into it a consideration
of the mind of Christ. Christian liberty must be willing to subject itself to
the law of love. Granted that a neighbor is often short-sighted and over-scrupulous,
and that it would be good neither for him nor for others to suffer him to become
a moral dictator; yet we are not quite relieved. The brother may be weak, but
the very claim of his weakness may be strong. We may not ride over his scruples
roughshod. To do so would be to put ourselves wrong even more seriously. And if
the matter is one that is manifestly fraught with peril to him, conscience may
be roused to say, as the apostle says: "Wherefore, if meat maketh my brother to
stumble, I will eat no flesh for evermore."
3. Power of the Cross
A third notable feature of the epistle is its exaltation of the cross of Christ
as the power and wisdom of God unto salvation. It was the force that began to
move and unsettle, to lift and change from its base, the life of that old heathen
world. It was neither Paul, nor Apollos, nor Cephas who accomplished that colossal
task, but the preaching of the crucified Christ. The Christianity of Corinth and
of Europe began with the gospel of Calvary and the open tomb. It can never with
impunity draw away from these central facts. The river broadens and deepens as
it flows, but it is never possible for it to sever itself from the living fountain
from which it springs. |
LITERATURE
The following writers will be found most important and helpful:
1. On Matters of Introduction (Both Epistles):
Holtzmann, Weiss, Hausrath, Harnack, Pfleiderer, Godet, Weizsacker, Julicher,
Zahn, Salmon, Knowling, McGiffert, J. H. Kennedy, Ramsay, Sabatier, Farrar, Dobschutz,
Robertson (Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes)), Sanday (Encyclopaedia
Biblica), Plummer (DB), Ropes (Encyclopedia Brittanica, 11th edition).
2. Commentaries and Lectures (on 1 Corinthians or Both):
Meyer-Heinrici, Godet, T. C. Edwards, Hodge, Beet, Ellicott, Schmiedel (Hand-Comm.),
Evans (Speakers' Commentary), Farrar (Pulpit Commentary), Lightfoot (chapters
i through vii in Biblical Ess.), Lias (Cambridge Greek Testament), McFadyen, F.
W. Robertson, Findlay (Expos. Greek Test.); and on 2 Corinthians alone: Klopper,
Waite (Speakers' Comm.), Denney (Expos. Bible), Bernard (Expos. Greek Test.).
3. Ancient Writers and Special Articles: For ancient writers and special articles,
the list at close of Plummer's article in Smith, Dictionary of the Bible should
be consulted.
R. Dykes Shaw
Tags:
bible commentary, bible history, bible reference, bible study, book of 1 corinthians, define, ephesus, first epistle to the corinthians, great epistles, new testament, paul, principal epistles
Comments:
|
 |
|
