τἀ Ἶοὶ ἈΜῊΝ ΠΝ Heiden a ae uit a vie to ete! VRB thd sfapetaralee ¢igie! Rens δεν “-- Cha be eed veto eu te εν shy) τὰ ΤΥ Δ tA ks OY uy. ae ἢ ἦν ἘΣ ; δὴ HK 7 ὍΝ 2 ? ay Corns | ὟΝ ᾿ κα . Piya Ἂ γι: ᾿ TAS Kany ΨΥ " ὌΝ “τ ᾿ εὐ ΤΑ J ᾿ Ὶ ih ὦ PM ol) oh RS fy | ΟΝ aN ‘ pat ᾽ν ΠΝ eas ᾿ { hy if tr, rang ἢ From the Library of Professor Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield Benueathed by him to : the Library of Princeton Chealogiral Seminary ee ἜΘ 2. 67 5 Section ) es - + a ee ee eg OLLI LL Mt FRO Pe - = ‘at ΣῊ panes Lik f »" 5 . Z —< A COMMENTARY ON THE HOLY SCRIPTURES: CRITICAL DOCTRINAL AND HOMILETICAL, ‘WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO MINISTERS AND STUDENTS, BY JOHN PETER LANGE, D.D., IN CONNECTION WITH A NUMBER OF EMINENT EUROPEAN DIVINES. TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, AND EDITED, WITH ADDITIONS, BY PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., IN CONNECTION WITH AMERICAN DIVINES OF VARIOUS EVANGELICAL DENOMINATIONS, } VOL VI. OF THE NEW TESTAMENT: CONTAINING THE TWO EPISTLES OF PAUL TO THE CORINTHIANS. NEW YORK: at CHARLES SCRIBNER’S/SONS, 743 AND 745 BROADWAY. seca «The i. ἄγη ᾿ 4 ; : : : + 2s ’ 5 } 4 + oe i > \ A ᾽ i ᾿ \y : ΓΟ NOPE NBER PRES AL AOR ‘ ἐ ᾿ ἕ » A ‘ Υ ΠΟ Τ᾿ ἢ ᾿ ΤΣ ἐδ τ ἷ ‘ Ψ 9 ald er ἕ ΄ ' τ τ ΄. . * ¢ Ν + ῃ ͵ ᾿ 3 J ! & ᾿ AF! " \ Ϊ, ᾿ Υ 7 ‘ ‘ ’ aL 3 wes - Ν Ze, a Ἵ Υ) a A 4 χ᾽ {ν Ι “.. wie é -“ Ψ sa j δὲ (Ὗ ὦ » L ΠΣ ὅ ΤΆ, ¢ 2 be : ‘2 2 EAT he » ‘ = a) 4 aly ΤῊΝ FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE SOR. N TH TANS. BY CHRISTIAN FRIEDRICH KLING, DOCTOR OF THEOLOGY, AND LATE DEAN OF MARBACH ON THE NECKAR. TRANSLATED FROM THE SECOND REVISED GERHAN EDI?ION, WITH ADDITIONS, . BY DANIEL W. POOR, D.D., PROFESSOR IN THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, SAN FRANCISCO, ΟΑξω NEW YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, 743 AND 745 BROADWAY. in i ᾿ d,s. Y i ’ » i " i ἔν i ( ta rk ΤΑ, i τὰ ἢ) γ ἢ 7 i ἢ yd fis ν νου, ry i γὰ ῃ ᾿ (oe I i 4 ‘ , i } Ϊ “δ, i ae ‘ LE ΄ , ENTERED, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1868, by ; CHP sa ital & σον of New York, : ’ PRINTING AND Boot 205-213 East τ Bale τ ἐφ LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS TO THE CRITICAL, DOCTRINAL, AND HOMILETICAL COMMEN. TARY ON THE BIBLE. GENERAL EDITORS: Rev. JOHANN PETER LANGE, D.D., Consistorial Counselor and Professor of Theology in the University of Bonn. Rev. PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., LL.D, _ Professor of Sacred Literature in the Union Theological Seminary, New York. I. CONTRIBUTORS TO THE GERMAN EDITION. Rey. C. A. AUBERLEN, Ph.D., D.D., ofessor of Theology in the University of Basle, Switzerland, Rev. KARL CHR. W. F. BAHR, D.D., Ministerial Counselor at Carlsruhe, Rev. KARL BRAUNE, D.D., General Superintendent at Altenburg, Saxony, Rev. PAULUS CASSEL, Ph.D., Professor in Berlin. Rev. CHR. FR. DAVID ERDMANN, D.D., Gen, Superintendent of Silesia, and Prof. Honorarius of Theology in the University of Breslau. Rev. F. R. FAY, Pastor in Crefeld, Prussia. Rev. G. F. C. FRONMULLER, Ph.D., Pastor at Kemnath, Wurtemberg. . Rev. KARL GEROK, D.D., Prelate and Chief Chaplain of the Court, Stuttgart. Rev. PAUL KLEINERT, Ph.D., B.D., Professor of Old Testament Exegesis in the University of Berlin, Rev. CHRIST. FR. KLING, D.D., Dean of Marbach on the Neckar, Wuartemberg. Rev. GOTTHARD VICTOR LECHLER, D.D., Professor of Theology, and Superintendent at Leipzig. Rev. CARL BERNHARD MOLL, D.D., General Superintendent in Kénigsberg. Rev. C. W. EDWARD NAEGELSBACH, Ph.D., Dean at Bayreuth, Bavaria Rev. J. J. VAN OOSTERZEBE, D.D., Professor of Theology in the University of Utrec’.t, Rev. C. J. RIGGENBACH, D.D., Professor of Theology in the University of Basle. Rev. OTTO SCHMOLLER, Ph.D., B.D., Urach, Wiartemberg. Rev. FR. JULIUS SCHROEDER, D.D., Pastor at Elberfeld, Prussia. Rev. FR. W. SCHULTZ, D.D., Professor of Theology in Breslau. Rev. OTTO ZOECKLER, D.D., Professor of Theology in the University at Greifswald tl. CONTRIBUTORS TO THE ANGLO-AMERICAN EDITION. Rev. CHARLES A. AIKEN, Ph.D., D.D., Professor of Christian Ethics and Apologetics at Princeton, N. J, Rev. SAMUEL RALPH ASBURY, M.A., Philadelphia. Rev. GEORGE R. BLISS, D.D., Professor in Crozer Theological Seminary, Upland, Pa. Rev. CHAS. A. BRIGGS, D.D., Professor of Oriental Languages in the Union Theological Seminary, New York. ΄ Rev. TALBOT W. CHAMBERS, D.D., Pastor of the Collegiate Reformed Dutch Church, New York, Rev. THOMAS J, CONANT, D.D,, Brooklyn, N. Y. Rey. E. R. CRAVEN, D.D., Newark, N. J. Rev. HOWARD CROSBY, D.D., LL.D., Chancellor of the University of New York »»"Ἱ yo LIST OF OONTRIBUTORS. Rev. JOHN A. BROADUS, D.D., Professor of New Testament Exegesis at Louisville, Ky. Rev. CHAS. ELLIOTT, D.D., Professor of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, Chicago, Ill. Rev. L. J. EVANS, D.D., Professor of New Test. Exegesis in Lane Theol. Seminary, Cincinnati. Rev. PATRICK FAIRBAIRN, D.D., Principal and Professor of Divinity in the Free Church College, Glasgow. Rev. WILLIAM FINDLAY, M.A., Pastor of the Free Church, Larkhall, Scotland. Rev. JOHN FORSYTH, D.D., LL.D., Chaplain and Prof. of Ethics and Law in U. 8. Military Academy, West Point, N. Y. Rev. FREDERIC GARDINER, D.D., Prof. of the Literature of the O. T. in Berkeley Divinity School, Middletown, Ct. Rev. ABRAHAM GOSMAN, D.D., Lawrenceville, N, J. Rev. W. HENRY GREEN, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Oriental Literature in the Theol. Seminary at Princeton, N. J. Rev. JAMES B. HAMMOND, M.A, New York. Rev. HORATIO B, HACKETT, D.D, Professo1 of Biblical Exegesis in the Theological Seminary, Rochester, N. Y. Rev. CHESTER Ὁ. HARTRANFT, D.D., New Brunswick, N. J. Rev. EDWIN HARWOOD, D.D., Rector of Trinity Church, New Haven, Conn. Rev. W. H. HORNBLOWER, D.D., Professor of Sacred Rhetoric, etc., in the Theol. Seminary at Alleghany, Pa. Rev. JOHN F. HURST, D.D., President of the Drew Theological Seminary, Madison, N. J. Rey, A. CO. KENDRIOK, D.D., LL.D., Jrotessor of Greek in the University of Rochester, N. Y. TAYLER LEWIS, LL.D., Professor of Oriental Languages in Union College, Schenectady, N. Y. Rev. JOHN LILLIE, D.D., Kingston, N. Y. Rev. SAMUEL T. LOWRIE, D.D., Philadelphia, Pa. Rev. J. FRED. McCURDY, M.A., A εἰ Professor of the Hebrew Language in the Theol. Sem. at Princeton, N. J Rev. CHARLES M. MEAD, Ph.D., Pyvolasgor of the Hebrew Language and Literature in the Theol Sem., Aadove:, Mass, Rev. GEO. E. DAY, Ὁ D., Professor in Yale Divinity School, New Haven, Ooan. Rev. J. ISADOR MOMBERT, D.D., Philadelphia, Pa. Rev. DUNLOP MOORE, D.D., New Brighton, Pa. Miss EVELINA MOORE, Newark, Ν, J. JAMES G. MURPHY, LL.D., Professor in the General Assembly’s and the Queen's College at Belfast. : Rev. HOWARD OSGOOD, D.D., Professor of the Interpretation of the Old Test. in the Theol, Sem., Rochester, N. Y. Rev. JOSEPH PACKARD, D.D. Professor of Biblical Literature in the Theological Seminary at Alexandria, Va. Rev. DANIEL W. POOR, D.D., Professor of Church History in the Theological Seminary at San Francisco, Cal. Rev. MATTHEW B. RIDDLE, D.D., Professor of New Testament Exegesis in the Theol. Seminary at Hartford, Conn. Rev. CHAS. F. SCHAEFFER, D.D., Professor of Theology in the Evangelical Lutheran Seminary at Philadelphia. Rev. WILLIAM G. T. SHEDD, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Systematic Theology in the Union Theologica) Seminary, New York. Rev. CHAS. C. STARBUCK, M.A., Formerly Tutcr in the Theological Seminary at Andover, Mass. Rev. P. H. STEENSTRA, Professor of Biblical Literature at Cambridge, Mass. Rev. JAMES STRONG, D.D., Professor of Exegetical Theology in the Drew Theological Seminary, Madison, N. J. e Rev. W. G. SUMNER, M.A., Professor in Yale College, New Haven, Conn. Rev. C. H. TOY, D.D., Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Exegesis, Louisville, Ky. Rev. E. A. WASHBURN, D.D., LL.D., Rector of Calvary Church, New York. WILLIAM WELLS, M.A., LL.D., Professor of Modern Languages in Union Collegs, New York. Rev, 0. P. WING, D.D., Carlisle, Pa. Rev, K. D. YEOMANS, D.B., Czange, M. J. TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE. Arter nearly four years of labor, remitted at intervals by reason of ill-health, I am able to lay before the public Dr. Kling’s able Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians in something of an English dress, The difficulties of translating his involved and scholastic style, designed only for German students, into readable English, suited for the public at large, can be known only by such as have attempted a like task. To have translated literally, and have strictly followed his method, would have been to make the work a comparative failure. By the consent, therefore, of the principal Editor, Dr. Schaff, I have, without altering the meaning, introduced such modifications of method and style as seemed necessary to give the Commentary the widest circulation. The changes made have been mainly, in substituting an English text for the Greek, excepting where the latter was absolutely required to render the comment intelli- gible,—in intercalating this text through the body of the Commentary instead of putting a few catch- words at the head of the paragraphs,—in breaking up the majority of the ponderous sen- tences into their component parts (a few being left as specimens here and there to show what a German scholar is capable of in this direction)—and in omitting some portions of the homile- tical and practical sections which seemed to be needlessly extended. The parts added by me, are all inserted in brackets, with the exception of the text in black letter, and the headings under the caption “ Doctrinal and Ethical” which are italicized. All matter thus enclosed, which is not accredited to particular authors, must be ascribed to me. This general acknowledgment of responsibility I have preferred to make here, rather than insert Tr. or D. W. P. all down the page—say, as a whim of my own. The additions made by me, it will be seen, amount to over one quarter of the whole Commentary. The authors consulted have been mainly Alford, Stan- ley, Wordsworth, Hodge, Robertson, Bloomfield, Barnes, Poole, Scott, Whitby, Meyer, de Wette, Olshausen, Bengel, Calvin, and Chrysostom. Such portions of their several works as seemed calculated to shed light on the text, or to illustrate the course of Biblical Criticism, I have freely used. These frequent citations, while they have served to enrich the body of thought, naturally tended to break up the logical structure of the paragraphs; but the lack of continuity, where- ever seen to exist, will be tolerated for the sake of the benefit derived. To the homiletical sections I have added the plans of such sermons as I have found in my library, not being in circumstances freely to consult any other as I would gladly have done. In consequence of my ill-health, Dr. C. P. Wing, who has been pleasantly associated with me in preparing the Second Epistle, kindly consented to assist in furnishing the critica) notes on the text from chapter VII. to the end. In this he has been far more full and painstaking than I was in the earlier chapters; for which scholars will thank him. The portions added by him are eae properly distinguished by his initials C. P. W. il» TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE. With these explanations I submit the work to the candid judgment of the Christian public, in the hope that they will find it a serviceable addition to the abundant and exceedingly valuable Commentaries that have been already issued on this portion of the New Testament. If it will aid in leading any to the better understanding and appreciation of this most important portion of Scripture, giving them a tithe of the benefit I have enjoyed, it will be the largest count in my recompense for the labor spent on it. Severe criticism on the style of the translation I must _deprecate in advance. If I have succeeded in putting Dr. Kling’s exceedingly involved, prolix, cumbrous, yet thoughtful style into readable English, it is more than I dared to hope for after having enlisted in the work and clearly apprehended the nature of the task before me. In con- sequence of being obliged to recast the whole of the exegetical and critical part, and, as it were, work myself into a new method, some slight errors of punctuation and lettering will be found in the earlier chapters, for which I ask the reader’s indulgence. : With the ever-growing conviction that no Commentary of uninspired man can ever exhaust the fullness of meaning contained in the Scriptures, and deeply conscious how far short this new effort falls below the attainable standard, I with diffidence present it to the Church as a tribute of humble reverence and affection for the Word of God, and a token of sincere desire that this Word may be more and more known, felt, and enjoyed by all believers, not only in its obvious scope and more general meaning, but also in the subtler implications and suggestions of its moods and tenses, its particles and order of language, being all informed by the Spirit of the Living One who is the Sum and Source of all Beauty, Goodness, and Truth. D. W. POOR. Newarez, March 21, 1868. The translation of this part of the Biblework is made from the second German edition, 1865, as revised by the Rev. Mr. Havrr, of Gmiind, an intimate friend of Dr. Kune, who died a few weexs after the date of his preface to the first edition (March 1, 1861). PS BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF DR. KLING. BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR. Frrepricu CuristrAn Kuina, D. D., the author of the Commentary on the Epistles to the: Corinthians in Dr. Lange’s Bzbelwerk, was born Nov. 4, 1800, at Altdorf, in the kingdom of Wirtemberg, and died at Marbach in April, 1861. His father was a clergyman of the Evangeli- cal Lutheran Church, and destined him for the same calling. Young Kling passed through that. thorough systematic course of classical, philosophical and theological training for which the: Gymnasia, the lower Seminaries (Maulbroun, Schénthal, Blaubeuren and Urach), and the Uni-- versity of Wurtemberg are unsurpassed even in Germany. After graduating in Tubingen he: went to the University of Berlin, which was then at the height of its fame in the theological de- partment. He attended chiefly the lectures of Schleiermacher and Neander, and enjoyed their personal friendship. His theological views were moulded by these celebrated divines, especially by Neander; but like most of their pupils, he advanced beyond them in the direction of a posi- tive evangelical orthodoxy. On his return to Wirtemberg in 1824 he spent a few years as Repetent in the theological Seminary at Tubingen—an honorable position of tutor and assistant professor, to which a few of the best scholars of each graduating class are appointed, with the additional advantage of a literary journey at the expense of the government. In March, 1826, he was elected deacon (7. 6. assistant minister) in the town of Waiblingen, where he spent six useful and happy years. He: was married to a grand-daughter of the celebrated philosopher, Fr. H. Jacobi. While faithfully’ discharging his duties as pastor, he furnished frequent contributions to leading theological Re- views, which made his name favorably known throughout Germany. In 1832 Dr. Kling received and accepted a call as professor of theology in the University of Marburg, where he labored successfully and acceptably for ten years. In 1842 he followed a call to the University of Bonn, and taught there till 1849 alongside of such eminent colleagues as. Drs. Nitzsch, Bleek and Sack. The state of his health induced him to withdraw from the aca- demic career to which he had devoted seventeen of his best years, to the more quiet and simple life of a country pastor at Ebersbach, in his native Wirtemberg. When his health was re- stored, he entered upon a more extensive sphere of labor as Dean of Marbach on the Neckar (the birth-place of Schiller), His leisure hours he devoted to theological study till his peaceful death. Dr. Kling was a gentleman of great simplicity and purity of character, plain and modest in appearance, gentle and amiable in temper, kind and affectionate in disposition, decidedly evan- iii 1v BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF DR. KLING. gelical, yet liberal in his views, of solid learning, sound and sober judgment, sincere and humble piety. As a pupil of Schleiermacher and Neander, he retained from the former a lively interest in the systematic arrangement and speculative construction of the doctrines of Christianity from the Christological and soteriological principle; while with Neander he shared a love of Scriptural simplicity, and taste for history and held to the motto: Pectus est quod facit theologum. He was no creative genius, opening new avenues of thought, but followed in the track of great and good men, yet with fine discrimination and independent judgment. He was not brilliant either as a lecturer or preacher, but very iustructive, sound and winning, and was highly es- teemed and beloved by all who knew him. I spent several days with him in the family of Dr. Krummacher at Elberfeld (now at Potsdam) in 1844, where, together with Dr. Krummacher and Dr. Sander, he assisted at my ordination on the eve of my departure for America; and I met him afterwards at Stuttgard and at a missionary festival at Basel in 1854. I well remember the impression which his sweet and lovely spirit, his simplicity and humility made upon all on those occasions, and how he reminded us of the beloved disciple. Dr. Kling commenced his literary career in 1824 by publishing from manuscripts, at the sug- gestion of Neander, the sermons of Bertholdt, a powerful Franciscan revival preacher of the 13th century, who is said to have addressed crowds of from 60,000 to 200,000 people, hungry for the bread of Life. This work was favorably reviewed by the celebrated German philologist, Jacob Grimm, and opened a mine of theological lore which lay buried among the German writers of the middle age. Since that time he prepared no extensive work except the Commentary on the Epistles to the Corinthians, to which he devoted the last years of his life. He wrote the Preface a few weeks before his death. He had repeatedly lectured on these Epistles while professor at Marburg and Bonn, and published comments on the more difficult sections in the Studien und Kritiken. Ue laid himself out mainly in the exegetical and doctrinal sections, while the homi- letical hints are mostly gathered from older sources. This Commentary was well received for its solid learning and Christian spirit; but the style is somewhat heavy and diffuse. Hence I al- lowed the translators full liberty to reproduce it freely in justice to the English idiom as well as the thoughts of the original. Itisno disparagement of the author to say that the American trans¢ lators have greatly improved his work by condensation and valuable additions and adaptation te the English reader. Every page gives proof of their independent scholarly labor. The German edi- tion contains 417, the English 596 pages, and a good deal of the new matter is in very small type. Dr. Kling was also a constant and highly esteemed contributor to the first theological Reviews of Germany, such as the Studien und Kritiken, the Tiibinger Zeitschrift fiir Theologie, the Deutsche Zeitschrift, etc., in which he took an active part in the leading exegetical, critical and doctrinal questions of the age. His essays and reviews were always marked by conscientious care, solidity, sound sense, and justice to all who differed from him. Among the many elaborate articles and discussions of his industrious pen we may mention those on Clement of Alexandria, Hasse’s An- selm of Canterbury, the early life of Neander, Baur’s view on the Epistle to the Romans, on several passages in the Corinthians, on Schaff’s History of the Apostolic Church, on the relation of philosophy and theology,—all in ULtMann AND UmBretr’s Studien und Kritiken. He also furnished the articles on “Athanasius,” “Augustine,” “ Bertholdt the Franciscan,” “ Hilary of Poictiers,” ‘“Marheinecke,” ‘ Mohler,” “Christianity,” “Conversion,” “ Justification,” and other important subjects for Herzoa’s “Theological Encyclopedia;” but he died before the com- pletion of this work, and found an honorable place in a supplementary volume (XIX. p. 704: 706) of this great storehouse of the modern evangelical theology of Germany. - Pe THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. INTRODUCTION. 21. THE POSITION AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THESE EPISTLES. The Epistles to the Corinthians occupy the second place in the series ascribed to Paul, according to the order of Scripture. Preceding that to the Romans in the order of time by nearly a year, they rank next to it in importance, as it respects both their contents, and the Church addressed. I. As to their contents, These are mainly of a practical kind. Unlike what we find so abundantly in the other Epistles of our author, we encounter here no discussions on the cardinal questions of Christianity, whether dogmatical or apologetic. Nothing is here said of the need of salvation, felt by the ancient world; nor of the supply of this need through Christ; nor of the relations of Christianity to the elder dispensation; nor of the nature of the Gospel salvation; nor of the way it fulfilled the law and the promise; nor of the great plan of God’s kingdom in relation to both Jews and Gentiles; nor of the part these were to bear in successively drawing each other to a participation of divine grace. Topics of this sort here give place to others, more particularly called for by the peculiar condition of the Corinthian Church. Taking occasion from the circum- stances immediately in view, Paul, in these Epistles, labors rather to exhibit the bearings of Christianity upon human conduct in its several relations to the church, to the state, to society in general, and to domestic life. And first of all, he begins with setting forth the varied condition of things in the Church, especially in their moral form and aspect. Under this head he treats of the position which church-members hold to their teachers; of their worthy maintenance of the grace which they have received; and of their high calling, both towards those who are Christians and those who are not,—alike at home and abroad,—but, above all, in the assemblier of the saints, whether convened in solemn festival, or for general edification. In short, Paul here solves the problem of preserving and restoring the purity of the Church as a body consecrated to God in Christ, by setting at work brotherly love, as well in the mutual furtherance of each other’s spiritual welfare—especially through the right use of spiritual gifts, as in the friendly balancing of all inequalities of outward condition, by a ready generosity on the part of the rich. From this he goes on, taking occasion from the attempts of his opponents to undermine his Apostolical character and influence, to give various expositions of an apologetic and polemic kind respecting the Apostolic office, its value, and the proper recognition of it, especially in reference to himself and his position. One doctrinal question only is directly and thoroughly handled,—that of the resurrection of the dead (1 Cor. xv.); and this is so done that its connection with the bay tek 6 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. pe eee facts of Christianity, and its bearing upon the whole body of Christian truth, as well as its ethical elements, is made to appear in the clearest light. That Epistles of so preéminently ethical a character (whose teachings are, however, every where made to rest on their proper doctrinal,basis) should be made to follow an Epistle like that to the Romans, was perfectly proper—all the more so, because of their importance in a twofold respect: 1. Historically, as illustrating to a remarkable degree the condition and circumstances of the Christian churches in the midst of the pagan world; 2. Normally, inasmuch as the Apostle so portrays the proper demeanor of a Christian Church and of those holding office in and for it, that churches and office-bearers may here find a mirror for themselves for all time to come. II. Looking at the relative importance of the two churches (at Rome and at Corinth), it must be conceded, that the church of the former city, as being the capital of a world-wide empire, and furnishing the largest opportunity for the spread of the Gospel, stands preéminent. Yet the church at Corinth, too, possessed a high degree of consequence, derived from the peculiar position and character of the city in which it was planted. Corinth, as is well known, was the metropolis of Achaia—a province that embraced in its bounds Hellas and the Peloponnesus. Situated on a narrow isthmus which just parted the Ionian Sea from the Peloponnesus, it commanded two cele- brated harbors—the one looking toward the East, and the other toward the West. It thus became the centre of an extended and varied commerce. The arts and sciences also flourished there in unrivalled splendor. It was noted, too, as the centre of religious worship for the whole Greek nation. In it was gathered a population numbering from 400,000 to 500,000—comprising people from all parts of the world. Of these a large portion were Latins, the descendants of that colony which had been sent here by Julius Czxsar, about a century and a half previously, for the purpose of recovering it from the desolation and ruin which had been brought upon it by Mum- mius. An illustration of Paul’s estimate of the importance of the place we have in the fact, that he labored here no less than a year and a half for the establishment of a church. In his view, it was a fit point from whence the Gospel might be made to diffuse its rays far and wide over the world, and where a church, once planted, might stand forth as an example for other churches scattered over the globe, whose members would naturally cluster here upon the errands of trade and commerce. And for this there were peculiar facilities arising from the manifold activity and cultivation of the people generally, which gave promise of a spiritual development no less rich and varied. But while Corinth presented peculiar advantages for a church, it also abounded in peculiar perils. No place was so noted for its luxury and licentiousness as Corinth.. The infamous goddess Aphrodite was here worshipped with sensual rites of the grossest kind, having no less than three thousand priestesses of loose character ministering at her shrine. Indeed, so notorious was the dissipation of the people, that the word Corinthianise (κορινϑιάνιζειν) was used to express conduct the most voluptuous and debauched. There was danger therefore lest in such a place the development of a Christian church would be obstructed by prevailing immoralities. No less great an evil was to be apprehended from the peculiar proneness of the Greek mind to intellectual conceit and party strife. In short, it may be said that in this one city there were concentrated in the fullest degree all those dangerous and corrupting influences which proceed from a thorough-going epicureanism, at once the most vicious and the most refined. ; A church occupying so important a position, and at the same time so beset with temptations, naturally required a special care on the part of the Apostle. Of this the two Epistles before us give abundant evidence. The nearer the Apostle stood related to this church, founded by his labors, and the more it threatened to deviate from its true course or actually went astray, the more was 3 2. RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH. 7 he, as its spiritual father, constrained to exert himself in its behalf and give vent to his own deep emotions of concern for its welfare; and the more energetically, too, did he find it necessary to assert the consciousness of the position which he held towards them. In the first of these Epistles it is only here and there that he gives us a glimpse into ‘his inmost thoughts and feelings on the subject. But itis from the second that we ascertain far more of the real traits of his noble character. For here it is, that, with the most unrestrained candor, and borne on by emotions which carry him beyond himself, he pours forth his whole soul, showing them with the utmost frankness how he had felt and acted, labored and suffered in their behalf. At the same time, also, in reply to the attacks of his foes, he so conducts his self-defence, that not only what he says of himself, but also the way in which he says it, vividly presents to our view abundant evidences of his rare fidelity and truthfulness, shining forth, as these traits do, both in his deep humility and in his lofty bearing, in his simplicity and in his honesty, in his self-denial and in his love, in his magnanimity and in his boldness, in his ardent devotion and in his deliberate demeanor, in his exaltation of soul and in his quiet, resigned cross-bearing. 4 11. RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH. Upon his second missionary tour, after a divine providence had led Paul from Asia to Europe (Acts xvi. 7-9), and he had here amid various fortunes established churches at Philippi and Thessalonica, and Berea, and finally at Athens had encountered Grecian philosophy, and . pride of learning, with the doctrine of a heavenly wisdom, Paul came on his way, about the year 52, to Corinth.’ The city was then in the height of its prosperity, puffed up with the pride of wealth and the vanity of carnal science, and captivated by a fondness for sophistical dialectics and pompous rhetoric; and Paul entered it, not in the lofty consciousness of his own strength, but in weakness and fear and much trembling, (Acts xviii. 1; 1 Cor. ii. 3) and with an humbling sense of the inadequacy of his own abilities to the great task before him. And his resolve was not to oppose human wisdom and eloquence with weapons of like character, but with the simple preaching of Christ crucified, in order that the faith of believers might stand in the power of God ulone (1 Cor. 11. 1, 5; 2 Cor. x. 3, 4). For the sake of support, he first jomed in company, as a tent-maker, with one Aquila, a Jew of Asia Minor, who had been banished from Italy in consequence of the decree of Claudius Cesar which drove all Jews from Rome (Acts xviii. 2,3). This co-partnership proved also a fellowship in the faith. But whether Aquila and Priscilla, his wife, were already Christians at that time, or were converted by Paul, it is impossible to decide. His first intercourse on the themes of the Gospel was also with the Jews. To them he was directed by the prophecy and the promise of which they were the bearers. Among them he obtained an entrance and foothold in the character of a travelling brother, and as one learned in the Scriptures. On entering the syna- gogue, it was expected of him, as was customary, that he would speak a word by way of edifica- tion; and he improved the opportunity to announce, and lay before them for suitable proof the advent of the long’expected Messiah. Here, too, he found certain Greeks who had attached themselves to the Jewish communion, or who, at least, came occasionally into the synagogues as hearers. These, by means of their social position and family connections, formed a bridge of access to the rest of the Gentile community. To convince both these parties of the truth which he had to impart was therefore his chief labor. But here again, as often before, only a small number believed. And when, by the arrival of his helpers, Silas and Timothy, Paul gathered fresh strength for his work, a fierce opposition arose, which so kindled the indignation of the Apostle 8 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. J SER EERS EE Aan et Denise ΞΘ ΞΘ ΞΘ 5 that, shaking off the very dust from his mantle, and casting on them the guilt of their exclusion from the promised salvation, he declared himself henceforth at liberty to labor with a pure con- science among the heathen. From this time onward he delivered his discourses in the house of a proselyte, Justus by name, who dwelt hard by the synagogue. Here Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, joined him with all his house, and many others also, who believed and were baptized, But with the growth of the church, the opposition rose likewise, and waxed to such a degree that the Apostle began to despair, and needed a word of encouragement from the Lord. This was graciously vouchsafed him in a night vision—“ Fear not, but speak boldly,” &c. (Acts xviil. 9,10). The result corresponded with the declaration. An attempt of the Jews to secure a judg- ment against Paul before the tribunal of the Proconsul Gallio so signally failed, that the accusers themselves were set upon and roughly handled by the Greeks without interference from the authorities. After remaining awhile longer in Corinth, Paui departed for Ephesus, attended by Aquila and Priscilla, whom he left behind at this latter place as he journeyed onward. ' These persons were destined henceforth to exert an important influence upon the development of the Corinthian Church. Meeting with the eloquent Apollos, an Alexandrian Jew, who had been a disciple of John and was well versed in Christianity, they took him and instructed him in the Gospel, and on his going to Corinth gave him letters of introduction to the disciples there. In this congenial sphere his talents soon found full scope, and by the assistance of divine grace he proved greatly useful to the infant Church through the skill with which he was able to convince the Jews, out of their own scriptures, that Jesus was the Christ (Acts xviii. 11, 28.). So far the narrative in the Book of Acts. Our first Epistle gives us further glimpses into the after-condition and development of this Church. We here mark a gratifying progress on the whole. There appears among them a wealth of spiritual gifts, especially in the department of religious knowledge (chap. i. 5). But there is no steadfastness in the progress made, The old life of nature continues still to assert its power in various ways, and in different forms and degrees in different persons, according to their several peculiarities and relations, and that, too, to such an extent, that the Apostle denies them a proper spiritual character, and designates them as odpxvvor: creatures of flesh, and σαρκικόι: carnal. One indication of this carnal temper was seen in the re-appearance of the old Greek Party sptril? under a Christian form, The Corinthian Church failed to abide unitedly in Christ. Fol- lowing the fashion of the schools, they soon joined themselves to different human organs of the spirit of Christ, with a one-sided and exclusive devotion, maintaining and magnifying the peculiar excellencies of their favorite teachers in a contentious zeal, until at last they broke into factions, each separate tendency pushing itself to an extreme, and settling there.* In chap. i. 12, four parties are enumerated,—those of Paul, of Apollos, of Cephas, and of Christ; and they are mentioned in the order of their rise. The occasion which gave them ~ birth was the appearance of Apollos at Corinth. His mode of understanding and interpreting the Gospel was no doubt essentially the same as that of Paul. But while Paul made it a rule to preserve the utmost simplicity in his preaching, Apollos, on the contrary, gave full scope to his Alexandrine learning and to his well trained powers of eloquence and argument. These shining qualities so attracted a portion of the Church, that in their over-estimate of them, they exalted 1 [Whe termination «vos denotes the material composition ; «xos, the moral quality.] 2(The tendency to faction had long characterized the Greek race, and has been stigmatized as the peculiar malady (ν ό σ ο ς) of the old Greek commonwealths.—STANLEY.] 8 (These factions were, however, not separations from the Church, but divisions in it —STanuey-] τ δ ὃ 2. RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH. & Apollos above Paul, as‘a teacher of superior education and culture. In opposition, however, te such pride of “wisdom,” Paul insisted upon that “demonstration of the Spirit and of Power” (ii. 1, 4; 2 Cor. xi. 6) which characterized his own discourses. ‘Thus an opposition was developed. Over against the adherents of Apollos, there arose a party for Paul, who applauded the founder of the Church as their master, and wished to make him their head. But while between these two parties there existed hardly any essential difference, and the issue respected only the relative worth of the two leaders, it was otherwise with those who professed to follow Peter. In this case the antagonism turned altogether upon a diversity of views both in morals and religion. Inasmuch as there is no proof that Peter himself was ever at Corinth, we must ascribe the origin of this movement to the presence of Judaizing teachers, who were interested in setting up a strictly legalistic party, and who appealed to Peter’s authority, as an Apostle who had been di- rectly called of Christ, and had enjoyed personal communion with him. But what does the Apostle mean when he speaks of some as saying that they were “of Christ?” If the language here used indicates a vicious partisanship, as would appear both from the connection and from the order of the words, how are we to understand it? It were natural to suppose here, that in view of the devdtion manifested by the several parties just mentioned towards their favorite leaders, there were still others who felt opposed to all adherence to men, and were resolved to exalt Christ alone as the Head to whom ¢hey belonged, but who did this in so exclusive and partisan a manner, that instead of proving a uniting element in the Church, they only made the rents worse. If, now, we may assume with Osiander, that under the opposers whom the Apostle assails 2 Cor. x., this party be meant (v.7), we should detect in them a Juda- izing clique, (chap. xi. 22) whose leaders, intruding into this Church, arrogated to themselves Apostolic authority, while they rejected that of Paul (2 Cor. xi. 5, 15; xiii. 11). That they are to be linked with the Petrinists, or are to be regarded as a modification of this party, is an un- warrantable assumption, since in 1 Cor. i. 12, they are co-ordinate with these as a distinct body, and in the Second Epistle throughout, no-further allusion to Peter occurs.! As to the grounds on which they rested their special connection with Christ, opinions differ. No sufficient reasons exist for supposing with some that they appealed to a direct family relation- ship with Christ, or to an immediate personal acquaintance with him, or, with others (Schen- kel, Dahne, Goldhorn), that they were a set of Gnosticizing theosophic mystics, who prided themselves upon visions and revelations which they professed to have received from God. Per- haps, with Thiersch, (Zhe Church in the Apostolic Age, 2d ed. p. 144.) we might take them to have been personal disciples of Christ, tinged with Pharisaic notions, who had come from Pales- tine as well as from Rome to Corinth to exert here a dangerous hostility to Paul by stealing from him the hearts of the Church, but who had nevertheless so far unmasked themselves as to merit from Paul the epithets “false apostles” and “servants of Satan” (2 Cor. xi. 13.). But there is no evidence compelling us to such conclusions.2 1,This also tells against Lechlerin his “Apostolic and post-apostolic Periods” 2d Ed. 1857, p. 386, who says of the Petri- nists: “But at the same time they assumed to themselves a pre-eminent and exclusively closer right to Christ himself on the ground of a former personal acquaintance with Jesus.” If 2 Cor. x.7 refers to the Christ party, it follows only that their leaders were Judaizers from Palestine, who found adherents in Corinth, and who, in opposition to all other parties, the Petrine included, designated themselves as “of Christ.” 2[In opposition to the prevailing views of German critics it may be well here to state the conclusions which Dean Alford has given of his investigations on the subject of the parties at Corinth. “(1.) That these designations (I. 12) are not used as pointing to actual parties formed and subsisting among them but (2,) as representing the SPIRIT WITH WHICH THEY CONTENDED against one another being the sayings of individuals and not of parties.. (“Each one of you saith),” q.d. ‘You are all in the habit of alleging against one another, some your special attachment to Paul, some to Apollos, some to Cephas, others to no mere human teacher, but barely to Christ to the exclusion of us his apostles.’ (8.) That these sayings, 10 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. “The “yet carnal” character of the Corinthian church showed itself also in an incapacity rightly to apprehend and apply Christian truth in its purity and power, and to enjoy Christian liberty in its laws and limitations, They were carnal in their boasting over the gifts of knowledge existing in the church, ὦ. 6. their pride of wisdom, their vain self-satisfiedness, and consciousnesg of perfected attainment (chap. iii. 4)—Carnal, too, in the grossest sense, was it for a member of the church to hold concubinage with his own stepmother; and the church betrayed a lack of spiritual life in so far as it was wanting in earnestness, power and courage, sufficient to expel this impure and all-defiling element from the midst of it—It was carnal also, only in a different direction, for church members to go to daw one with another, and that, too, before heathen tribunals (chap. vi. 1-8), since in this there was manifested not only a lack of that yielding brotherly love which prefers to suffer wrong than to do wrong, but also a defective sense of the high dignity of Christians who are called to share hereafter in the judicial functions of their Lord, when he shall sit to judge the world—The immaturity of their carnal state, and their defective sense of Christian liberty and obligation, ‘appeared also in the sphere of the sexual relations, developing themselves in two opposite directions. On the one hand, there were some who insanely held that Christian liberty involved the right to gratify the sexual impulse in promis- cuous intercourse with those who prostituted themselves for money, after a fashion allowed and religiously consecrated among the Pagans (whoredom)—as if the Christian were free to dispose as he chose of that body which God had redeemed unto himself (vi. 12 ff). On the other hand, there were those so fettered by legal scruples as to maintain that even marital intercourse was incon- sistent with the sanctity of a Christian life, and who therefore insisted not only upon the duty of celibacy, but also upon the cessation of connubial intercourse between parties already married, yea even upon the dissolution of the marriage tie, in case of one of the parties still remaiped unconverted. Such austere notions betrayed a lack of sound religious prudence, an ignorance of human infirmity, as well as of that divinely ordained diversity in human constitu- tions which rendered what might be possible and meet for one person wholly unsuitable for another. They also indicated a want of confidence in the power of Christianity to draw those, who consented to remain with believing companions in the closest intimacies of the natural life, into a fellowship of the spirit also. And last of all, they evinced a want of insight into the Gospel rule of abiding in the vocation wherein a person is called—a rule which ceases to be valid only in case the unbelieving party insists on a separation. Tn contrast with such asceticism there existed also in some quarters an unrestricted desire ‘while they are not to be made the basis of any hypothesis respecting definite parties at Corinth, do nevertheless hint at matters of fact and are not merely ‘exempli gratia:’ and (4,) that this view of the verse, which was taken by Chrys. “Theodoret, Theophylact, Calvin is borne out, and indeed necessitated by ch. iv.6, ‘These things I have ina figure trans- ferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes.’” In answer, however, to the argument adduced in support of Alford’s view from this last text, as if it implied that Paul had only used the names of himself and Apollos instead of the real names” of unknown leaders, by way of accommodation, and to avoid all personal altercation, Stanley well remarks, “This would not apply to the use of the name of Cephas, and it is clear that the Apostle in this instance (ch. iv. 6.] merely expresses his intention of confining himself to those who called themselves after his name and that of Apollos, in order to show that his censure was aimed, not only against his Judaizing opponents, but against the factious spirit itself, by which those who claimed to be his partisans were no less animated than those who claimed to be his friends.” The opinion that Paul’s language was intended to designate parties actually existing in the Church is confirmed by the testimony of Clement, who in writing to this same Church less than fifty years later says, “ The blessed Paul wrote to you about himself and Cephas and Apollos, because, then as well as now, you formed parties.” See Stanley. Among Ameri- can commentators Hodge and Barnes substantially agree with our Author. The former says, “The idea that the names of Paul and Apollos and Cephas are used figuratively, when other teachers were really intended, is 80 unnatural and has 80 little to sustain it that it is now almost universally repudiated. “Jt is a remarkable fact,” writes Stanley, “that the factions, once so formidable, have never been revived. Never has any disruption of the unity of Christianity appeared of equal importance; never has any disruption which once appeared of importance (with the exception, perhaps, of the Paschal controversy) been so completely healed.”’) ——— νόου ἢ ὐΝἷἷ 2 2. RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH. 11 for marriage; as though celibacy were an evil and a disgrace. In reference to such a tendency the Apostle insisted only that in view of “the present distress” believers hold themselves free from earthly ties, and that in forming new connexions they take care to keep within the circle of Christian fellowship (chap. vii.). A further antagonism of a similar kind was called for by the same cause in relation to the use of meat that had been offered unto idols (viii. ff.). On this point, likewise, two parties were formed; one strict, and the other liberal-minded. On the part of the former, there was a clinging to the external aspects of the act, or at least some remains of heathenish superstition in regard’ to an actual objective influence exerted by the idols upon the meats offered to them. On the part of the latter there was evinced indeed a more correct insight into the merits of the subject; but this was accompanied by an overweening pride, and a lack of self-denying love, which was shown in the reckless use they made of their liberty, by reason of which some were scandalized,. and others were led to participate in heathen ceremonials in a manner utterly inconsistent with. the proper observance of the most sacred feast of Christian worship. This lack of knowledge im: regard to the privileges belonging to a Christian, as well as the lack of consideration and self-denial: towards others, were alike indications of the “yet carnal” mind. In the one case faith was not- live enough to beget a liberalizing knowledge; in the other case, it was not strong enough to: produce brotherly love. This same lack of decorum as well as of brotherly love, was also to be seen in the sphere of public worship (chap. xi.); the former, in that the women violated the custom, prevalent in the Churches of God, of appearing in the congregation veiled; the latter, in that the love-feasts to» which the Lord’s Supper was attached, were celebrated in a manner entirely at variance with: the design for which they were instituted, which was to awaken and preserve a just sense of the: unity and equality of all believers in Christ, for here the rich separated themselves from: their poorer brethren, and kept the portions they brought, aside for their own use, so that the affluence of the one class and the poverty of the other were exhibited in painful contrast. The “yet carnal” mind was furthermore manifest in relation to the spiritual gifts which abounded in the Church. There was a lack both of correct inszght into the ground and purpose: of these gifts and of determination to maintain a constant reference to this ground’ and ‘purpose, in the use of them. In other words, there was wanting an humble recognition of dependence upon the one God, and Lord, and Spirit, for the existence of these gifts, and also a sincere and’ loving endeavour to employ them for the furtherance of the interests of the Church. Besides, there was mingled with this a foolish pride at the possession of such. gifts, and! an.unreasoning, over-estimate of those in particular which had in them something remarkable.and astonishing, such as the gift of tongues. The ability to speak what was incomprehensible, except through ‘an interpreter, in a state of ecstasy, was more highly prized than: the-ability to prophesy, even: though this was better fitted for edification. It was alsoa token: of carnal immaturity, that they were indisposed to repress the impulse to prophesy when: it was operating to disturb the order of the congregation, and to hinder edification. With this there was associated also a display of vanity on the part of women in their desire to imitate the men in speaking in an in- spired vein (chap. xil.—xiv.). In addition to all these erroneous moral tendencies, there existed also a theoretic error, (easily passing over, however, into one of practice) which resulted from an adherence to the old heathenish habits of thought. It was an aversion to the doctrine of the glorification of the body (cf. Acts xvii. 82). There were persons in the Corinthian Church who denied the possibi- Ἃ 12 THE EPISTLES OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ---- — lity of we resurrection of the dead, inasmuch as they could not see into the method of the pro- cess. (Chup. xv. 35). In this case they showed themselves guilty of gross ignorance, partly in relation to the consequences of such a denial (vv. 1-19), partly in relation to the whole system of God’s counsels and ways, of which the resurrection formed an important part (vv. 20-28), partly in respect to the practical significance of the resurrection (ver. 29), partly in respect to God and His power (ver. 34), and partly in regard to the development of the life in Christ; which was — in accordance with the analogies of the natural life, and with the precedent set by Christ hime self (ver. 35 ff). § III. LITERATURE, Among the more general exegetical works on the New Testament, or on the Pauline epis. tles, must be mentioned first, the patristic commentaries of Curysosrom, Taroporet, THEOPHY- ract, and Orcumentus; then, those of the Reformers Cavin, Beza, Fuactvus, and others; then tiose subsequent to the period of the Reformation by Grorrus and his learned opponent Caxovius; and last of all, the later commentaries by Fuatr, Orsaausen, De Werte, Meyer, Borcer, Neanper, etc., and, as especially deserving of consideration, that by Ostanper (Stuttg. 1858). With these we have compared also the Roman Catholic exposition of the two Epistles to the Corinthians by Bisprne (2d ed., 1863). Besides these, honorable mention must be made of ΜΈΠΤΑΝΟΤΗΟΝ (1 Cor., and a few chapters of 2d Cor.), W. Muscunus, Aretius, BuLLInGEr, Ses. Scumip, Moser, 8. J. Baumearren, Scuutz, Morus, Emmerzine, Krauss, HeypEnreicn (on 1st Cor.), and Brutrots. To these may be added the collective works: Cririct Sacrr; Poor's Synopsis ; Wour’s Cure ; SrarKe’s Bibel- Werk ; the Bertensurcer Brexe; C. H. Riecer's Observations on the New Testament, which naturally connect in spirit with the excellent Gnomon of Bence; Gossner’s Spirit of the Life and Doctrine of Jesus Christ in the New Testament (1818) drawn for the most part from the Berlenburger Bible and from Zinzendorf; Hrusner’s Practica. Exposition of the New Testament (1858); W. Ἐς Besser’s Bible-Lessons (8th vol. 1862). Impor- tant aids to the exposition of these Epistles are furnished by the treatises on the Apostolic period (Hess, Neanver, Scnarr, Lecuter, Lanes, Turerscn, and others); upon the Apostolic and Pauline doctrine (Messner, Lurrerseck, Ustert, Dinner); upon the New Testament The- ology (Cur. Scumip and others). Comp. also Baur, The Apostle Paul (2d ed. by Zeller, 1867, 2 vols.], and from the earlier time Srorr’s Notitie Historice (in his Opuscula). [Among the English and American works, those possessed of distinguished merit are, H, Hammonv’s Paraphrase of the New Testament, with Notes (1684); M. Henry's Lxposition of tha Old and New Testament (begun in 1704); D. Wurrsy’s Paraphrase and Commentary on the New Testament (1726); Tuos. Scorr’s Commentary on the Bible (1821); A. CrarKe’s Commentary on the Bible (1826); Buoomrrenp’s Commentary on the New Testament, and Critical Digest (1826) ; Barnes’s Commentary on the New Testament (1837); Hopar’s Commentary on the Corinthians (1862); Axrorp’s Greek Testament (5th ed. 1865); Srantey’s Epistles of St. Paul to the Corin- thians (3d ed. 1865); F. W. Ropertrson’s Sermons on St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians {1860); Worpswortn’s Greek Testument with Notes (4th ed. 1866); besides The Life and Epis- siea of St. Paul by ConyBeare and Howson (1853, and several editicns since in England and avverics) ; Eaptr’s Paul the Preacher (1860); and Howson’s Hulsean Lectures on St. Paul, for HK | lan THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTIANS. 41. ITS GENUINENESS, The genuineness of this Epistle is undoubted. The witnesses for it stretch far back into the remotest antiquity ; and among the earliest are Polycarp, Ignatius, Clemens Romanus, Irenzus, Athenagoras, and Clemens Alexandrinus, [Lardner adds Barnabas and Hermas]. [As specimens of the testimony they adduce, take the following furnished by Lardner and Alford: Barnabas (A. Τὴ. 71) has the following evident allusions to 1 Cor. iii. 16, in his Epistle ch, vi: “The habitation of our heart is an holy temple to the Lord;” and in ch. xvi. “God truly dwells in our house, that is, in us. This is the spiritual temple built unto the Lord.” Clemens Rom. (A. D. 96) in his Epistle to the Corinthians, ch. xlvii. writes: “Take into your hands the Epistle of the blessed Paul the Apostle. What did he write unto you at the first, in the beginning of the Gospel? Verily he did by the Spirit admonish you concerning himself, and Cephas, and Apollos, because that even then ye did form parties.” And then we have citations in xlviil. from 1 Cor. x. 24; in xxxvii. from 1 Cor. xii. 12; in xlix. from 1 Cor. xii. 4; in xxiv. from 1 Cor. xv. 20. Hermas (A. Ὁ. 100) in Sim. v. 27 alludes to 1 Cor. vii. 11, “If therefore a man or woman perseveres in anything of this kind and repents not; depart from her, and live not with her; otherwise thou also shalt be partaker of her sin. But it 15 therefore commanded, that both the man and the woman should remain unmarried, because such persons may repent.” Ignatius (A. D. 107) in his Epistle to the Ephesians ὃ 2. quotes from 1 Cor. i. 10, “That in one obedience ye may be perfectly joined together [in the same mind, and in the same judgment, and may all speak the same thing of the same thing”"]. And in ibid. ὃ 18 from 1 Cor. i. 18; in Epistle to Rome @5 from 1 Cor. iv. 4; in Epistle to the Magnes 2 10 from 1 Oor. v. 7; in Epistle to Ephesians from 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10, ete. ἢ Polycarp (A. D. 108) in Epistle to the Phil. ch. xi. quotes from 1 Cor. vi. 2, “Do you not know that the saints shall judge the world? as St. Paul teaches. Another citation in ch. v. from 1 Cor. x1. 9. Further illustration might be given, but the above are sufficient to show the strength of the evidence. Those interested in prosecuting the investigation are referred to Lardner and Tregelles and Alford]. The internal characteristics also allow no uncertainty on the subject. The boldest criticism of our day, that of the Tiibingen school, has suffered it to go unchallenged, and puts these two Epistles beside those to the Romans and the Galatians as the genuine writings of St. Paul. [The best exposition of these internal evidences is given us by Paley in his Horx Pauline, ch. ili. Among these may be mentioned a minuteness of detail and characterization, also in- cidental allusions and omissions, such as could hardly be looked for in a forged document; and 1 The part included in brackets Hefele rejects as spurious. 13 14 INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ee Se besides these numerous close, yet undesigned coincidences between the statements in the Epise tle and portions of the narrative in the Book of Acts. But aside from and beyond all these evidences is the style and tone of the Epistle itself. Its every line is instinct with the spirit of Paul. All the features of his great and unique charac: ter are too sharply impressed upon it to allow of any hesitation as to the authorship]. (21. PLACE AND TIME OF WRITING. The subscription purports that this Hpistle was written at Philippi. But this is directly contradicted by Paul’s own statement in xvi. 8, where he says that he would “Tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.” Michaelis thinks that the mistake must have arisen from a mis-appre- - hension of διέρχομαι in xvi. 5, which being read in the present was made to mean “I am now passing through Macedonia,” thus indicating his whereabouts at the time of writing, All modern critics agree in taking xvi. 8 as deciding the point of place. As to the time, there is not the same unity of opinion, though Conybeare and Howson assert that “its date can be fixed with more precision than any other.” Kling says “about the close of Paul’s well-nigh three years’ residence at Ephesus, some time before Pentecost, and shortly before Easter, after he had sent away Timothy and Erastus (iv. 17; Acts xix. 22), and had him- self resolved to go through Macedonia and Achaia. (Acts xix. 21; 1 Cor. xvi. 8).” The editor of the second edition singularly adds, without any apparent sense of the contradiction, “ that it is not to be put before the month Tisri (Sept.), the beginning of the Jewish year, since the Apostle must certainly have followed the Jewish reckoning, and not the Attic-Olympian.” Whatever may have been meant by this, Kling’s view as to the season of the year (Spring) is accepted by the majority of recent critics. (MryER, DE Wxerrr, Worps., AuF., Hopes, efc.) But not so agreed are they as to the year itself. Kling puts it at A. D. 58, and so also Meyer. De Wette says 57 or 58. Alf: “It is almost certain that it was written before Pente- cost A. Ὁ. 57;” and so also Pearson, Mill and Wordsworth. According to Lardner’s computa- tion it was in the year 56. This was also the opinion of the French commentators, L’ Enfant and Beausobre. This variation of two years is however a very slight one. The judgment of critics preponderates in favor of the year 57]. 2 III. THE OCCASION AND DESIGN OF THE EPISTLE. From what has been said in the general Introduction it is easy to infer what prompted the Apostle to write to the Corinthians, and what object he had in view. The moving cause was the whole condition of the church as unfolded in this Epistle. And in view of the evils which had broken out among them he felt constrained to attempt their suppression without delay, and that, too, by writing, as he had good reason for not wishing to defer his work in Macedonia The chief points he aimed at was to restore harmony, repress inordinate license, correct errors of faith and practice, and confirm them in their allegiance to their Divine Master. [To these we may add, to reéstablish his own authority and vindicate his own character and style of preaching from the attacks of enemies who had crept into the church during his absence, and assailed his Apos- tleship]. Already before this had he learned of some of the excesses into which several of the converts had fallen, and in an Epistle (now lost) had warned them against keeping company with fornica- tors, and urged the expulsion of such members from their cbmmunion. (1 Cor. v. 9, 11), And now again he had received further information, through persons arrived from Corinth, of the party-strifes which had sprung up among them. Besides this he had received a letter from the church (also lost) propounding various questions on points at issue in regard to which he was asked to decide. [Reason enough therefore was there for his writing; and from the abrupt man- ner in which he enters upon the case in hand, after his calm opening, which is not without indi- cations of restrained feeling, we see how thoroughly his whole soul was roused to his work, and how strongly he felt the necessity upon him for plain and decided utterances. The result was an Epistle which forms one of the most important portions of Sacred Writ. Thus man’s evil occa sions are God’s grandest opportunities for good]. @ V. CONTENTS. 15 ¢ IV. ITS STYLE. [On this point we can do no better than give entire the statements of Alford in his Intro« duction. “This Epistle ranks perhaps the foremost of all as to sublimity and earnest impassioned elo- quence. Of the former, the description of the simplicity of the Gospel in ch. ii—the concluding apostrophe of ch. 111. from ver. 16 to the end—the same in ch. vi. from ver. 9 to the end—the reminiscence of the shortness of the time ch. vii. 29-31—the whole argument in ch. xv. are ex- amples unsurpassed in Scripture itself; and of the latter ch. iv. 8-15, and the whole of ch. ix., while the panegyric of love in ch, xiii. stands a pure and perfect gem, perhaps the noblest assem- blage of thoughts in beautiful language extant in this world. About the whole Epistle there is a character of lofty and sustained solemnity, an absence of tortuousness of construction, and an apologetic plainness, which contrast remarkably with the pcrsonal portions of the second Epistle.” And all these qualities shine forth unconsciously, without effort, while in the earnest and direct prosecution of his purpose, yea, while entirely repudiating all attempts at rhetoric as ut- terly inconsistent with the simplicity of the Gospel. Here we have a beautiful illustration of the unconscious character of the truest eloquence. “No Epistle,” Alf. proceeds, ‘“‘raises in us a higher estimate of the varied and wonderful gifts with which God was pleased to endow the man whom he selected for the Apostle of the Gentile world, or shows us how large a portion of the Spirit, who worketh in each man severally as He will, was given to him for our edification, The depths of the spiritual, the moral, the in- tellectual, physical world are open to him. He summons to his aid the analogies of nature. He enters minutely into the varieties of human infirmity and prejudice. He draws warning from the history of the chosen people; example from the Isthmian foot-race. He refers an apparently trifling question of costume to the first great proprieties and relations of Creation and Redemp- tion. He praises, reproves, exhorts, and teaches. [He is tender, sarcastic, ironical!, Where he strikes, he heals. His large heart holding all, when he has grieved any, he grieves likewise; where it is in his power to give joy, he first overflows with joy himself. We may form some idea from this Epistle—better perhaps than from any one other, because this embraces the widest range of topics,—what marvellous power such a man must have had to persuade, to rebuke, to attract and fasten the affections of men.” @ V. CONTENTS. The main thought of this Epistle is to be seen in the object aimed at (2 3); its organic un- folding in the General Introduction in the development we have given of the history of the Church (@ 2). The entire contents of the Epistle revolve round the one purpose of leading the Corinthian Church to realize its true idea, and to set aside all those faults and defects in knowledge and practice which obstructed its proper growth. I. To this end, after the benediction connected with the address, the Apostle first alludes to the good beginning which the Corinthians had, on the whole, made in a sound church life, thankfully acknowledging the divine grace which had been vouchsafed to them in this respect, and their spiritual good estate as established therein. To this he adds the hope, grounded upon the truth of God, that they would continue steadfast unto the end (vv. 4-9). II. From this he turns to reprove their defects and discords of which he had been informed, first, by word of mouth from members of the Church, and then by letters of inquiry sent to him touching these things. A. These defects were, first, a lack of sound Christian community of feeling. 1. As it respects the position of Church members towards Christ and his organs (i. 11, ff-iv.). He begins with rebuking the party spirit which was manifested towards himself, who had given no occasion for it, and towards Apollos; mainly in so far as this grew out of an inordinate estimate of human wisdom, learning and eloquence, an estimate which was wholly 16 INTRODUCTLON TO THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. inconsistent with the plan of salvation, with the character of those called to participate in it, and with the style of that preaching which was to lay the foundation of the Christian life. (i. 17- ii. 5.). This preaching, however, he maintains, involved a high divine wisdom, which remained a closed mystery only to such as were not spiritual. (ii. 6 ff). This declaration he then ap- plies to the Corinthian converts as being not yet spiritual (iii. 1 ff.) and leads them to a right estimate of those who were reverenced as party leaders, and of their doings (5 ff.), warning them. at the same time against all destructive violations of the Church, which was the temple of God. (18 ff.). From this he proceeds to instruct them in regard to the lofty claims of Christians to the several means and instruments of salvation (21 ff.) and exhibits to them the proper standard for measuring the worth of Christ’s servants, a worth which was to be manifest in due time, and the manifestation of which therefore was to be waited for in suspense of judgment (iv. 1 ff.). After he had thus set before them the contrast between their imagined self-sufficiency, and the actual condition of the Apostles (6 ff.) he passes from the severe into a paternal tone, points out the difference between a mere teacher and a spiritual father, and rebukes their arro- gance towards the latter, which seemed to proceed from the assumption that he was unable to punish (iv.). With this he proceeds to notice a further defect in Christian community of feeling. 2. As it respects the discipline of unworthy and corrupt Church members (v.). He here insists upon the excommunication of a member who had disgraced the Church by gross immorality, and the toleration of whom hitherto was a just cause for deepest shame. In this connection he corrects a misunderstanding of what he had said in a former letter in regard to intercourse with immoral persons. 3, As it respects the demeanor of Church members in their cwil relations toward each other (vi. 1 ff.). He rebukes the practice of Christians going to law with each other before heathen tri- bunals, especially when they were in the wrong, since unrighteousness belongs to the sins which exclude from God’s kingdom, and from which therefore they as Christians had been purified. 4. As it respects a becoming Christian deportment in the sexual relations as opposed to heath- enish fornication (vi. 12 ff.). That this practice was by no means one morally indifferent, is shown from the relation of the body to Christ as the head of the Church, from its character as a dwelling-place of the Holy Spirit, and from the price paid for its ransom. 5. As it respects their views of marriage (the foundation of all social life), and the conduct of the several parties in this relation (vii-). One inquiry in the letter of the Church had touched upon the relations of the marriage and the celibate state. Marriage and the bed undefiled he advised as a safeguard against fornication and as a relief to incontinence. Otherwise, to remain single were a noble thing (ver. 1ff.). But the dissolution of existing marriage relations is discountenanced except in cases where the unbe- lieving party insisted upon it (ver. 10 ff). The general rule laid down is for a person to abide’ in the condition wherein he is called (ver. 17 ff.). But the unmarried are advised to remain as they are, both on account of the existing distress which demanded an entire freedom of the spirit in regard to all possession and enjoyments, and for the sake of a more entire devotion to the Lord and His will. Nevertheless, the contracting of marriage is not condemned as sinful, - and in some cases is approved (ver. 25 ff.). 6. As it regards the conduct of the strong and liberal-minded towards the weak in things indifferent; that j is to say, a defect in self-denying love (vili.—x.). The discussion here, which was called forth by an inquiry about the eating of meat offered . unto idols, proceeds on the assumption, that mere knowledge without love, so far from furthering the life of the Church, only begets a corrupting pride (viii. 1 ff.). He then gives them to under- stand that an insight into the nothingness of gods, so called, was not so general as to divest all persons of a conscious relation to the idols in the eating of the meat offered to them. Hence to lead such persons to eat of this meat by the exercise of a liberty conformed to such an insight, when the mere eating was of no moral worth before God, was in fact a betrayal into sin, and so a beguiling to perdition. And this was entirely contrary to the love of Christ, who had made the Se oe ἢ ὃ Υ. CONTENTS. 17 greatest sacrifice in their behalf (ver. 5 ff.). Here the Apostle shows them, by his own exam- ple, that the surrender of an acknowledged right for the sake of furthering the cause of Christ was the proper boast of the Christian, and the condition of obtaining an indestructible crown, (ix.). He then warns them against all false confidence, in supposing those once received into the communion of God’s people, and into a participation of the means of grace, could ever fail, while at the same time he points them comfortingly to the faithfulness of God in keeping them from temptation (x. 1 ff.); dissuades them from participating at idol altar-feasts, as inconsistent with a participation in Christian solemnities (ver. 14 ff.) and finally exhorts them to follow the rule of love, and do what was for the glory of God. (ver. 25 ff.). 7. As it respects their deportment at the assemblies of the Church. _ a. Of women in the matter of dress. He pronounces the covering of their head in public as a custom that was in accordance with nature and suited to the posi- tion ordained of God for woman, while that of being uncovered was more suited to the man (xi. 1-16.). ὃ. Of the rich towards the poor in the observance of the Lord’s Supper. He reproves the custom of the two classes separating at the love feasts, as contrary to the na- ture of the institution, and calculated to draw down upon it the judgment of God, because of the unworthy communion it vccasioned (ver. 17 ff.). ce. Of the Church generally, and of those endowed with spiritual gifts in their im- proper estimate and use of these gifts (xu. to xiv.). a In respect to these, he exhibits, first, their foundation and object and hence their unity in manifoldness, as designed for mutual helpfulness, suitably to the organic character of the Church (xii.). β He next shows the measure of their worth and the rule of their use, viz.: Love which is described according to its qualities, and recommended and praised above all transient gifts, because of its eternal duration. y Finally, he compares the gifts of prophecy and of speaking with tongues in respect to their worth, as measured by their fitness to edify the Church; and sets forth the rules that are to regulate their use in accordance with their de- sign and with what is seemly for the Church of God. (xiv.). To these defects in true Christian community of feeling, there is added, still. B. A defect in doctrinal knowledge and of steadfastness in respect to the article of the re- surrection of the dead (xv.). On this point the Apostle teaches them, 1. How the possibility of this fact is essentially presupposed in the resurrection of Christ, that well attested event on which the faith and hope of Christians rest (vv. 1-19); 2. What position it occupies in. the carrying out of God’s plan of salvation, (ver. 20 ff.); 3. What practical consequences its denial involves; 4. How the ob- jections against it arising from its mode, and from the nature of the resurrection body, are groundless and irrational, (ver. 35 ff.); and 5. How it will be with those who survive at the moment of Christ’s appearing (ver. 51 ff.). III. The concluding portion of the Epistle (xvi.) is made up of instructions in regard to the the collection for the Christians at Jerusalem; of intimations in regard to his approaching visit; and hints respecting the treatment they were to give his friends and helpers; and, finally, of greetings and parting wishes accompanied with earnest exhortation. Obs. The survey above given of the contents of this Hpistle finds its proper supplement in the attempt made in Introd. 3 2. to refer back all its faults to the lingering carnality of the Co- rinthian Church. These are but the various points of view from which to consider and expound it. How nearly the contents of this Apostolic letter touch our Christendom, and what practical bearing it has for us is well expressed by old Hepner in the following powerful language, which we may well consider (comp.) Starx, Ernu.? 12 “A Christianity decayed in all the duties of life and its several relations, may see itself distinctly mirrored in this Epistle, and may per- ceive how, with the Corinthians, all their mistakes and idle fancies about the nature of true blessedness have not yet entirely died out. How sadly is the Church of the saints still tormented with rationalizing spirits, and with falsely-famous worldly-wise ones, who intrude 2 18 INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS upon others that are truly spiritual their own self-coined conceits and rules! To what extent are multitudes still corrupted from the simplicity of the faith! How boldly do people judge of spiritual things according to the crooked standards of a carnal or political wisdom! How con- ceited and puffed up are many pastors and teachers through their vain learning! How merciless toward the weak! How tender in rebuking distinguished sinners! How common has fornica- tion become! How grossly and wickedly do many conduct themselves both in married and single life! How careless are people about winning their neighbor’s regard! How often is the Lord’s Supper dishonored and disgraced, as if it were a common meal, by the unbelieving, the hypocritical, and the godless! And such, forsooth, will still pretend to be Christians! God grant that by the frequent perusal of this Epistle, yea, of the entire Scriptures, they may reform betimes! Furthermore, we may learn from this Epistle: 1. In Paul, his love and patience as evinced to- wards the faults of the Corinthians; his wisdom and foresight in convicting and reproving; his zeal against open offenders; his care that a great evil might be warded off in season. 2. But in the Corinthians, (a) How a good beginning may not hold out, and how easily persons may be turned from the simplicity which is in Christ, if they do not keep a wakeful watch over them- selves; (ὁ) What damage is done, if a person yields too much to his own reason, or relies on his secular wisdom, or allows himself to be ensnared by the artful words of carnal learning. 3. What a blessing it is to have a faithful teacher. 4. How necessary and useful church discipline is. 5. How difficult it is steadfastly to refrain from sins to which a, person has been accustomed, and which he formerly considered not sinful. 6. How high an estimate should be put upon every believer, and what care should be taken not to offend the weak. 7. That Satan regards nothing as too sacred to be turned by him to the advantage of his kingdom and to the injury of Christ’s Church, as (6. g.) spiritual gifts. 8. How dangerous it is to err in fundamental truths and how necessary to instruct others concerning them.” a, COMMENTARY. THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. FIRST DIVISION. THE GREETING; THANKS AND HOPE IN REFERENCE TO THEIR CHRISTIAN STATE IN GENERAL. I. Greeting. Cuapter I. 1-3. 1 PaUvt, called! to be an apostle [a chosen apostle] of Jesus Christ through the will 2 of God, and Sosthenes our [the] brother, Unto the church of God which is at Co- rinth,? to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be [chosen] saints, with all that in every place [om. in every 3 our Lord, [in every place*] both theirs an ee) call upon the name of Jesus Christ ours: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. 1Ver.1—KAnros: called or chosen is wanting in many good authorities (A. D. E. etc.) These, however, are not sufficient to warrant its omission, since it is more likely that the word was omitted as superfluous, in consequence of διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ (as it is not found in like connection in 2 Cor.i.1; Eph.i.1; Col.i.1; 2 Tim. i.1), than that it should have been inserted from Rom.i.1. (Cod. Sin. has it. This is the nearest equivalent in English. translate kAyn Tos asa verbal adjective “ chosen.” In the text we follow the version of our author and “Called” would be more correct; but this word is appropriated to another meaning, and would therefore be ambiguous. ] 2 Ver. 2.—[Our author inserts the clause “which is at Corinth” after “Christ Jesus,” an unnatural order, authorized by B. D. E. F. G. It. and which he vindicates on the ground that it were more natural to suppose that the order of the Received Text was a supposed improvement by transcribers, than that the clause in question should have been placed by design or error in those manuscripts after “sanctified in Christ Jesus.” The valuable Cod. Sin., however, agrees with the Received Text, and we adhere to this against the decision of Alford, Stanley or others. ] 3 [We here conform to the unquestioned order of the Greek text, which alone yields the true meaning.—See below.] . EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. Vers. 1-3. These opening verses, according to ancient custom, combine to present in advance the address and greeting; that is, the designa- tion of the parties concerned in their mutual re- lations, and likewise the benediction. Ver. 1. Paul.—Concerning his person and his- tory, his importance to the Church and his la- bors, consult the general introduction to these Epistles [also Herzog’s Real. Ency. art. Paul. Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, do. Kitto’s Bible Ency. do. Besser, ‘‘Paul the Apostle.” Eadie, ‘““Panl the Preacher.” Howson, ‘* Hulsean Lectures,” for 1862. A. Monod, ‘Five Dis- courses on St. Paul.’ Ld. Lyttleton, ‘‘On the Conversion of St. Paul.” Neander, ‘Planting and Training,” etc. ] ἣ A chosen Apostle of Jesus Christ, by the will of God.—The ordinary rendering, ‘called to be an Apostle,” does not give suffi- cient prominence to the leading thought here, which is shown by the order of the words to lie in ‘Apostle.’ The sense is,—an Apostle by virtue of his calling; and this calling was that given him by Christ (Acts ix. 22-26), having for its deeper ground the will of God (comp. Gal. i. 15 ff.). Hence, neither of these designations is superflu- ous. The fact of ‘‘being called” is insisted on in contrariety to everything like arbitrary as- sumption of honor, or unwarrantable intrusion « Καλεῖν: to 681], like x55 is used ἡ τὰ δ Ἢ to denote the way in which God specially appoints men to any particular end.” Neanper. And this was a matter which, in view of the parties at Corinth who refused to acknowledge Paul’s (19) into office. 20 apostleship, and sought to put him below the twelve, directly called by Christ when on earth, it was in point to bring prominently forward; and no less important was it to show that this call- ing came through (dca) the Supreme Will. And there was the greater necessity for this, inasmuch as the office of which he claimed to be the bearer was highest in the divine economy. It was that of an ambassador of Jesus Christ, whose business it was to represent his Master, whose words and acts were to be regarded as Christ’s words and acts, the honoring or contemning of whom was to be looked upon as the honoring or contemning of Christ, who, as Christ’s commissioner, ap- pointed to organize and govern the Church throughout the world, wielded an all-embracing power, and exercised a far-reaching authority, and who agreeably with such an appointment and such plenitude of authority was endowed with a wealth of spiritual gifts, such as is ordinarily dis- tributed among several persons in a less degree.* And Sosthenes the brother.—Although conscious of his high and well established posi- tion, he nevertheless does not present himself be- fore the Church alone; but he takes into com- pany one who officially stood far below him. Him, however, he designates as an equal—as a brother both to himself and the Church, in the unity of Christian faith and hope. ‘The disposi- tion on the part of Paul to send out his Epistles in the name of one or more of the brethren happen- ing to be with him (Gal. i. 2), may be taken either to imply that the persons mentioned had aided in the upbuilding of the churches concerned, or as an expression of their perfect agreement with what he wrote. It certainly is, at any rate, a testimony to that fellowship in the Spirit, which Paul so often inculeated, and which he was ever diligent both to cultivate in himself and to inculcate upon his readers.” BuRGER. Whe- ther this Sosthenes was the ruler of the syna- gogue mentioned in Acts xviii. 17,—-supposing him to be then already inclined to the cause of Christ, in case it was by the Jews that he was beaten, or that he was violently opposed to this cause, in case he was beaten by Greeks, (the readings which indicate the one or the other are neither of them original),—cannot be accurately ascertained, In any case, he must have been known and esteemed in the Church, so that it was not without its influence with them that he expressed his assent to the contents of the letter, and represented them before Paul. That he must have written the letter himself under Paul’s dictation, as some suppose (Billroth, Hodge) (comp. xvi. 21), does not necessarily follow from this connection. Perhaps we might infer that he had been an official assistant of Paul; but even this is not expressly denoted bythe term ‘brother.’ Ver. 2. Names and characterizes the party written to.—Unto the Church of God.— ‘The congregation,’ or, ‘the Church of God’ is the Old Testament designation of Israel as a divinely gathered people. It means a people assembled before God and for God. The derivation of the ΓΚ On the nature and extent of the apostolic office, con- sult articles undér the word “Apostle,” in Kitto’s Enc., 2d ed.; Smith’s Bib. Dict.; Herzog’s Real. Enc.; also, Owen’s Works, vol. iv. p. 438-445; Schaff, Hist. of Ap. Ch., Book ini. chap. 2; Conybeare and Howson, Life of St. Paul, ch. xiii.; Litton, The Church of Christ, Book ii., Part ii. ch. 1.) ee π΄ π΄Π-΄΄ππΠΠ’ΠἕΠ3Π3ΠἷΞἷΞ“π΄ΞΠΠΠπΠ..΄ὦἷΠ“.ν.-- τ΄’ Ὁ. τᾷ 0... ππΠΠ-.οϑοτει͵;τοτιϑἍ.σ τ͵᾽ὐςξς-------ὄ.----------- THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ἌΝ ππππσσ. Ὁ word ecclesia points out the mode of its gather. ing. It was by means of a ‘calling,’—a spiritual instrumentality. Hence its members are desig- nated as ‘‘the called.” In this a personal inde- pendence is presupposed. Salvation is offered, not enforced, and it is shared only by those who voluntarily accept and enter into it. Τοῦ ϑεοῦ : of God—Gen. of possession. The Corinthian Church is hereby emphatically declared to belong not to any human leader, but to God alone. The Church is His.—Which is at Corinth [The local designation of the Church. Geographical divisions are in the Church the only ones recog- nized in the New Testament, and the Church in one place or city is always spoken of as a unit. Though consisting of one or more distinct con- gregations, it was regarded as an organic whole under one general superintendency. 1t was other- wise when a province was in view, e. g., the churches of Asia.—*‘Church at Corinth! that wicked city! what a joyful and striking para- dox.” Bengel.]|—to them that are sancti- fied in Christ Jesus.—By this the Church of God is distinctly characterized in its mem- bers as Christian. It is composed of persons who are sanctified, ¢. e., separated from the mass of sinful humanity, the world, and devoted to the exclusive service of the true God [and whose guilt has been expiated by an atonement. Both ideas, those of consecration and expiation, are included in the word ἁγιάζειν: to sanctify]. This is not to be understood in a simply legal or theo- cratic sense (as in the case of the Jews, who were termed a holy nation because of their de- scent from Abraham and their divine govern- ment); nor yet ina purely objective sense, as im- plying the mere imputation of holiness; but in a real sense, as being the result of the operation of the Holy Ghost (comp. vi. 11; 1 Pet.i.2). Yet this inward appropriation of salvation is not on this account to be considered as complete, but only as begun in its informing principle, and as existing in a germ which may be developed in various degrees. In Christ Jesus.—These words denote the ground or soil whereon those who are sanctified stand, and from which they derive the power of sanctification. It is Jesus Christ, into whose fellowship they have entered by faith and bap- tism (comp. Gal. iii. 26 ff.; Rom. vi. 3), [and who is the only centre and bond of union for the Church ]--called or chosen saints. This implies that they are consecrated to God and numbered among His peculiar people by virtue of a divine call, [‘‘effectual call as distinguished from a merely external invitation.” Hopax] (comp. Rom, x. 14; ix. 24, ete.); hence, that they, as well as the Apostle on his part (ver. 1), were also in- debted for their high position to the Divine Will, which was made known to them in their call through the Gospel (Rom. x. 14; 2 Thess. ii. 14). ‘*Paul here may have reminded them of their ‘calling’ as something which was alike for all, having in view already the parties whom he was soon to rebuke for giving undue promi- nence to the human instrumentality, and for in- sisting upon subjective diversities in a schisma- tic way.” Neanper. [‘It is not to be inferred from this that the Corinthian professors were all true believers, or that these terms express CHAP. I. 1-3. 21 -_-Oreeeeeereeeee——————————eeeeoor eee nothing more than external consecration. Men are uniformly addressed in Scripture according to their profession.’”’ Hoper]. With all that call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place.—There is a difference of opinion as to the connection of these words. They might be joined to those just preceding, 6. g., ‘who are called holy, as are all who, etc.’ So taken, they would serve to remind the Corinthian converts of their fellow- ship with Christians in all places. So Bengel. Or they may be construed as enlarging the circle of those whom Paul intends to address. The former construction would not be unsuitable, since it would furnish a fit antidote to the nar- row-minded tendency to division which showed itself in the church. But the latter is favored by the similar passage in 2 Cor. i. 1, which at the same time more exactly defines and explains the general statement we have here: ‘in every place.’ Then we should have immediately joined to this, as belonging to it, the closing words—both theirs and ours.—To connect these [as the E. V. does] with ‘‘our Lord,” g. d. ‘‘their Lord and ours,” is hardly admissible from the order of the Greek text, and is also unsuita- ble, because in that case the word “‘our”’ as con- nected with ‘‘Lord”’ would be understood not simply of Paul or Sosthenes, but also of the re- cipients of the letter included with them as well. (Comp. 2 Cor. xiii. 18).—Referred to the daugh- ter churches of Corinth in Achaia, as suggested by 2 Cor. i. 1, these words yield the sense: ‘‘in every place which belongs as well to them—the Corinthians as the mother church—as also to us, the Apostle and his companions.”’ So construed, the Apostle will here be understood as, on the one hand, conceding fo them the right of the mother church, and impressing upon them the duty of taking a deeper interest in the daughter churches, and, on the other hand, as indicating his interest in these, and so winning them also to the reception of his doctrine and exhortation. [But is it not more natural to refer *‘theirs” to ‘those who call upon, ete.,” and to include under “fours” both the parties writing and the parties written to? So Alford. Another interpretation has been proposed. ‘‘The Epistle is addressed to all Christians in Corinth and Achaia, wherever they might be. Every placeis at once theirs and ours—their place of abode and my place of labor.” See Hodge. ‘These words form a weighty and precious addition—made here ‘doubtless to show the Corinthians that member- ship of God’s Holy Catholic Church consisted not in being planted or presided over by Paul or fvpollos or Cephas (or their successors), but in calling on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Alf. ]. ue call upon the name, οἰο.---ἐπικαλεῖσϑαι τὸ édvoua. By this is denoted, not the being called by the name of the Lord, asif the Greek verb were in the Passive, but, as every where in the Old and New Testament, the calling upon the name of the Lord, especially the invocation of His help as Lord. It is, accordingly, an act of divine worship, [and in a more extended sense, denotes a life of reverence towards God, and of habitual religious faith]. The term Lord, answering to the Hebrew my or 708: Jehovah or Adonai, here applied to Christ, indicates His plenipotence and truth, which is more fully set forth in Matth. xi. 27; xxviii. 18; John xviii. 2; and which rests partly upon His original sonship and His mediatorial agency in the creation (viii. 6; Col. i. 16 ff; Heb. i. 2 ff.), and partly upon His redemptive office (vii. 22 ff.; Acts xx. 28; Tit. ii. 14).— The name indicates the being as revealed and known; hence the invocation presupposes faith— faith, preaching—and preaching, the word of God (Rom. x. 14 ff). Those who called upon the name of Christ formed a contrast with those who blasphemed this name among the Jews. (Luke xxiii. 89; 1 Tim. i. 18; Acts xxvi. 9; comp. chap. xxii. 16). This same thought lies at the foundation even in places where instead of a name we have a mere description. The name of Jesus Christ expresses what He is, His entire per- sonality together with His office and work. [On the import of names, especially as belonging to Deity: see Bush, Com. Ex. iii. 13.; Hengst. Com. Ps. viii. 2; ix. 12; Whately, Serm. Matth. i. 23]. Ver. 3. The benediction, which elsewhere among the Greeks, and twice also in the New Testament (Jas. i. 1; Acts xv. 23) is woven with the address into one sentence, is here peculiarly extended.—_Grace and peace constitute the sum total of Gospel blessings, the former being the ground and source of the latter. Χάρες pro- perly denotes that which begets joy, viz. favor, grace, kindly feeling. It may be regarded either as a quiescent trait, the mere outshining of an inward goodness or amiability; or as an energy put in active exercise for the welfare of others. Among the Greeks the word was used also in connections which we should deem immoral. But in the language of revelation it denotes that supreme love and self-devotion which was manifested in its most perfect form by the Son of God. It is what we, in respect of the unworthi- ness of the object, denominate grace, by which is meant sometimes the mere feeling of kindness in the heart, and sometimes the beneficent act which is its result, Here, indeed, it means the peace of forgiveness and reconciliation, corres- ponding to the Hebrew pibyy which includes the entire welfare of the individual both spiritual and physical, and the root of which is inward peace, the repose of the spirit in the sweet con- sciousness of being reconciled to God, and in the blessed assurance that we have God for our friend and have to expect from Him good alone. (Comp. Rom. viii. 1, 31-39). [‘*The wish of peace has a peculiar bearing here in view of the dissensions at Corinth.” Ols.]. From God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.—That this clause is not to be translated ‘‘from God the Father of us, and of the Lord Jesus Christ,” is clear from Gal. i. 8; not to say any thing of the impropriety of thus putting Jesus Christ in a subordinate position.— The co-ordination of Jesus with the Father is tu be explained on the ground that the office of mediating grace and peace-rests upon His divine sonship, and so upon His equality with God.— This is a truth already indicated in the appella- 22 tion “Lord,” and which is inferred from viii. 6, and from the whole Pauline system of doctrine. [‘* Here it is to be remarked, that God is called our Father and Christ our Lord. God, as God, has not only created us, but renewed and adopted us. Godin Christ has redeemed us. He is our owner and sovereign, to whom our allegiance is immediately due; who reigns in us, and rules over us, defending us from all our enemies. This is the peculiar form which piety assumes under the Gospel. All Christians regard God as their Father and Christ as their Lord.” Hodge]. DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. From the-fact that God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ are exhibited tous as the common source or sum total of all the blessings of salvation, it is to be seen that the Apostle, even while subordinating Christ to God (111. 28; xi. 8; xy. 28), yet maintains such a mediation through Christ of the Divine grace, and of the blessings flowing from it, as presupposes in Christ the Mediator a divine nature. How the two things, subordination and equality of substance, agree, is a problem for the science of Christoiogy. This is the mystery of love, which in the xather flows out in the fulness of the divine perfections; which in the Son keeps itself evermore as con- sciously dependent and recipient, and, accord- ingly, both thinks, purposes and does every thing with sole reference to the Father. 2. The equality of Christ with God is also in- dicated by the calling upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Both this invocation and that de- rivation of all the blessings of salvation from the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ con- jointly, can be made consistent with the Old Testament teaching respecting God, only on the supposition of the essential divinity of Jesus Christ and His true equality with the Father. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 1. The consciousness of being called to the min- istry through the will of God (ver.1) is: 1. the ground THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. in ta tl ea LI of our confidence in appearing before a Chris- tian congregation to instruct, exhort, reprove and comfort (comp. 2 Cor. iii. 4 ff.); 2. the spring of humble devotion to the service of the Lord, a, devoid of all arbitrary and self-willed activity, ὃ. and in every thing observant of the Master’s eye, and subject to His word; [8. an example for all engaged in any lawful vocation. The con=— sciousness of being called to our work in the providence of God is necessary for the sanctifi- cation of our labors, by imparting to them a no- ble aim, a right impulse, and a true courage to do and endure valiantly for God, our true Mas- ter, in all things appointed unto us. After Rob- ertson ]. 2. The main features of a true church (ver. 2) are, 1. that it is an assemblage before and for God; 2. that it consists of such as are conse crated to God in Jesus Christ; 3. that it is thus consecrated through the mighty creative will of God; 4. that its members are such as call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ; [5. that these things may exist in connection with many glaring faults in true professing believers, and with | many false professions of faith, which yet do not necessarily vitiate the claim to be called a true church]. 8, The proper fellowship between the office and the church rests, 1. in that the former works out for the latter the benefits of salvation which come from God and Jesus Christ in the way of blessing’; 2. in that the latter receives these benefits from the ministration of blessing with earnest and hearty desires, 4, Vers. 2, 8: Besser:—How must the Apos- tolic greeting shame many corfgregations who assemble to hear this Epistle read, and yet come there with discordant sentiments and divided tongues! ‘The name ἐκκλησία: church,” says Chrysostom, ‘‘is a name not of separation, but of union and harmony.” [5. Ver. 2: Benaen :—The consideration of the church universal frees the mind from party bias, and sways it to obedience. ] Il. Gratitude and hope in respect to their Christian state in general. CuapTer I. 4-9. 4 J thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is [was'] given 5 you by [in: é&] Jesus Christ; That in every thing ye are [were] enriched by [in] him, 6 in all utterance, and in all knowledge; Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed 7 in you: So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus 8 Christ: Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day 9 of our Lord Jesus Christ. God 7s faithful, by [through] whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. [* Ver. 4. δοθείσῃ: was given, viz., at the time of conversion]. CHAP. EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. This opening, in which the Apostle expresses his thanks to God for the abundance of spiritual gifts possessed by the Corinthian Church, and his hope in their steadfastness and further prosperity in all good, should by no means be regarded as a simple rhetorical capiatio benevolentiz, as a mere bit of flattery designed to win his readers, so that they might the better accept his subse- quent exhortations and rebukes, and keep them- selves well disposed in spite of the unpleasant things he-had to say, and submit to be the more readily guided to the ends he had in view. What Paul here says is preéminently the truth. It comes from his heart. He does feel a sincere joy that so much good exists in the church and that it affords such ground of hope for the future. Itisa conviction which proceeds from his fatherly dis- position (comp. iv.15). Nor are wetoregard it as any self-deception or fond fancy of his. For how- ever great may have been the faults of individuals, the work of Divine grace had nevertheless been begun in all the plenitude of spiritual gifts, and his confidence in the continued operation of the Lord confirming their hearts, and in the faith- fulness of God towards them, was verily well grounded. Both these things are presupposed in his exhortation and rebuke. First, objectively: in so far as the expectation of any good results from his efforts rested only upon the existence of some good already in the church and upon God’s faithfulness and codperation. Again, sub- jectively:'in so far as the acknowledgment of previous successes and the hope of yet greater ones, generally inspire confidence and render per- sons favorably disposed to receive exhortation and rebuke as given kindly and intelligently, and infuse into them courage to undertake the work of reform; and this courage is of the right kind since it refers all good back to God as the source. And in this style of address there is something more than cool human calculation. It is acting in perfect conformity with the true laws of the mind, and above all with the law of that love ‘‘which believeth all things and hopeth all things,” but which nevertheless secures the same results that worldly prudence is wont to calculate for ina selfish way. ‘The Corinthian Church was well trained and instructed and established in the faith; but it was not yet entirely simple-minded and pure in heart; there was much worldly vanity and party spirit still among them. So in every church there is to be found a mixture of what is praiseworthy and blameworthy. The praise of the better class piques even the worse, and is a means of inciting them to merit that praise, too. And the reproof of the bad ought to affect the better class likewise, awakening in them regrets that there are such persons by their side and in their communion as deserve re- proof, and it should prompt them to remove the evil. Every church is one organic whole, by reason of which the several members exert an influence upon each other and share in that which others have and are.’’ Heubner, p. 213. “This introduction, breathing blessing and praise, gratitude and confidence, exhibits the spiritual shepherd in apostolic simplicity and I. 4-9. 23 truth. All goodness in the church he denomi- nates a work of grace, and he sets in prospect the consummation of the salvation begun as only grace likewise, and he does it in a manner at once humbling and animating. He looks at the church in its germ, in the strength of its better elements which may be rendered a source of blessing to others, and so, wisely preparing the way, he passes over from the bright to the darker side.” Osiander. Ver. 4. I thank.—An expression of acknow- ledgment and joy towards God as the Author of all good.—My God.—As in Rom. i. 8 and else- where,—of course not in an exclusive sense, but as an ayowal of his own personal communion with God and direct interest in Him; a personal attestation of his religious position, without any sinister design, but yet in a manner calculated to elicit respect and confidence in what he is about to say.— Always.—This cannot mean that he was always engaged in audible thanks- giving, or that this feeling of gratitude was also definitely present in his consciousness; but only that he bore this church perpetually upon his heart with grateful emotions to God—a meaning which the word in the Greek also carries.—On your behalf for the grace of God.—The personal object for whom and the reason on ac- count of which the thanks were given. [ydprc: grace, the disposition in God, for χαρίσματα: the blessings flowing from it—‘‘a metonymy which has passed so completely into our common par- lance, as to be almost lost sight of as such,”— Alf. Wordsworth, however, distinguishes here, χάρισμα is a special gift to be used for general edification. χάρις is grace generally for personal sanctification. Tongues, miracles, healing are χαρίσματα. χάρις 15 givenin order that χαρίσματα may be rightly used.”].—Which was given you in Jesus Christ.—Comp. also ver. 2.— Christ is here regarded, in a sort, as the place, where the grace of God is manifested (comp. 2 Cor. v. 19) so that he who enters there becomes partaker of it. But this entrance is faith, by which the believer is in Christ and comes into vital communion with Him. Ver. 5. Extends the thought and shows where- in the manifested grace consists.—That ye were enriched in him—i. e., as being in Christ and haying constant communion with Him; and this enriching is the work of God’s grace.— In every thing.—A general statement, which is at once more particularly defined and limited. —In all doctrine.—Thus ought λόγος to be translated with Luther [in which Calvin, Alf., de Wette, Billroth, Meyer concur, understanding by it: doctrine preached to the Corinthians], and not: ‘‘ utterance,” as though the reference were to powers of eloquence or the gift of tongues [so Bengel, Stanley and Wordsworth; ‘and which interpretation,’ Hodge says, “gives good sense and is the one generally adopted.” Meyer: ‘¢ All manner of external endowments for speak- ing ;” excluding however any allusion to gift of tongues, as inconsistent with the subordinate value attached to this in chap. xiv. This view is sustained by xii. 8: 2 Cor. viii. 7; xi. 6. In this case γνώσις ; knowledge, would denote the inward endowment. The order of the words appears to support Kling’s view. ‘Truth 24 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. preached, (i. ¢.) ‘doctrine,’ must precede ‘truth | of the gospel in the soul results in a rich unfold. >) apprehended,’ ἡ, 6. ‘knowledge.’ alogous passages in the two Epistles go to prove Meyer’s view and the correctness of the English version also].—In all knowledge.—By this he means: the general acceptance of the doc- trines that had been communicated to them on every side, and a comprehensive insight into their truth. This statement does not conflict with the fact of peculiar defects in individuals. Ver. 6. Further confirms and illustrates the foregoing. Inasmuch ε5---καϑώς: [not correla- tion: ‘‘according as,” but as in appended clauses denoting explanation, quoniam, si quidem, since. Winer’s Gr. tint. 8].—The testimony of Christ.—Christ may here be taken either as the subject, the one testifying, or as the object, the one testified of. The one does not exclude the other. In the former case the phrase would mean, the proclamation of the Divine plan of sal- vation in allits parts (its grounds, aims and re- lations; its beginning, mediation, execution and consummation), obtained by a direct insight into the heart of God, into His inmost thought and purpose (comp. Jn. i. 18; vi. 46). But in this testimony of Christ, which sounded forth from the Apostles also, and so included their preaching, there is involved also the other idea, Christ’s own personal testimony, and the testimony of His Apostles likewise, to His divine Sonship and His mediatoral office. It makes little difference whether we construe it in the one way or the other. [‘*The former is the higher and there- fore the better sense. It is good to contemplate the Gospel as that system of truth which the Eternal Logos or Revealer has made known.” Hopes. Yet, it must be said, usage favors the latter acceptation. ‘*The testimony of Christ” is the witness borne concerning Christ by His Apostles of which the New Testamentisthe record, and in this instance by Paul. So Caly., Alf., Stan., Meyer]. ‘That the word μαρτύριον, testimony, and not. διδασκαλία, instruction, is here chosen, does not rest upon a simple Hebraism, but is well explained onthe ground that the gospel has not to do first and primarily with a system of ideas, but with an announcement of facts, the power of which a person must experience in himself.” Neanprr. The same expression occurs in 2 Tim. i. 18.—was confirmed in you.— Others render: ‘was established among you’ (Mark xvi. 20; Rom. xv. 8; Heb. ii. 4), whether it be by signs and miracles or by extraordinary operations of the Gospel.—Riickert: ‘by its ef- fects on you.’ But this neither suits the connec- tion with what precedes, nor what is afterwards (ver. 7) mentioned as the result of it. The for- mer indicates that the testimony of Christ was confirmed in their hearts, inwardly rooted there. And this happens partly through a comprehen- sive knowledge, so that thus the words ‘‘in all knowledge”? would be further illustrated, and partly as its presupposed condition, inasmuch as it is effected by faith, which is the root of all knowledge, and is to be regarded as a becoming fixed and remaining steadfast in the truth. Re- specting their steadfastness in this respect see xvi, 1:2 Cor. i) 24. Ver. 7. The consequence.—So that ye come behind in no gift.—The deep and fixed rooting But the an-| ing of spiritual life, of which he now proceeds ἐσ speak. By “gift” we are to understand a result of the operation of divine grace. Rom. y. 16 expresses by it the work of grace as a whole, Here we are to understand it of the particular operations by which the members of the Church were variously qualified to labor for the edifica- tion of the body of Christ, either by instruction, or exhortation, or rule, or service, inasmuch ag the native talents of individuals requisite for such labors are awakened and sanctified by di- vine grace (comp. xii.). When such talents fall within the sphere of moral effort, and are ex- ercised in furthering the welfare of the Church and in glorifying God, they acquire an ethical character, and the gifts appear as Christian vir- tues. That such were the gifts alluded to seemg to be intimated in what follows—Waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ.— This constant expectation of our Lord’s second coming (Rom. viii. 19 ete.), when He shall be re- vealed in his glory unto all (Col. iii. 4), is one of the characteristic features of primitive Chris- tianity (comp. Phil. iii. 20; 1 Thess. i. 10; Tit. ii. 18; 2 Tim. iv. 8). Hence the clause has been taken as a simple paraphrase of the word: Christians. But this is by no means allowable here.—The connection of this participial clause with the preceding one has been variously inter- preted. Luther somewhat loosely: ‘And are waiting,” ‘‘only waiting” in the sense, that they were all ready; in which sense we might trans-_ late it: ‘And can wait” or: ‘can comfortably wait;” But this would conflict with the entire contents of the Epistle. To take it as ironical, (Mosheim) in the way of a slant at their self- sufficiency, would be inconsistent with the friendly winning style of the introduction. And ~ no less so, to suppose that he intended to alarm, by the suggestion of a coming judgment (Chrysos- tom), or to rebuke the sceptics of whom mention is made in chap. xv. More correct it would be, undoubtedly, to adopt the closer connection and translate: ‘while ye are waiting,” or, ‘ye who are expecting,” etc. The train of thought is this, that they, in this state of waiting, did not cease to make advances in every Christian quali- fication. So considered, the fact of ‘not coming behind” obtains the sense of: not falling short from any lack of earnest moral endeavor. There was a self-cultivation on the part of the spiritually quickened in consequence of their establishment in the faith (ver. 6). [But it must be added also that in the very mention of their waiting atti- tude, a commendation is intended. For this very ‘‘ waiting,” as Alford well says, was ‘‘the great- est proof of maturity and richness of the spiritual life; implying the coéxistence and coéperation of faith, whereby they believed the promise of Christ—hope, whereby they looked on to its ful- filment, and love, whereby that anticipation was lit up with earnest desire.” But it may be asked, Were the Corinthians looking for Christ’s second advent. as an event likely to oceur in their day, and which some of them might expect to witness? This question must be answered in the affirma- tive. As Trench has well remarked, “It is a necessary element of the doctrine concerning the second coming of Christ, that it should be possi- ee ee CHAP. I. 4-9. 25 ble at any time.” And all the hints given us throughout the Epistles (comp. 1 Thess. iv. 13— νον Phil ms 2055 Wit a 18.. 2 Tim. iv8) show that the hope of seeing Christ appear; while yet in the flesh, was an influential and inspiring sentiment, pervading the whole early Church. It was a powerful motive to watchfulness and patient endurance. And that it should so operate was one design of the secrecy which veiled it. ‘Tatet ultimus dies, ut observetur omnes dies” (Aug.). That such was the case with the Cor- inthians seems to be intimated in the use of the word expressive of their mental attitude, aexde vo μένους: waiting it out, as persons expecting to see what they are waiting for ].* The earnest endeavor of the Church (or at least its better portion, its kernel) just recognized, leads the Apostle, in spite of all existing defects in individuals, to cherish the hope which he ex- presses in Ver. 8. Who shall also confirm you.—To whom does the relative ‘‘who” refer? Most ᾿ naturally to Christ, mentioned just before in ver. Lod 7. But in this case it is remarkable that in the next clause instead of saying ‘‘in His day,” he uses again the whole name and title of Christ. Hence the ‘“‘who” might be referred back to “God” (ver. 9), whose gracious doings are spoken of in vy. 5 and 6, and to whom the con- firmation in the faith is ascribed (2 Cor. i. 21; Rom. xvi. 25). The effect then of the Divine confirmation of the testimony of Christ in them would be regarded as awakening the hope also that God would establish them still further.+ The reference however to Christ must still be maintained. The use of the full phrase “in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ,’’ must be regarded only as the adoption of a solemn formula, else- where also employed, to designate the time of the second advent (comp. 2 Tim. i. 18). In 2 Thess. “iil. 8 we have likewise the work of confirming believers ascribed to Christ. And this is men- tioned here in correspondence with what is said of their not coming behind in any gift and of their patient waiting. It involves also what follows.—Unto the end.—. e., as the con- nection requires, not the end of the present life of individuals, but the end of the present dis- pensation, which terminates at the second ad- vent, when the new era (αἰὼν μέλλων) will come in. —‘' Blameless.’’—A short constructio pregnans --οἰς τὸ εἶναι ὑμᾶς: that ye may be, [which is supplied inthe E.V. <‘‘Compare the expressions διδάσκειν σοφὸν, αὐξάνειν μέγαν, to teach a man so as to become wise, to increase him so as to be [* Neander believed that in the minds of the Apostles, es- pecially in Paul, a progressive development in Eschatology took place. The second advent at first seemed close at hand and possible in their day, but as they became more enlight- ened as to the future by the illuminations of the Spirit, it stood at a farther remove. Neander “Plant and ‘Train, of the Christian Church,” p. 484.] + [The reasons for referring “ Who” to God, ver. 4, are well given by Stanley “1. καὶ βεβαιώσει: also confirm, evidently refers back to ἐβεβαιώθη: was confirmed, in ver.6.” 2. “In the day of the Lord Jesus Christ,” would else be: “in His day.” 3.0 θεός ; Godis the general subject of the whole sentence, and therefore repeated in ver. 9. “God is faithful. For the sense comp. Phil i. 6.” To these may be added a 4. from Hodge : “ vocation and perseverance are in the work of redemption specially referred to the Father.” The same position is taken by Calvin, Alford, Bill- roth, Olshausen, de Wette, Osiander and others.} great; Kiihner, 3417, 8. This is called by gram: marians a proleptic use of the adjective.”” Words. See Winer, Gram. Part 111. 3 lxvi. 8. g.]. By the term ‘blameless’ we understand such as are liable to no accusation; and this not simply putatively, but, since he is speaking of their condition at the appearing of Christ, in the sense of an actual or perfected holiness, so that the All-seeing Judge Himself will have nothing to lay to their charge (comp. Eph. v. 27). Meyer. ‘This blamelessness is conditioned upon perseverance in the faith by which our justification is appro- priated, and therefore is imputed; nevertheless by virtue of the moral nature and power of faith, as well as by virtue of the sanctification through the Holy Ghost, it is entirely of a moral nature (Rom. vi. 1 ff.; viii. 1 ff.). Hence the per- son who is ἀνέγκλητος: blameless, appears at the revelation of Christ not indeed as ἀναμάρτητος: sinless, but as a ‘‘new creature in Christ” (2 Cor. γ. 17) who having been Divinely restored (Eph. ii. 10) and progressively sanctified (1 Thess. v. 23) has worked out his own salvation in the moral power of a new life (Phil. 11, 12). [But here a question arises. Is this promise absolute or conditional? Conybeare and Howson add the gloss, ‘‘He will do His part to confirm you.” Hammond puts in the qualification, ‘“‘God will make good His promise if you do not fail your- selves.” A. Clark inquires ‘‘But can it be said that God will keep what is either not intrusted to Him? or, after being intrusted, is taken away?” But such limitations seem to take from the promise its blessedness and comfort, for if this promise be of any value, it is the fact that it furnishes a guarantee against that greatest of dan- gers, the ficklenzss of the human will. It is in view of this danger, so manifest in the Corinthi- ans, that Paul expresses his assurance of their steadfastness as grounded in the confirming grace of God. It were better therefore to take the promise absolutely. ‘Those to whom God gives the renewing influence of the Spirit, He thereby pledges himself to save; for the ‘first fruits of the spirit’ are of the nature of a pledge.”’ Hodge. } Ver. 9. Refers the hope expressed in ver. 8 to its deepest ground.—God is faithful.—He will not drop the work He has begun after the fashion of weak inconstant men; but persevering in love He will carry out that which was commenced in love, even unto its goal. (Comp. Phil. i. 6; 1 Thess. v. 24; 2 Thess. iii. 3; Rom. xi. 29)— [‘‘Here, on this fidelity of God, and not on the strength of the believers’ purpose to persevere, nor on any assumption that the principle of religion in their hearts was indestructible, was the con- fidence of the Apostle in their steadfastness grounded.” Hodge. This faithfulness of God is pledged in three directions: 1. to Himself in the purpose formed; 2. to Christ in the covenant made with Him, Is. liii.; and 3. to believers]. —Through whom.—dvd ov: a popular ex- pression. We.can speak of God as a media- ting as well as a principal cause. (Rom. xi. 36). His Providence it is that through a great variety of arrangements and codperating circumstances mediates the call, viz., the presentation of the Gospel to them, and also its effect in their hearts. —Ye were called unto the fellowship of His Son, &c.—This calling of God is the com- 6 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. mencement of His work. Its goal is a participa- tion as a son in the glory of his Lord (Comp. Rom. viii. 21, 23; 2 Thess. ii. 14). The fellow- ship with Jesus Christ embraces our entire con- dition, into which we are transferred through the power of the word when heard and received, and through the sacraments, extending from childhood on until we come into the inheritance of the glory which is to be revealed in Him and in us also.”’ Burger. But does not ver. 9 compel us to take God as the subject in ver. 8? [Certainly; one would sup- pose so]. By no means [!j. The truth of God is a pledge that Christ will confirm us. For it is precisely because we have been called through the unchangeable loving will of the Father to have part in Him, the glorified Son of God, and therefore to be made conformable unto Him that He whose will is ever one with the Father can do no other than confirm us. [Rather far fetched]. DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. That Jesus Christ is the living sanctuary, whence all the manifestations of Divine grace are made, and all gifts are imparted, rests upon the character of His person. In Him it pleased God that all fulness should dwell—yea, that the ful- ness of the Godhead should dwell in Him bodily (Col. i. 19; ii. 9). From this it follows that believers are complete in Him. (Col. ii. 10). 2. The actual participation in this fulness is conditioned on the confirmation of this ‘‘testi- mony of Christ” in the heart through a lively faith, which involves a union with Christ and results in energetic endeavors, awakened in prospect of Christ’s glorious advent, to be be- hind in no gift, in order that the Church of Christ may become a well-equipped organic whole, and so ripen on to perfection. 3. To this actual confirmation of the truth in the heart there corresponds the work of Christ, resting upon the faithfulness of God who has called us unto the fellowship of His Son, for the confirmation of His own unto the end that they may be found blameless at His appearing, and prepared to participate in His glory as a bride adorned for the bridegroom (Rey. xxi. 2, 9; comp. 2 Cor. xi. 2; Col. i. 12). 4. The nature of the believers’ calling: 1. As to its condition. It is a fellowship with Christ through faith in character, in sufferings, and in glory. 2. As to its permanence, endurance unto the end; kept by the power of a faithful God. 8. As to its activity, a cultivation of Divine gifts in the service of Christ. ] —s [5. The second advent of Christ is possible for any generation, and ought constantly to be looked for, desired and prayed for. ] HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 1. A proper joy at the prosperity of a church: a, expresses itself in thanks to God, (ver. 4); ὃ. is occasioned by the grace of God manifested ἐς it in Jesus Christ; [c. and should fill every min- ister’s heart even as it did Paul’s, compensating him for all the toil and suffering of his minis- try]. 2. The wealth of a church in doctrine, [or ut- terance] and knowledge, a. has its ground in Christ, (ver. 5); ὁ. is obtained through the con- firmation of his testimony in it. 3. The right waiting for the coming of Christ allows us to remain neither idle nor unfruitful, but inspires us with an earnest zeal constantly to appropriate and improve every spiritual gift. 4. Our hope for the perfection of Christians is our confidence in Christ [or God], who will con- firm them blameless unto the end, and it ig founded upon the faithfulness of God who has called us to the fellowship of His Son. (ver. 9.) [5. The test of a true or false Christian is his waiting for or dreading the revelation of Christ. Bengel]. Heusner: Ver. 4: 1. Gratitude is something more than prayer. He who does nothing but al- ways pray, is and appears ever unsatisfied. 2, God must become our God, 7. e., we should not only acknowledge Him as God in general, but we should also recognize Him as our own God from all the experiences of life. Thisis true egotism, 8, A teacher has no blessing except what comes from God. Ver. 5: 1. Wealth in that which is needful for salvation is true permanent wealth, 2. The amount the Apostles accomplished in their churches ought to shame us. They were obliged to quarry their churches out of the rough rock. We find Christians ready made to our hand, yet how little we achieve. Ver. 7: Christian life in a church is to be known by the awakening of all good Christian energies. Every one should be ready to serve the holy cause of Christ with his gift. Wer. 8: Unblamableness at Christ’s judgment should be the goal of a Christian. [Ver. 4. There is a bright side even to the most disheartening circumstances of the church. It is our duty to consider these first and take courage]. ὶ [Vers. 4-9, The rebukes of a minister, when steeped in love and prefaced by commendation descend like an excellent oil that doth not break the head]. CHAP. I. 10-17. 27 10 11 SECOND DIVISION. REPROOF OF DEFECTS AND FAULTS. I. Exhortation to unity and rebuke of party spirit. CuapTER I. 10-17. Now [But‘] I beseech [exhort?] you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus: Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and chat there be no divisions among you; but [rather*] that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind [γνώμῃ sentiment] and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which [who] are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among, you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos;. I thank God that I baptized! 12 13 and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified fort you?’ 14 or were ye baptized in [into: εἰς] the name of Paul? 15 none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any [In order that no one*] should say 17 that [ had baptized in [ye were baptized into®] mine own name. And [I baptized! also the household of Stephanas; besides I know not whether I baptized any other.. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: 1 Ver. 10.—[“dé: but, introduces a contrast to the thankful assurance just expressed.”—Alf.] 2 Ver. 10.---ἰφἰπαρακαλῶ ; “obsecro—a mixture of entreaty and command.”’—Stanley. | 3 Ver. 10.---ἰ δὲ: but rather.—Hartung, Parlikellcher, i. 171.] £Ver.13.—[“ Instead ot ὑπὲρ some MSS. B. D.* have περὶ, but ὑπὲρ isin A. C. D.***E. Ἐς G. I. andsalso in Cod. Sin?” -—Words.] 5 Ver. 15.—[tva μή τις εἴπῃ; ἵνα carries here a telic force.] 6 Ver. 15.—Instead of ἐβάπτισα, which is to be accounted for from its occurring in the next verse, Lachmann and: Tischendorf [and Alford and Wordsworth] in accordance with the best authorities read ἐβαπτίσθητε. EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. The connection may be understood thus: I thank my God for his work of grace among you, and in view of his faithfulness am confident that the work, Christ [or God’s] has begun, he will perfect. You, nevertheless, I exhort, that ye consider carefully what is required for the fulfil- ment of this work, and remove whatsoever shall hinder it. Ver. 1. The Exhortation—I exhort you brethren.—A friendly, winning address, which, as an evidence of his fellowship in the faith and his equality with them in it, imparts to his exhor- tation the character of an entreaty. This is also implied in the Greek παρακαλῶ. ‘Paul often adds the term: brother, when he has an earnest word to utter.” (vii. 29; x.1; xiv. 20). Meyer. The de: but, introduces the transition from his exhibition of the bright side of the church to the reproof of its dark side. It is asif he said: “For much in you I have to thank God, but there is much in you which I have to censure.” Neanver.—By the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.—It is thus he strengthens his exhorta- tion and presents a motive for compliance.— [‘‘The name of Christ was the bond of union and the most holy thing by which they could be adjured.”’ Stantey.]. The force of it lay in this, that they all acknowledged Jesus Christ to be their Lord, and so professed themselves to belong to one and the same Master; and in this the obligation to unity was unmistakably indicated. Similar instances are found in Rom. xv. 30; xii. 1; 2 Cor. x. 1.—The contents and aim of the exhortation are expressed in the several clauses: which set forth the same leading thoughts in: several relations [and they are introduced by iva: in order that, which points not only to the import: but also to the intent of the exhortation. See WineER, ti. 6.]—That ye all speak the same thing.—By this he means: give expression to their inward accord and harmony of sentiment. It is precisely the opposite of the conduct men- tioned in νυ. 12. They were with one voice to: avow their allegiance to the one Lord, to the ex-. clusion of all divisive party-watchwords. This. is obvious from the following negative clause— that there be no divisions among you.— Inasmuch as he is not treating here of ‘“dissen- tions in doctrine, but of divisions arising from adherence to different leaders, and from peculiar. modes of apprehending and applying doctrine,” we are not to regard him as insisting upon ‘an. exact uniformity of profession in the essential points of doctrine and life.” [The word used. for divisions is σχίσματα, lit.: schisms. These, “in their ecclesiastical sense, are unauthorized: separations from the church. But those which. existed at Corinth were not of the nature of hostile sects refusing communion witb each other, but such as may exist in the bosom of the same church, consisting in alienation of feeling and party strifes.”’ Hopcr.]—But rather that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.—tThe in- ward positive side implied in the previous nega- tive one. [The original word for ‘joined to- gether” is from καταρτίζειν : to repair, to mend, to reunite and make perfect what has been broken. It were natural therefore to suppose an allusion 38 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. here to the broken condition of the church which needed to be reunited and to translate the word as in the text literally. So Alf. and Hodge and Stanley, who says that ““καταρτιστήρ was the acknowledged phrase in classical Greek for a reconciler of factions.’ Calvin takes the word to signify: ‘‘fitly joined together, just as the members of the human body are joined in most admirable symmetry,”’ thus furnishing a picture of what the church should be. Kling however, following the Vulgate and Theoph. prefers the derivative sense of: perfect, and makes it— τέλειοι. That wherein they were to be united is given in two words νοῦς and γνώμη. The for- mer ‘embraces that peculiar mode of thought and of viewing life which lays the foundations for the moral judgment and moral self-determi- nation. Soin1 Tim. vi. 5; 2 Tim. iii. 8. Comp. Brox, Bibl. Seelenlehre, 3 51; Detirzscu, Bibl. Psychol. ἢ 189. The latter is power of knowledge, understanding, spirit, also sense, disposition, as well as insight obtained, view, opinion, conviction, also resolve, design, aim; view expressed—counsel, proposition. The two must here be distin- guished. Only it cannot be readily decided which denotes the side of thought and judg- ment, and which that of will and disposition. Since, however, γνώμη is used elsewhere in this Epistle to signify wew, and counsel (see vii. 25, 40, also 2 Cor. viii. 10), perhaps it would be best to take it here also in a theoretic acceptation— view, conviction. [‘‘In the New Testament it always means judgment and opinion. When the two words are used together, the former is most naturally understood of feeling, a sense in which the word mind is often used by us.” Honpae. ‘Disposition and opinion.” AtLrorp]. Ver. 11. Explains the occasion and motives for the exhortation, while the disgrace of it is softened by the fraternal address.—For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them of Chloe.—Sad reports had reached him, and he names his authorities inadvance. What relation these persons sustained to Chloe, whether children, or servants, or other members of her -household, cannot be ascertained from the text, ‘‘Paul names his informants without reserve in order to obviate suspicion.” Brssrr. ‘‘Conceal- ment and mystery sow distrust and destroy love.” Burarer. This Chloe must at all events have been a woman well known to the Corinthian brethren, either as a resident at Corinth, so that her people had come from thence to Corinth, or as a resident at Ephesus, so that these persons had learned of the state of things at Corinth during a visit there.—-that there are con- tentions among σου. -- ἔριδες: discords, wranglings, which would inevitably lead to sepa- rations, to a rent in the Church, if not arrested in season. [Here he sets forth in severer phrase what he had more gently intimated in the word ‘schisms’? above, and shows its evil and bitter character. ] Ver. 12. Fuller explanation. Now this I -‘mean.—roivro: this, as commonly, points to -what follows, (vii. 29; xv. 50), not to what pre- cedes. That every one of you saith: ({.6.} has one or other of the following speeches in his brachilogy here. In these four statements Paul intended to comprehend all the declarations current in the chapter regarding religious parti- sanship. Each adherent of the respective sections used one of the following expressions”’]. ‘‘Saitk boastfully.” Benaren. He here vividly sets before us the several partisans, as they step out side by side, or in opposing ranks, each announcing the name of the leader he followed. It is asif he saw or heard them thus arraying themselves “As they were wont to do at the school, so here they acted in the Church.” Brssrr.—I am of Paul,—(i.¢.) I belong to him as my head or spiritual father. The Genitive of ownership or dependence. The order of mention is most readily explained by supposing it to correspond with that of the rise of the parties. According to Neanper, Paul follows the order of particular relationship, since the Apollos-party was only a fraction ofthe Pauline. The idea of a climax (Ben- GEL), Paul in his humiliation putting himself at the bottom, is superfluous and improbable. Al- together groundless, however, and without any indication in its favor, yea, directly contrary to ver. 14, is the opinion of the old expositors, that Paul used these names at random by way of a cover to the real leaders whom he had in mind. See the statement made respecting these parties and their rise in 32 of the Introduction. The Pauline party naturally stands first, since the Church depended on Paul as its founder, and that portion which clave to Paul and his ways, (after a fraction had defected to Apollos), must beregarded asthe original party.—I of Apollos, —(ashortened form for Apollonius). He was just as little disposed to act the part of leader, as was Paul. This may be seen from the fact that not- withstanding the urgent solicitation of Paul, he positively declined to visit Corinth at that time. This was no doubt with a view to avoid giving any fresh fuel to the strife which had already sprung up. (Comp. iv. 6; xvi. 12). Respecting him see Acts xviii. 24 etc.; xix. 1; also OSIANDER on our passage [and Smirn, Bible Dict.]. That he was a humble man, one who did not pride him- self upon his culture, one of the few ‘wise after the flesh,” who had been early called (i. 26) and ‘had sanctified their science by faith in Christ, to whom they made it subservient,” is clear from his willingness to be instructed by those simple mechanics, Aquila and Priscilla. Far from wishing to outbid Paul for influence and popu- larity, he labored only to confirm believers by a cautious reference to the Prophecies of the Old Testament. We find him once more mentioned commendatorily in Titus iii. 18. Highly proba- ble is the suggestion, first made by Luther, an afterwards ably advocated by Bleek, that he was the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Osi- ander calls this Epistle a most noble monument, both of his genius, which harmoniously combined human culture and Divine illumination, and of his style of doctrine, which was directed mainly to the work of atonement, and to the illustration of the fulfilment of the Old Covenant in the New, &e.—I of Cephas,—(i ¢.) Peter, without doubt, It was his Aramean name, found also at ix. 5; xv. 6; Gal. ii. 9. Whether the party following mouth, A like use of ἕκαστος; every one, ap-| him adopted this name, because they derived it pears in xiv. 26, [Wuver says, “There is no | through Jewish emissaries out of Syria, or be- == ~~), CHAP. I. 10-17. 29 cause it seemed to them more sacred as coming | to refine it by philosophical criticism.’’ ΝΈΑΝ ΕΚ) from the mouth of our Lord (Jno. i. 42), or be- cause the Shibboleth of a vernacular word sounded more imposingly, we are not able to decide. It is more probable that the Jewish name was the more common one with Paul. Only once in Gal. ii. 7 ff, do we find him using the Greek name: Peter.—I of Christ.—As a supplement to what was said in the Introduction on this point, see Meyer in loco. We here give the main particulars. First, according to a fair exegesis it must be maintained that the parties were four in number. Alike needless and inad- missible is the attempt to resolve them, either into two essentially identical pairs (as Baur does, who distinguishes between that ‘‘of Paul” and that ‘‘of Apollos” only in form, and takes that ‘‘of Christ” to be the same as that ‘of Pe- ter,’ which only assumed this cognomen because it deemed a genuine Apostleship dependent on personal connection with Christ, or which, as Beeker thinks, consisted of native Jewish con- verts connected with the Petrinists that had come in from abroad, but had called themselves Christians because they had been converted by Paul and Apollos); or into two main parties: that of the Apostles and that of Christ, the three first adhering to Apostles or Apostolic teachers, and the fourth going back immediately to Christ (as Neander and others do); or into three par- ties, in such a way as either to set that ‘of Christ’? as the only rightly disposed one, in contrast with the others as sectarian, see iii. 23, (as Schott and the Greek expositors) ; or to assign the designation ‘‘of Christ’”’ to the three parties in common who all professed themselves Christ’s, but who desired to have their participation in him regarded as dependent on their connection with this or that teacher (as Rabiger: “I belong indeed to Christ, but itis as a Pauliner and am nevertheless a true Christian’). But Calovius hit the truth long ago, when he said ‘‘even those who called themselves Christians from Christ were guilty of schism, since they separated themselves from the rest in a schismatic spirit and insisted on appropriating this term to them- selves alone.” To this we may add what Flacius writes, ‘¢ Under the pretext of Christ’s name they scorned all teachers and would have nothing to do with them, pretending that they were wise enough for themselves without the aid of other instructors. For there was sin on both sides, either by exalting Church teachers too much or by appreciating them too 11{{16.᾽ As soon as the knowledge of Christ came to be established in the Church, there may have been persons, who, in opposition to an over-estimate of all human instrumentalities, held to an independent Chris- tianity, and so were easily brought to look away from these instrumentalities altogether, and with utter contempt of their worth and authority, fell into the way of asserting their exclusive de- pendence upon Christ, and so, priding themselves on this point, got to regard themselves as his sole genuine disciples, and tried to pass for such. To seek for this class exclusively among Jewish or among Gentile converts (‘‘ the philosophically educated to whom Christ appeared like a second is altogether unwarranted. The few philosophi- cally educated Gentile converts could easily have satisfied themselves with the tendencies of the Apollos party. Nor are we justified in tracing to these the beginning of Gnosticism or Ebionitism, or in charging upon them a looseness in morals and a denial of the doctrine of the resurrection. According to Roman Catholic expositors, the party ‘‘of Apollos’? were in danger of falling into a false spiritualism which volatilized the positive contents of Christianity; the party ‘of Peter” contained the germs of the later sect of Ebionites; and the type of the party of Christ was an ecclesiastical liberalism. Ver. 13. The reproof, in the form of questions which expose the absurdity of the partisanship just charged.—Is Christ divided ?—There is a doubt whether this should be read asa question or as a simple declaration. Meyer and others [likewise Stahley following Lachmann] take it as an emphatic assertion of the lamentable results of the aforenamed divisions: ‘‘Christ has been divided! torn up into various sect-Christs in- stead of being entirely and undividedly the Christ common to all!” Since each of the exclu- sive parties claimed to have him, their conduct was virtually a rending of Christ. But ever since Chrysostom, commentators have generally regarded the words as a question. This would be more conformable to the analogy of the other clauses, and be just as forcible. Besides the subsequent question is of different import, so that it. is not to be expected he would connect the second to the first with an or, as in the case of the third which is but a correlate to the second. This is what Bence means. ‘The cross and baptism claim us for Christ. The correlatives are, redemption and self-consecration.”—To the sound consciousness of a true Christian who knows but one Christ, the bond of universal fel- lowship, such partisanship is a contradiction. It involves a division of Christ against himself, since the parties, who exclude each other, all think to have him. Hence the question, ‘Is Christ divided? Is there a Pauline, an Apollo- nian, a Petrine, a Christian Christ?” Thus we apply the question to all parties alike; and not merely to the fourth, as Baur does, who takes Paul to imply, that the name of Christ employed asa party designation was the most significant evidence, that they, by their sectarianism, had rent Christ in pieces. Every party, he says, must still, as a Christian party, have thought to have Christ. If then there were but one proper Christ-party, it followed that the one Christ, in whom all distinctions ought to vanish, was rent asunder (Tiib. Zeitschrift, 1836, s. 4). It is clear in this case that the clause is not to be taken as a question. Under the term Christ, we are to undertsand not the Church as a mystical body of Christ (Estius, Olsh. ), still less Christian doctrine, the Gospel (Grotius), but the Person of Christ, as the Head of the Church, in opposition to all party leaders. This is evident from the follow- ing questions, in which the exclusive right of Christ as Lord over His redeemed ones, and their obligations to Him as having been baptized into perhaps higher Socrates, and who, despising the | His name, are set forth: Was Paul crucified Apostolic form of the doctrine of Christ, sought | for you?—Lit: Paul surely was not crucified 80 for you; was He? [The question is introduced here with the negative Particle μή. Meyer adduces this as an argument to prove that the pre- vious clause which is without μή, is consequently to be read differently, as a declaration. ‘To this Alford replies, ‘‘that the μή introduces a new form of interrogation respecting a new person, viz. Paul; and that it was natural for solemnity’s sake to express the other question differently. In μεμέρισται ὁ χριστός the majesty of Christ’s person is set against the unworthy insinuation con- veyed in: ‘‘is divided””—in μή Παῦλος ἐσταυρώϑη ὑπερ ὑμῶν, the meanness of the individual Paul is set against the triumph of Divine love implied in ‘‘was crucified for you.” ] With the strictest impartiality, which here appears as the truest prudence, he rebukes first the partisan attach- ment to his own person, and makes those, who set him up as their leader, to feel his painful dis- approval of their course. Such persous while boasting of their connection with him, were as- assigning to him a position which belonged to Christ alone. They were acting on the supposi- tion that he had suffered for them, an act which was the ground of their belonging to Christ, who through His sacrifice for sinners had acquired the right to their undivided devotion (comp. 2 Cor. v. 15). [If (as Socinianism alleges) the suf- ferings of Christ were merely exemplary, there would be no such absurdity or simplicity, as St. Paul here assumes to exist, in comparing the sufferings of Christ to the sufferings of Paul”’ Worps]. To this ground of claim there corres- ponds the question expressing and confirming their personal objection —Or were ye bap- tized unto the name of Paul?—That is: was the name of Paul called over you at your baptism, as though he were the person to whom you pledged yourselves, and in whom ye believed and whom you professed as your Lord and Saviour? This is certainly the sense, although “the baptism into the name” may be regarded primarily as submersion into it as a person’s life- element; so also as an introduction into fellow- ship with the party named as into an essential ground of salvation; or as immersion in reference to him, so that the obligation to profess faith in that which is expressed by the name is indicated (comp. on Matth. xxviii. 19). ‘The fact that Paul puts his name for all the rest proves how ingenuously he was opposed to all this party spi- rit, and how humbly he was anxious that Christ’s name should not be prejudiced through his own” NEANDER. Vers. 14-16. I thank God that I bap- tized none of you.—The Apostle recognizes as a thank-worthy Providence that he had been kept, for the most part, from administering bap- tism, since he had thereby obviated all appear- ance of intention to bind the baptized to his own person, an appearance which certainly would have arisen had he here acted contrary to his usual custom elsewhere ;—but Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, converted through Paul (Acts xviii. 8),—and Gaius, certainly not the one of Derby (Acts xx. 4), but the same as that Gaius mentioned in Rom. xy. 23, a man of distinction, who entertained Paul, and with him the Church, either by furnishing his house as a place for meeting, or by receiving there such of the Church THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. as wished to visit Paul—in order that no one should say—By this is expressed not the design of the Apostle, but the Divine intention in order- ing his conduct in such a way.—While writing he recalls another exception, ‘‘ perhaps from in- formation derived from Stephanas himself, who was with him.”—And I baptized also the household of Stephanas—the family whom in xvi. 15 he calls ‘‘the first fruits of Achaia.” οἶκος includes also the domestics. [‘‘ Under the old dispensation, whenever any one professed Judaism, or entered into covenant with God, ag one of his people, all his children and dependents, that is, all to whom he stood in a representative relation, were included in the covenant, and re- ceived its sign. In like manner, under the Gos- — pel, when a Jew or Gentile joined the Church, his children received baptism and were recog- nized as members of the Christian Church” Hopes]. In order to avoid all blame for want of frankness he adds, besides I know not whether I baptized any other.—[‘ Inspira- tion, although it rendered him infallible, did not make him omniscient’’]. It will be seen that he baptized only the first converts, afterwards, when these multiplied, he transferred the business te helpers, possibly also to deacons, to whose func- tions this in course belonged. In like manner Peter (Acts x. 48). On this point he next pro- ceeds to explain himself more fully by stating the veiw he took of his office. Ver. 17.4 For Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel.—Sent: ἀπέστειλεν ἃ plain allusion here to his of- fice as ἀπόστολος. The appointment to this of- fice did indeed include the work of baptizing (Matth. xxviii. 19). But in Mark xvi. 15, as well as in Luke xxiv. 47; Acts i. 8, and John xy. 27, the work of preaching, of bearing testimony concerning Christ, appears to be the chief calling of an Apostle. And so it was in the calling of Paul (Acts ix. 15; xxii. 15; xxvi. 16-18 comp. Gal. i. 16). The preaching which awakened faith, was the proper entrance upon the work of Christ, who indeed never Himself baptized but only through His disciples (John iv. 2). [**The main thing in the commission was to make dis- ciples. To recognize them as such by baptism, was subordinate, though commanded, and not to be safely neglected. In the Apostolic form of religion, truth stood immeasurably above exter- nal rites. The Apostasy of the Church consisted in making rites more important than the truth” Hopar].—Whether we are to assume here, as Cal- vin does, an ironical hit intended at the opposers, who employed the easier function to gain adhe- rents, may be doubted. The supposition that they did so, is, at least, uncertain. The word εὐαγγελίζεσϑαι: to evangelize, in classic usage, and commonly in the Old Testament, like "\gs*5) employed to denote the announcement of all sorts of good news, is in the New Testament used solely in regard to‘‘the good tidings,” by way of preéminence, the proclamation of salvation in Christ, and the fulfilment of the promises and the perfect revelation of divine grace before pre- pared (Is. xl. 9; 111. 7; Ix. 6; Ixi. 1, &c.—The contrast in ‘ not,’’—‘‘ but,” is not to be weakened into a comparative, ‘“‘not so much as.’’ Baptism CHAP. I. 10.:17α. 81 was not the object of his commission, although it was allowed to him. (Acts ix. 15, 20; xxii. 15; xxvi. 16-18.) DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. The Church is essentially one, as a body subject to Jesus Christ, the one perfect Lord and Head, who has an absolute right over all its members by virtue of His complete self-offering in their behalf, and to whom they are absolutely bound by being taken up into fellowship with Him, as the element of their life and the sole ground of their salvation. It can properly be divided no more than Christ Himself can be divided. [This unity consists of onenesss of sentiment, of conviction and of speech. That is, there must be an inward and an outward unity, an invisible and a visible unity; the former manifesting itself in the later, the latter sus- tained by the former. The pretence of the one is not sufficient without the other.—See this whole matter exhaustively discussed by BAxTEr on “Catholic Unity,” ‘Reasons for Christian Unity and Concord,” ‘The Catholic Church De- scribed,’ Practical Works, vol. iv.; Lirron ““ On the Church of Christ,” B. ii. part ii. chap. 1; Joun M. Mason, Complete Works, vol. ii. p. 265; Emmon’s Works, vol. ii. sec. 13]. 2. All sectarianism arising out of an inordi- nate preference for favorite teachers is a sin. It ruptures this unity by limiting Christ’s right over us and our subjection to Him. It concedes toa mere man, to his peculiar opinions and ways and doctrines, something of that power and impor- tance which belong to Christ alone; inasmuch as it binds men, and would fain bind all, to these objects, as if on these our whole salvation de- pended; causes them to move in these as the very element of their existence; draws to these their entire devotion, and so makes a human personality with all its individuality and singu- larity an essential mediator of spiritual life, which comes alone by truth and grace. 3. The proper view of Christ and of the instru- mentalities He employs in their relation to Him is the true antidote against schismatical ten- dencies. Obrist is the fountain-head of truth and grace, in whom all fulness dwells, and from whom all believers, whether teachers or taught, derive their spiritual excellencies. Where this truth is recognized, there there can be no inordin- ate devotion tohuman agencies. These agencies can be regarded only as the various imperfect rays of the One Light, which, so far from de- taining us by themselves, should conduct us up to the source from whence they stream. Yet just as little does it become us to despise these hu- man agencies, and withdraw into our own par- ticular knowledge and experience of Christ, as though we were sufficient unto ourselves. Ra- ther it must appear to us that, the more super- abundant and glorious the fulness of Christ is, the greater must be the necessity for numerous and manifold vessels to take it up, from various sides and according to their several capacities, and to present it to others in ways suited to their manifold necessities, so that persons shall be most easily led, one through one and another through another, into a participation of the { riches of Christ, according to their several apti- tudes and needs. But the more this is done in truth the more open does a person gradually become to other aspects of Christ and to other organs of His. And this will lead us, on the one hand, to a just estimate of these organs themselves, and, on the other hand, to modesty of deportment and toa loving regard for such as were first led to Christ and edified by this or that teacher. And while the interested adherence to one particular as- pect of Christ leads to a division of the one Christ in our feelings, and then to a rupture of the Church into parties, which deny to each other the full and proper enjoyment of salvation, and shut themselves up against each other in those aspects of the life and character of Christ which have been exhibited to them through the several organs they have chosen, the procedure we have been advocating conducts at last to a perfect unity of conviction and sentiment, which, precluding all division, makes itself known in unity of speech, wherein the manifold voices confessing the one all-embracing, all-sufficing Christ, blend in harmony. This is ἃ catholicity which is to be found as little in Romish Christi- anity as in the coagulations of a Lutheran or Calvanistic specialty. 4. [Sectarianism; its nature and origin; a historical survey of it in its existing aspects]. “The tendency to sectarianism lies in human selfishness and stubbornness of opinion, in con- ceit and egoism. Sectarianism does not con- sist in holding fast to our profession for con- science sake, but in using our own form of doc- trine or religion as a means for exalting ourselves and for ruling over or opposing others. And this is not confined to leaders alone. That sec- tary who does not feel strong or courageous enough to take the lead, will at least join him- self with ambitious devotion to some other per- son better able to do it, in whose honor and glory he may share. But Christianity refuses to be sectarian at all. How then, it may be asked, do existing divisions comport with it? They arise, under the Providence of God, out of the diversity of human opinions. Only, these de- nominations ought not to hate one another, but they ought to plant themselves on the one com- mon ground, Christ, and recognize each other there.—The one Christ can have but one doc- trine and one church. But under the hands of men Christianity disintegrates into parties. From this arises a necessity for our choosing that party which seems to us the purest and most Christian. Parties were unavoidable. God suffered them that they might become instru- mental in exciting Christians to greater zeal, to mutual purification, and to the exercise of kindly forbearance towards each other. Toleration is a word which should not be spoken among Christians; for toleration is a very proud, in- tolerant word.” Heubner. Our confessions (Greek, Romish, Evangelical, with all their divisions) are, on the one hand, (historical necessities; they resulted from the gradual working out of Christian ideas or prin- ciples, such as the Theocratic, the Hierarchical, and the Protestant, which is the principie of free- dom, subject only to the word of God. On the 82 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ----------------------------------ρ----ς-----ς--ς--ς---ς-------.---ς-ς-ς--- gy other hand, they result from the disturbance oc- casioned by sin in the development of Christian truth and life. ‘his is true even in respect to their national forms: the Greek, the Roman, the German, and the mixture of the latter with Ro- man and other elements. Hence the petrifac- tion of the first principle (theocratic) in the Ori- ental Greek Church; of the second (the hierar- chical) in the Occidental Romish Church, so that the third (the Protestant) came to an indepen- dent form in the sphere of German life, differ- encing itself only according to national peculi- arities. In one place there was a rigid adhe- rence to the letter, accompanied with great in- tellectual acumen and force of will; and in another larger freedom prevailed, associated with greater breadth and depth of spirit and sentiment. But on the part of both (the Re- formed and the Lutheran) communions, the in- fluence of the two first principles was again felt, and the result was a stiffening of life and form, which showed itself in the former case in an ever-increasingly superficial adherence to the letter of the Bible, and in the latter case in an externalinduration of a form of doctrine,—which was originally free, and which asserted the free- dom of the religious personality (justification by faith),—until at last in both spheres a false free- dom usurped the throne, a subjectivity emanci- pated from all obligations to the word of God; in other words, rationalism. And now the only proper return to unity can be effected by at- taining unto the knowledge of the truth of the several principles above mentioned, and by fus- ing down in our living consciousness the stiff forms of the past, and with these the truth of all that has been transmitted to us, through a deeper penetration into the word, or rather into Christ Himself, who is the kernel and substance of the written Word; and through a more humble, self-denying appropriation of Him in our lives. Such a return is at the same time an advance towards the true union, which the spirit of God will create by the harmonious combination of diversities. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 1. The Apostolic exhortation to unity, addressed to a church torn by factions, and suited to Chris- tendom at the present time. 1. Its matter: a. To speak the same thing, unity of confession; ὁ. on the ground of unity of sentiment and views. 2. The motive of such unity: the name of our | Lord Jesus Christ; a due regard for the interest | all have in Him according as He has given Him- self to be known, experienced and enjoyed by them (vv. 10-13), 2. The wrong of parties in Christendom; a, so far as they subordinate Christ to human leaders or put these literally into His place; ὁ. so far as they are servilely dependent on such leaders and take pride in them; c. so far as they exclude, scorn and hate each other; d. so far as they boast of their partisanship in vain self-sufficiency, and seek to glorify themselves and their leaders in it (vy. 12,13). 8. The proper conduct of a teacher towards such as are devoted to him: a. that he perpetu- Eph. iv. 2). 10), while he never forgets that he and they alike are indebted to Christ for everything (ν. 13); 6. that he ever keeps in view the main object of hia calling, to preach Christ (vy. 17). Vers. 13, 14. As the Corinthians made ita matter of great moment by whom they were bap- tized, instead of considering into whom they had been baptized, so now multitudes put a greater stress upon the party ly whom they are confirmed, that into what atid to what they are confirmed. (Bibl. Worterd., 11. 3 79.) Starke: Ver.-10. The noblest virtue which can befit Christiansis brotherly union through the bond of love (Col. iii. 14), and this because of Christ’s command (Jno. xiii. 84) and of his prayer (Jno. xvii. 11), after the example of the Apostolie Church (Acts iy. 82) and the manifold exhorta- tions of the Apostles (Phil. ii. 1; 1 Pet. iii. 8; Lange:—The unity of the church is certainly much insisted on and yery important. Yet we must take care not to prescribe one for another a form or a name according to our own opinions, especially in incidentals which do not belong to the fundamentals of faith. In these respects there must be variety of judgment. It is enough if we agree in all matters essential to salvation. Herp. (vy. 11):—Whatashame! Rend- ing asunder the body of Christ! _Who perpe- trates the mischief? Not the peacemakers, not the confessors and friends of Christ, but the zealots without knowledge; those who love profane and vain babblings; impure spirits who preach Christ of contention. O man, study the precept which inculeates the restoration of the erring in a spirit of meekness (Gal. vi. 1) and exercise thyself therein. believe every report, but should ascertain facts before they reprove. To give information at proper quarters from a desire to effect reform is no sin; only let care be taken not to exaggerate. Ver. 12.—Honor is due to ministers, but they must not be served as lords. To call oneself Lutheran by way of distinction from the Papists or those belonging to other denominations, with- out adhering to Luther as authority, is not im- proper; but to do this in a sectarian spirit is just as wrong as it was for the Corinthians to say, ‘Tam of Paul.” Ver. 13.—The death of Christ is alone meritorious; no saint can merit any- thing for himself, much less have his merits imputed to others. Vers. 14, 15.—The care of God’s Providence over us can best be recognized in the issues of events, which is then to be ac- knowledged with reverence and gratitude even in the smallest particulars. - Ver. 10. Burcer: ‘Speak the same thing ;” unnecessary, capricious deviation from the estas blished forms of doctrine is a violation of the spirit of unity and love. [‘‘There are many sore divisions at this day in the world among and between the professors of the Christian religion, both about the doctrine and worship of the Gospel, as also the discipline thereof. That these divisions are evil in them- selves and the cause of great evils, hinderances of the Gospel, and all the effects thereof in the world, is acknowledged by all; and it is doubt. less a thing to be greatly lamented that the genes rality of those who are called Christians are ally points them away from himself to Christ (vy. | departed from the great rule of ‘keeping the Ver. 11.—Teachers should not © CHAP. I. 17-25. 33 unity of the spirit in the bond of peace.’ He who doth not pray always, who is not ready with his utmost endeavor to remedy this evil, to re- move this great obstruction of the benefit of the Gospel is scarce worthy the name of a Christian.” JoHN OWEN. | [Ver. 13. Carvin: ‘Paul crucified for you!” —This passage militates against the wicked con- trivance of Papists by which they attempt to bolster up their system of indulgences. For itis from the blood of Christ and the martyrs that they make up that imaginary treasure of the church which they pretend is dealt out by means of II. indulgences. Here, however, Paul in strong terms denies that any one but Christ has been crucified for us. The martyrs, it is true, died for our benefit, but (as Leo* observes) it was to furnish an example of perseverance, not to pro- cure for us gifts of righteousness.’’ ] Vers. 14-17. [If the doctrine of baptismal regeneration be correct, Paul was instrumental in saving but few souls. Certainly the commis- sion of modern Romish missionary seems to read the reverse of St. Paul’s. He is sent te baptize, not to preach the Gospel. ] THE TRUE METHOD OF PREACHING. A. Repugnant to the predelictions of both Greeks and Jews. CuAPTER. I. 17-25. 17 18 of none effect. Not with [in ἐν] wisdom of words, [discourse"] lest the cross of Christ should be made For the preaching [discourse] of the cross is to them that perish, 19 foolishness; but unto us which are saved, it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where 7s the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this? world [the world]? For after that [since]’ in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching* to save them that believe. For [since both] the [om. the] Jews require a sign, [signs ]* and the [om. the] Greeks seek after wisdom: But we [on the contrary]’ preach Christ crucified, unto the [om. the] Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the [om. the] Greeks [Gentiles ἔϑνεσι]" foolishness; But unto them which are called, [these, the called]® both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser 20 21 22 23 24 25 than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. 1 Ver. 17.—[év σόφίᾳ λόγου might be rendered: in philosophic discourse. ] 2 Ver. 20.—The τούτου of the received text is undoubtedly transferred from the preceding. dorf reject it according to the best authorities. 3 Ver, 21.—[émevdy is not temporal but illative—Alf.] Lachmann and Tischen- 4 Ver. 21.--- [κηρύγματος : passive noun, the thing preached both in contents and in form.] 5 Ver. 22.---ἐπειδή καὶ. it may be rendered: “ For both,” but Kling translates as above.] 6 Ver. 22.—The plural σημεῖα is better attested: whether it is internally the more probable may be doubted. 7 Ver. 23.—{6é after ἐπειδή expresses contrariety.] 8 Ver. 28.---ἔθνεσι is decidedly better attested than the received” Ἕλλησι which arose out of vers. 22and 24. 9 Ver. 24.—[“‘ avrots δὲ τοῖς κλητοῖς ; the αὐτοῖς serves to identify the called with the believers, ver. 21.”—Alf.] EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. [ The connection.—From the mention of his com- mission, especially to preach the Gospel, the Apostle takes occasion, as it were incidentally, to set forth the manner in which this work was tobedone. The topic thus introduced has how- ever a direct bearing upon the previous one, for he handles it in a way both to vindicate his own course to which some had taken exception, and also to rebuke those tendencies, which, in their antagonism to a pure Gospel, had engendered contention and schism. ΟΥ̓ the mode of transi- tion to this theme Bengel remarks: “1 doubt whether it would be approved by the rules of Corinthian eloquence. Therefore the Apostle in this very passage is furnishing a specimen, so to speak, of apostolic folly, and yet the whole is arranged with the greatest wisdom.”’ ] Vers. 17-21. [The proper mode of preaching described first negatively].—Not in wisdom of speech.—oix« ἐν σοφίᾳ λόγου. It is better to join this clause to the word ‘“‘ preach”’ just pre- ceding, than to the main statement ‘Christ sent me.’ [As to the meaning there are three dis- tinct interpretations. 1. That of Calvin and others, who place the stress on ‘‘speech,” and understand by the phrase ornate and artificial discourse in contrast with plain homely speech. The objection to this is that it fails to give due weight to the word ‘‘ wisdom,” which is used by the Apostle in a strict sense throughout the chapter, and is the special object of his animad- * Leo the great ad Palestinos, Ep. 81. See the passage cited in full, Calvin’s Inst. (Lib. III. cap. v. Ὁ 1.). 84 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. version. 2. That of Olshausen, who takes it to denote ‘‘ word-wisdom,”’ ἡ 6., “ἃ wisdom in ap- pearance and not in reality,” an interpretation which de Wette justly styles ‘‘sonderbar.” ὃ. That of Storr and Flatt, de Wette and Hodge, who, taking the emphasis to be on “" wisdom,” and understanding it of the sudject-matter, suppose the Apostle to be repudiating here all connec- tion with heathen philosophy. But to this it may be replied that such repudiation was wholly gratuitous, for no one would imagine that in preaching the Gospel he would be likely to em- ploy the speculations of a secular wisdom. 4. That of Meyer and Kling, who while empha- sizing ‘‘ wisdom,” understand it as referring to the form of discourse. According to this, what the Apostle asserts is that he was ποῦ to preach the Gospel in a philosophical manner, making it a matter of science rather than a vital power for the heart and conscience. In such a case the Genitive would be used analogously to the He- brew construction, where the first noun in con- struction qualifies the second. Hence ‘wisdom of discourse’? would be=philosophic discourse. See Nordheimer Heb. Grammar B. III. ch. v. 4 801. 2.] So Neander ‘‘ Σοφία Adyou=ocogia ἐν τῷ λέγειν, not wisdom absolutely, but the wisdom of dialectic demonstration.”’ Indeed it is not to be denied that in the course of this paragraph both σοφία and λόγος are used also in relation to the subject matter, and that this is always more or less affected by the mode of exposition. Un- questionably it makes a difference whether the subject matter is first vitally apprehended by the spirit and then creates its own form of expres- sion for itself, or whether a form foreign and unsuitable is forced upon it, drawn from other spheres of life and thought; in other words whether the Gospel is proclaimed naturally in its divine excellence and simplicity, or whether, taken up under the conceptions of an alien phil- osophy, and arrayed in the rhetoric and dia- lectics of a people still unsanctified (like the Greeks for example), it be thus presented to the mind. An instance of the latter kind occurred not only in the Gnosis of the heretics, but also to a certain degree in that of the Alexandrian Church of a later period. And probably it was with an eye to the beginning of such a tendency in the party of Apollos that the Apostle affirmed that, according to the will of the Great Commis- sioner, it devolved on him not to preach the Gos- pel ‘‘in wisdom of speech.” And the expres- sion means nothing else than: not in the style of a philosopher trained in the rhetoric and dialec- tics of the schools, [but in that of a witness, bearing testimony to the great facts in and through which God had chosen to reveal him- self. The reason for this was], lest the Cross of Christ be made of none effect.— Kevorty7, become empty, void; here according to the connection: be robbed of its power and influence. By ‘the Cross of Christ” we under- stand that death of Christ upon the cross by which we are redeemed and reconciled to God. This is the centre and kernel of all Gospel preaching, by the power of which sinners are delivered from the tyranny of sin, and restored to a new and divine life. And this cross, he says, would be bereft of all efficiency for such ~ results were it set forth in the forms of philoso phy, inasmuch as in this way it would serve only to call out the assent of the intellect or awaken an aesthetic pleasure, while the flesh, that is, the corrupt natural life of the selfish heart, would remain unaffected. But let the cross only be held up before that heart in its di- vine simplicity, and it would then display an energy destructive of this life. Through it the flesh with its affections and lusts would be eru- cified. (Gal. vy. 24). But although this blessed result is obtained by means of preaching or doc- trine, yet it does not follow from this that we are to make ‘‘the cross” here equivalent to “the doctrine of the cross, or to the doctrine of Christ crucified.”” Rather the relation which this clause sustains to the foregoing implies that here we are to understand the simple fact itself held up in its own native majesty and power. [Whatever ob- scures or diverts attention from this deprives it to that extent of its power]. Ver. 18. [The position thus taken he pro- ceeds to explain and substantiate from obvious facts.—For the preaching (lit: word λόγος) of the cross is to them that perish folly, but to those that are saved, ourselves, it is the power of God.—Here the force of the ar- gument is to be found in the second member of the antithesis. The first is introduced merely as a concession to a supposed objection. The Co- rinthians might retort, ‘‘The cross of Christ rendered without effect by wisdom of speech! Why, your method of preaching is not half so taking and effectual as the one you denounce.” This the Apostle concedes, but limits its applica- bility only to a certain class, to those who are in the way of sin and are going to destruction. ‘These,’ he says, ‘are blind. They have no sense of sin, and’see not therefore the wisdom of the cross. To them it is folly. But while to them I acknowledged it is such as you say, yet to those who are in the way of salvation, the cross is a thing of power. They see its meaning. They feel its disenthralling and life-giving influ- ences. And’ it is by what you see of its effect among these that you must judge of it”]. Ac- cordingly that to which this divine power is as- cribed, ‘‘the word of the cross,”’ must be regarded as Gospel-preaching in its simplest and most unadorned style, the earnest exhibition of the great act of redeeming love directly to the heart, without human accessories. It is not the doctrine about the cross, but the word which presents the cross itself in its concrete form and in its plain and pungent application to human conditions. It is of this he predicates a divine power. But this power is manifested only among such as are saved—a thought which is brightened by the foregoing contrast. In both clauses the sign of the Dative ‘‘to” means “in their judgment.” But in the one case it is a judgment proceeding from a blinded mind, in the other a judgment founded upon blessed experience. In reference to the first see 2 Cor. iv. 8, 4; to both 2 Cor. ii. 15,16. To the former it seems absurd to have the fact of Christ’s death nakedly held before them as the ground of all salvation—to hear a voice from the cross calling unto them ‘Look unto me and be saved,” because they see no ra- tional connection between cause and effect here. ~ CHAP. I. 17-25. These are ‘the lost,” ὦ ¢., they are excluded from all participation in the blessedness and glory of God’s kingdom, and are doomed to bit- ter anguish and disgrace. (See 2 Thess. i. 9; Rev. xxi. 8; xxii. 15; Mark ix. 43). In con- trast with this appears the state of salvation, that is, a deliverance from this doom, (see Luke vi. 9; Matth. xviii. 11; Jas. iv. 12) which in- cludes also a share in the blessedness and glory of God’s kingdom. (Comp. 2 Tim. iv. 18; Rom. v. 10;: viii. 24). There are here, then, two classes of persons contrasted in relation to their final lot. For the purpose of designating them P. uses the present participles (aToAAmuévorc --σωζομένοις) as the ones best sui ἃ, since time is not taken into account. It is) aerefore not ‘“‘the present for the future” fo/ jhe pur- pose of indicating the certainty of the{/ contem- plated, nor yet does the present} note the progressive development in the cond )η of the parties. Nor yet would it be in place here to introduce the idea of predestination, as Riickert does, taking the terms to denote the divinely ap- pointed destiny of two classes, for with Paul this idea never occurs in any such way as to exclude the idea of a free self-determination, (comp. 2 Thess. ii. 10; Acts xiii. 46) since to all pro- founder contemplation the work of God and the act of man in the genesis and development of faith are inseparably one. ‘This only must be con- ceded that the Apostle’s mode of expression is grounded upon a τρόπος παιδείας ; a mode of teach- Ing peculiar to him. Paul delights to refer back everything at once to the divine superintendence. Only in this reference the human receptivity or non-receptivity is at the same time in- cluded.” Neanper. On ‘the power of God” see Rom. i. 6 where the Gospel is said to be ‘the power of God to every one that believeth.”” The contrast between ‘‘folly” and ‘‘power’”’ is cer- tainly not a strict one, but nevertheless a true one. As the former implies that the Gospel is, according to the judgment of those that perish, a weak thing, so does the latter imply that it is to the others, a manifestation of divine wisdom; or, as the idea of folly excludes that of power, so does the idea of power presuppose that of wis- dom. Ver. 19. Confirmation adduced from Scripture. “For it is written [‘‘This formula with its following citations is found only in those Epistles of Paul which were addressed to churches in which there was a large admixture of Jewish converts. It does not occur in those written to the Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philip- pians, which were composed almost entirely of Gentile converts. This coincidence between the History in Acts and the character of the Epistles is evidence of the genuineness of both.” Worps.] I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and bring to naught the prudence of the prudent.’’—This Divine declarationis taken from a prophecy of Isaiah, which culminates in an announcement of salvation through the Mes- siah (Is. xxix. 14, comp. ver. 17 ff.), and, as the result and penalty of the hypocritical conduct of the Jewish people, proclaims the downfall of the wisdom of their wise ones and the vanishing of the understanding of the prudent, so that this wisdom and understanding should contribute 88 -----...... nothing towards their deliverance in the day of evil. This judicial threatening on the part of God was incontrovertibly fulfilled in the times of the New Testament. The wisdom of the un- godly proves unfit for apprehending the Gospel- salvation. In reference to this it loses all its availability and appears as nothing worth. The citation is not literal, though, according to the sense, exact. [It is taken from LXX. with slight variation: ἀϑετήσα for κρύψω, and αὐτοῦ omitted twice. ‘The prophet makes use of neuter verbs, while Paul turns them into the active form by making them have a reference to God. They are however perfectly the same in meaning. ‘‘Wisdom perishes,” but it is by the Lord’s de- stroying it. ‘Prudence vanishes,” but it is by the Lord’s covering it over and effacing it.—The application of this to the subject in hand is this: The Lord has been wont to punish the arrogance of those who, depending on their own judgment, think to be leaders to themselves and others; and if this happened among a people whose wisdom the other nations had occasion to admire, what will become of others?” Catvin]. In reference to this subject see the words of Christ: Matth. xi. 25 ss.; also chap. xv. 7, 8. Ver. 20. [The Apostle’s triumphant challenge for disproof of this declaration.—Where is a wise ? where is a scribe? where isa dis- puter of this world ?—The designations here are all anarthrous, and Meyer, de Wette, Kling, all translate as above. Alford, Stanley, Hodge, Barnes, insert the article. The difference in meaning is plain, though not important. Inthe one case the inquiry is after the person men- tioned, g. d., ‘Where is a wise man to be found?’ as though he were not. Inthe other the question is, ‘What has become of him conceding that he ex- ists?’ The latter better suits the drift of the text. —There is a question also as to whether these words likewise are cited from the Old Testament. There is something like them to be found in Is. xxxiii. 18, uttered ‘‘in a burst of triumph over the defeat of Sennacherib,”’ and Stanley consi- ders them as taken from thence. But as the Apostle is here evidently speaking in his own name, we can regard his language as no more than an undesigned imitation of that of the Prophet—a lingering echo of it freely reproduced to suit a present purpose. He is here appealing in his own name to existing facts by way of con- firmation. Where is the wise? ete. So Cavin]. They have vanished, They pass for nothing in the Divine economy. So far as it is concerned, they are as if they had never been. His mode of challenge occurs also elsewhere with Paul (xv. 55; Rom. iii. 27, 29, 31.)—The last attributive: ‘‘of this world,” belongs, although not grammati- cally, (since the questions are rapid and abrupt), yet logically, to all the three terms, and describes those mentioned as belonging to the lower stage of human development, the Prae-Messianic period. This old world, so far as it seeks to maintain it- self still, even after that which is perfect has come in Christ, shows itself to be perverse and at enmity with God; yea, as in itself evil, because pervaded with error and sin. Comp. Gal. i. 4, “from the present evil world.” Here the term rendered ‘‘world” is αἰών and more properly denotes ὦ period of time, an age of the world. 86 The antithesis to thisis αἰὼν ἐκεῖνος or μέλ- λων: that age, or: the coming age. (NO - D Vy): This is a course of existence founded 4 on the redemptive work of Christ, and includes in itself all the impulsive forces and power of the new life. Until the end of ‘*this age,” the ‘*com- ing age,” willbe in a germinal state, enclosed and restricted within the envelope of the present; but then it will burst into open manifestation as the sole reality. The αἰὼν οὗτος: present age, is identical with ὁ κόσμος: this world. The only distinction is that the latter designates the sphere of life itself as one essentially godless and corrupt in its on-goings, especially the hu- man race as alienated from the lite of God, while the former indicates the period of time through which it continues. Hence in Eph. ii. 2 we see the two united in one phrase. αἰὼν τοῦ κόσ- μου τούτου: the course of this world. The present age, as the period of the rule of sin and error, has for its god or governing principle the devil, as in 2 Cor. iv. 4 he is denominated ‘the god of this world,’ and in Jno. xii. 81 ‘the ar- chor or ruler of this world.’ In so far now as the Jews also in their hostility to the perfect revelation of God in Christ, by which they be- came blinded to the nature of earlier revelations, also (2 Cor. iii. 14 ff.) belonged to this corrupt age, and inasmuch as in the progress of this dis- cussion the Jewish element also is brought up to view, we shall be obliged to understand by the ‘‘wise”’ here mentioned, Jewish as well as Pagan sages, (not the one or the other exclusively); and since the Apostle afterwards speaks of wisdom only, it may be well perhaps to take the term ‘‘wise” in a general sense as denoting all those who were devoted to the higher science, or at least pretended to be such; and the other two terms as specific, ‘‘the scribe’ denoting the wisdom-seekers among the Jews—and ‘the dis- puter,” the like among the Greeks. Such ap- propriation of the terms is supported by the fact that according to the uniform usage of the New Testament (Acts xix. 35 alone excepted) * scribe” is the designation of the Jewish learned class. But the otherterm, ov 7 τητῆς, which is best translated : ‘‘disputer” (comp. σνζητεῖν Mark viii. 11 ff.; συζήτησις Acts xv. 2.7; XXvili. 29), and hence denotes a class of persons who make disputing their business and have facil- ity in it, can be only incidentally applied to the Sophists then widely spread throughout the Hel- lenic world. So Meyer. But would it not be more suited to the rhetorical character of the passage to make no such disposition of terms, but merely to abide by the general fact that the Apostle had in his eye men who boasted of their learning and science and ready abilities, and as inasters of the truth looked down contemptuously upon the masses—men who were to be found among the Jews as well as among the Greeks,— and that only in the word ‘scribe’ there is a prevailing reference to the Jew? [Stanley, who takes ver. 20 as a modified citation from Is. | xxxiii. 18, says ‘These expressions acquire ad- ditional force by a comparison with the Rabbini- cal belief that the cessation of Rabbinical wisdom was to be one of the signs of the Messiah’s coming (see the quotations from the Mishna in Wetstein THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. -- ---.... ad loc.), and that this was expressly foretold in Is. xxxiii. 18. Analogous to this was the belief of Christians that the oracles of the heathen world ceased on the birth of Christ ’’]. i The challenge is strengthened by a further question—hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world ?—i. ὁ. actually demon- strated that it is not what it professes to be; but rather, folly—unreason, stupidity, incapacity for knowledge in relation to the highest matters. [‘‘We must here carefully notice these two things that the knowledge of all the sciences is mere smoke, where the heavenly science is wanting; and man with all his acuteness is as stupid for obtaining of himself a knowledge of the mysteries of God as an assis unqualified for understanding musical harmonies.—Paul (however) does not expressly condemn either man’s natural perspic- uity, or wisdom acquired from practice and ex- perience, or the cultivation of mind obtained by learning ; but only declares that all this is of ne avail for acquiring spiritual wisdom.—We must restrict what he here teaches to the specialties of the case in hand.” Catviy]. Ver. 21.—Shows why and how it was that God had made foolish the wisdom of this world. —For since in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God through the foolishness of preaching [κήρνγμα, not κήρυξις, not so much the preaching as the thing preached, though not without an implication of the former] to save them that believe.—The relation of the pre- mise to the conclusion is that of a sequence, divinely ordained in the way of punishment [ra- ther of mercy], so that in the first man’s guilt [rather guilty impotence, see below], is assigned as the ground of what is stated in the other. From this we perceive the incorrectness of Riic- kert’s view, who, snuffing predestination every- where, explains the phrase ‘‘in the wisdom of God” to mean: ‘‘in virtue of God’s wisdom, its leading and appointment.” Neither does it con- sist with the relation of the two clauses to ex- plain it of the wisdom of God’s plan of salvation in the Gospel (Mosheim and others); for the refusal to ‘recognize this wisdom was not any- thing to which the divine determination spoken of in the second clause could be referred, as to something definitely concluded upon. To this it must be added that from the very beginning, before the disposition of men in relation to it could be ascertained, the preaching of the Gospel had for the world the appearance of folly. The case is entirely different in chap. ii. 6. Rather we must here understand a reference to some- thing prior to Christ, to certain exhibitions of Divine wisdom previous to the revelation made in Christ, in and through which man could or ought to have discerned God,—to its sway in nature and history, and indeed not merely to that revelation alluded to in Rom. i. 18 ff; Acts xiv. 17; xvii. 24 ff, but also to the ordinances of this wisdom in the guidance of the covenant-people, who, because of their unbelief (with the exception of the “election,” Rom. xi. 7), belonged together with the world. Neander, on the contrary, dis- covers here only a contrast instituted between revelation and the religion of reason, and regards the wisdom of the Greeks as the particular object CHAP. I. 17-25 of whose relation to Christianity the Apostle is treating. But this interpretation is opposed by the fact that in the vv. 22-24 closely connected by ἐπειδή: since, with v. 21, Paul three times ex- pressly states that by ‘‘the world,” in y. 21, not only the heathen but also the Jews are intended. But does not the declaration in reference to the heathen that, they ‘‘did not know God” conflict with Rom. i. 21 where it said that ‘when they knew God they glorified him not as God?’ We must here distinguish between that sense of a God forced upon the mind by a revelation of God, a merely passive religious notion, the ineffectualness of which is set forth even in the passage above referred to, and that living knowledge of God, which inyolves communion with Him, and which is the thing here denied of the world and which, had the world possessed, it would have qualified the world for the comprehension of that more perfect revelation in Christ which was to be the fulfilment and consummation of all that had gone before, so that had this knowledge existed sucha decree of God as is affirmed in the second clause would not have been made, nor would the preach- ing of the Gospel have been to them foolishness. The ‘“‘wisdom” then, ‘‘through” which the world knew not God (διὰ τῆς codiac), denotes that intelligence by means of which the knowledge of God ought to have been attained, but was not. It is the appropriate organ of the human mind, sharpened by culture, through which God is perceived and recognized as He displays Himself in His wisdom; in other words, the eye for dis- cerning God’s light. But this proved itself disqualified for its proper end, since the world, the possessor of this wisdom, had become alienated from the truth and love of God, and hence perverted and darkened by error and sin. The translation, ‘‘on account of their wisdom,”’ as though this was the cause of their not perceiving God would require the accusative (διὰ τὴν cod av). It might still be questioned whether the phrase ‘‘through wisdom” does not refer like the previous one to the wisdom of God, so that it has its corresponding antithesis in the phrase, “through the foolishness of preaching.” This is Bengel’s view. ‘‘In the wisdom of God, i. e. because the wisdom of God was so great. By wisdom, namely, that of preaching, as is evident from the antithesis, by the foolishness of preach- ἐπ. So, too, Fritsche (Hall, Lit. Zeit. 1840). ‘‘After that, in the wisdom of God, ἡ, 6. while God allowed His wisdom to shine forth, the world did not recognize God, through the wisdom made available for them by God, then God resolved to choose means of directly the opposite kind. In setting forth the antithesis here, it occurred to him to emphasize strongly the wisdom of God, which failed of attaining its end.” But all things considered, the view carried out by us merits the preference, and the repetition of ‘‘the wisdom of God” must always appear somewhat artificial.* * {Kling has hardly done justice to the view which he calls Riickerts, and stigmatizes as Predestinationism. There certainly is no little plausibility, and much fair ground in Scripture for interpreting, “in the wisdom of God” to mean “according to the wise ordination or arrangement of God.” All the movements of the ante-Christian period were un- qnestionably so disposed by Providence as to prepare the way for the coming, and the reception of Christ. And why may it not have been a part of the Divine plan to allow the 87 The judgment [rather the merciful pleasure] of God towards a world not recognizing Him in consequence of its own sin, is introduced by the phrase εὐδόκησεν ὁ ϑεός,--- Οὔ was pleased— hence ‘‘ concluded,” ‘determined.’ It indicates here not so much the freedom or pure favor, from which the resolve proceeded, as the suit- ableness of his proceeding to the end contem- plated, or to the circumstances of the case. We find it first among the later Scripture writers, and most commonly in the Sept. In the New Testament it occurs chiefly in Paul (Rom. xv. 26; Gal. i. 15 ff.). In reference to the ex- pression and thought comp. Luke x. 21. The world had shown itself incapable of discerning God in His wisdom through its wisdom. There- fore God found it good no more to appeal to hu- man wisdom by the manifestations of His wis- dom, but by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe,—. 6ὁ., by a pro- clamation, the contents of which carried the im- press of folly, or must need appear foolish to the world as it was. This was to deliver from sin and wrath, and introduce to everlasting blessedness those who should believe in what was declared. In other words, the determination was, to appeal to faith instead of to reason. [So Hopae: ‘The foolishness of preaching means the preaching of foolisness, ὃ. e., the cross.”” But is there not an allusion to the nature of the preaching itself as being distinct from philosophical disquisition in the simplicity of its method. Preaching is her- alding, proclaiming facts and messages, a foolish matter for those who delight in the subtleties and arguments of philosophy.] From this it is clear [?] that the phrase “through foolishness of preaching” does not furnish, as might ap- world to try its own wisdom, and test its capacities to the utmost, in order that its utter inefficiency for discovering God, » and finding out a means of salvation, might be fully proved and thus that consciousness of ignorance and inability be awakened, which is one of the first conditions of simple faith in revelation? Paul hinted at this very truth in his speech at Athens (Acts xvii. 26, 27). “And hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth; and hath determined the limes before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; that they should seek the Lord, if happily they might feel after Him and find Him, though He be not far from every one of us.” This interpre- tation carries therefore a legitimate and Scriptural sense, and it is preferred by Alf., Barnes, Poole, and most American sermonizers. But there is still another interpretation, worthy of consi- deration, as having the advantage of giving to the important word “ wisdom” a uniformity of meaning throughout the entire passage. What Paul is here controverting is the fondness for philosophic speculation so characteristic of the Greeks, and which in the Corinthian Church was threaten- ing to destroy the practical nature of Christianity, and turn it into another scheme of philosophy. This tendency, or rather its products, the Apostle calls “ wisdom” (σοφία), and it is, as he says, something he would not indulge in, however pleasing to the Corinthian temper. One reason for this was, the utter inefficiency of all philosophy in the matter of relt- gion. He does not condemn it absolutely, but relatively to the ends in view. This, therefore, it became him distinctly to state, which he does in verses 20,21, may be paraphrased thus: “For since in its speculations concerning God, the word through speculation and philosophy did not know God, it pleased God through “the announcement of the simple facts of the ‘tospel, which to a speculative mind seems like fclly: to save those who accept them in mere faith.” We thus take σοφία---φιλοσοφία, make τοῦ θεοῦ the objective Genitive, and interpret the whole phrase “in the wisdom of God,” as denoting the sphere of thought in reference to which the Apostle was speaking. This was in fact theosophy, a word compounded of just the ones here associated. The antithesis then in the two clauses would be between philo~ sophy and preaching, between scientific knowledgs and faith, accepting the simple proclamation of the Gospel]. 88 pear to be the case at first sight, the contrast to the phrase ‘this wisdom,’’* but to the other, “in the wisdom of God;”’ and the antithesis to “‘this wisdom” is to be sought in ‘ them that be- lieve.” Faith is pure receptivity, and as such is directly the opposite of all endeavors after knowledge by the unaided powers of the intel- lect, such as are peculiar to human wisdom. It is the humble acceptance and appropriation of the testimony concerning Christ crucified, in spite of all the objections which the understand- ing of the natural man may urge against the doctrine of salvation, and in the utter renuncia- tion of one’s own opinions, and in the entire re- pudiation of predominant theories. Inthe act of believing there are united, therefore, both hu- mility and courage. Finally, there is still an- other correspondence in the words ‘‘know” and “save.” Knowledge ought to lead to salvation (comp. Jno. xvii. ὃ). Not knowing, therefore, hindered the obtaining of salvation. Vers. 22-24. Modein which the Apostle fulfilled the good pleasure of God expressed in ver. 21.— Since both Jews require signs and Greeks seek after wisdom, we therefore on the contrary preach Christ crucified. —[So Kurne translates the passage. But there is a question here as to the construction. This verse, like the previous one, begins with ἐπειδή. It may therefore be taken as a parallel to that, (so Hodge, Meyer), resuming the thought and amplifying it (so Stanley), and like the preced- ing having a protasis + and apodosis (as Kling); or it may be joined by ἐπειδή directly to the previous clause, and regarded as explanatory of what is said of the “foolishness of preaching” being the means of saving believers (so Alford, Calvin, Riickert, de Wette). In this case the second clause instead of being an apodosis would be directly dependent on ἐπειδύ, and the rendering would be:—Since, or seeing that, while both Jews require signsand Greeks seek after wisdom, we on the other hand preach Christ, etc.—Thigs seems to us the most natural rendering. See Winer, P. iii. @ lxv. 6. But Kling rejects it as ‘the less suit- able.” According to his view], what the pro- tasis states is the result of ‘‘not knowing God” (ver. 21); what the apodosis states is the judi- cial procedure corresponding to it as carried out in “the foolishness of preaching,” viz., a refusal to yield to vain demands for wisdom, and the counter preaching which appears to those mak- ing these demands as absurd, but which to be- lievers proves to be the power of God and the wisdom of God. The ἐπειδῇ introduces a case well known and made out: since indeed; the ὃ ἐ Seed ἡμεῖς) is used also elsewhere in the apo- osis after ἐπεί and érecdj to make the antithetic relation of this clause the more prominent: therefore, on the contrary (comp. Meyer on this passage). This construction is favored by the par- [* One would suppose that the naturalness and indeed in- evitableness of this contrast would have shown the incor- rectness of Kling’s interpretation. (See Winer. part iii. sect. 47, ἃ.) Paul means here to set the simple “testimony of Jesus” over against “ philosophy” or “ wisdom,” and the method of faith over against the method of reason. In all that follows he is correct. ] [ΠῚ Rob. in Lex. observes that ἐπειδή is never used in the protasis. ] THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. —_ - ς΄’: allelism between the protasis and apodosis in ver, 21. andthose here found. The «at,—xac: both,—a and, unite here classes alike in one respect, i. δ.» in the unwarrantableness of their demands, but otherwise diverse, and they belong not exclu- sively to the subjects mentioned (Jews and Greeks), but serve to connect the two clauses in one whole: ‘‘since it is so, that both Jews re- quire signs and Greeks seek wisdom.” Jews and Greeks here represent two classes of men ac- cording to their peculiar characteristics. Hence they are mentioned without the article. It is as if he said ‘‘ since people like the Jews seek, ete.” The Greeks here as in Rom. i. 16, and elsewhere, stand as pars pro toto, for the Gentiles generally, who, according to the most probable reading, are mentioned afterwards in ver. 23. They are the people who best represent the whole multi- tude of nations (417) found outside of the cove- nant relation with God, and who, in respect of culture and language, prepared the whole civil- ized world for Christianity; just as the Jews, scattered among them all, did the same thing in respect of religion, being freighted with the pro- mise which was to be fulfilled in Christ. It was among these two nations that Christianity πᾶ its first sphere of operations,—the Jews, who had the first claim to announce the fulfilment of that promise which had been preserved, and of that hope which had been awakened by them (comp. Acts xiii. 46; iii. 25; Rom. 1. 16; xy. 8), and the Greeks, who had carried out the work of human culture in science and art, and had, as it were, taken the whole civilized world in posses- sion, and so had furnished the most perfect form for the human appropriation of the truth of revelation, and so the richest receptivity for the life and truth which were in Christ, and which were fitted to ensure them the most perfect satis- faction. But in both alike did Christianity en- counter peculiar obstructions. The Jews clave to the external form of revelation, the miracle; and they did this to such a degree as to insist on having it before their eyes in its most striking, dazzling form, as the condition of their accep- tance of the truth. They thus betrayed their fundamental unbelief and disaffection for the truth which rebuked their sin, humbled their pride, and demanded of them entire self-denial. This is what is meant by their ‘“‘seeking after a sign,” or, according to another reading, ‘‘ signs.” (Comp. Jno. iv. 48; and Matt. xii 88; xvi. 4; Luke xi. 16; Jno. ii. 18; vi. 80). (Meyer, Ed. 8.) “Signs, that is, miraculous tokens, by which Jesus, whom the Apostles asserted to be risen from the dead and ascended on high, should prove Himself to be the Messiah. These they still called for, inasmuch as the miracles of His earthly career had lost for them all evidencing power, in consequence of His crucifixion”), The Greeks, on their part, had been captivated by the outward show and glitter of their civiliza- tion. Whatever did not appear before them un- der the name of a new philosophy (comp. Acts xvii. 19 ff.), or was not sustained by philosophic proof, or was not set forth with logical and rhe- torical art, this they refused to accredit; and by insisting on wisdom only in a form agreeable to them, they likewise betrayed their unbelief and their aversion to that Divine truth which re as CHAP. I, 17-25. 89 quired a mortification of their vain self, with all its pride of science and art, and which demanded a humble surrender to a revelation in Christ that infinitely surpassed all their attainments. Thus on both sides, in modes diverse and con- ditioned by their peculiar histories, did the Same opposition arise to the preaching of the Gospel which held up to their faith the one Christ, who was declared to have secured the salvation of mankind, and built up the way to regal glory, not through wondrous miracles, according to the demand of the Jew, nor through such wisdom as wisdom-seekers sought, but by suffering the | shameful death of a malefactor. Thus did the preaching of the Apostles and their associates (ἡμεῖς) concerning a crucified Messiah, their public proclamation of this fact and its signifi- cance in all simplicity, prove for the Jews a stumbling block, 7. 6., an offence, a hinderance to faith, the occasion of a fall, something caus- ing them to err (comp. πρόσκομμα Rom. ix. 32ff.). A person hanging on the accursed tree presented such a contrast to all their desires for some glorious exhibition of power (such as destruction to their enemies, etc.), that they could do no otherwise than reject Him. [‘‘ They could have tolerated Christ on the mount, but not Christ on the cross.”—A. Butter].—For the Greeks (Gentiles) foolishness.—Thatsalvationcould come to the world through a crucified Jew ap- peared to them plainly absurd. It was an in- strumentality utterly inadequate to the end pro- posed. Thus while to the Jews such a person was an object of horror, as one accursed of God, to the Gentiles he was an object only for scorn and contempt. (Comp. Acts xxiii. 18-32; Luke xxiii. 36-41). To this, however, there is a noble contrast. But unto these—the called—Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.— This clause might be taken to depend on ‘‘we preach,” so that this would be repeated in thought, and ‘Christ the wisdom of God”’ form an antithe- sis to ‘‘Christ crucified” with its adjuncts: We preach Christ as crucified, who for the Jew is a stumbling block, etc., but to those who are called we preach Christ as the power of God. BENGEL appears to suggest this, when to ‘‘Christ” he adds ‘‘with his cross, death, life, kingdom,” and says further, ‘‘ When the offence of the cross is overcome, the whole mystery of Christ lies open.”—But the course of thought would be more simple if we put ‘Christ crucified” di- rectly in opposition with what precedes: ‘*We preach a crucified Messiah who to the Jews is a stumbling block, etc.—but to them who are called, Christ—the power of God.” By it then is signified, that He, the crucified one, at whom the Jews stumble, is to the called, the An- ointed of God, (Messiah, Christ),—the One in whom the promise of a heavenly king is fulfilled, the Power of God, ete. This corresponds also to the expression respecting the ‘‘word of the cross” in ver. 18. The’ αὐτοῖς: to these serves to give prominence to ‘‘the called” as the chief persons in the case, who occupy a positive relation to ‘‘the crucified,” and enjoy an expe- rience corresponding to it. It points at the same time to those already mentioned, to ‘‘them that believe,” ver. 21, and to the ‘‘sayed,” ver. 18; and while the first of these terms designates their subjective position towards the Gospel, the sec- ond shows the advantage they derive from it. The term ‘‘called” indicates the Divine ground on which they stand. (On κλητόε: called, comp. ver. 2). By the addition of: both Jews and Greeks he gives us to understand that in the purpose of grace denoted in their calling the separation hitherto existing between these par- ties had been removed. (Comp. Rom. ix. 24 and x. 12).—the power of God and the wisdom of God.—Here we have the antithesis to ‘“‘stum- bling block”? and ‘‘foolishness.” While the Jews were asking how a person crucified and accursed could possibly be the Saviour of Israel, how one so utterly devoid of strength could be able to overthrow all hostile power, and the Greeks were deeming it absurd to expect salva- tion from one who came to so miserable an end, the chosen of God were, on the contrary, expe- riencing and confessing that from this very cru- cified Redeemer there issued a Divine power, the power of a heavenly life and peace, a renewing, sanctifying, beatific power, such as could be found in nothing creaturely, and that accord- ingly Christ was the possessor of such a Divine power, that in Him there existed a Divine wisdom that was capable of solving the hardest problems, of lighting up the darkness that rested on the ways of God, of fulfilling God’s noblest purposes of bringing men back from all their wanderings into the path of life and of introducing them at last to their final destination. Ver. 25. A general proposition, substantiating what has just been said.—Because the fool- ishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God mightier than men. —tThe phrase ‘foolishness of God” is not to be taken too abstractly, as if it meant the Divine folly. The Apostle is evidently here speaking from a human point of view and implies merely that which appears foolishness in God. He here has in mind God’s dealings with men in the Gos- pel, such as the procuring of salvation through the crucifixion of Christ, and other things con- nected therewith, which in the judgment of self- styled wise men of this world, who measure every thing by the measure of their fancied wisdom, appeared contrary to reason. Now of this ap- parent foolishness of God he affirms that it sur- passed in real wisdom all men however wise they seemed to be in their own sight, or were held to be by others, or whatever they might be able to reason out or imagine. Ina similar manner we must interpret the following expressson, the weakness of God —By this he means a Divine scheme which seemed weak to those who held merely to physical forceand boasted in that (for instance, the procuring of redemption through one subjecting himself to the humiliation of death on the cross), but which in fact is stronger than men, 7. ¢., exerts a mightier power than they with all their imagined strength and prow- ess. Bence adds: ‘Although they may appear to themselves both wise and strong, and wish to be the standards of wisdom and strength.” Thus interpreted, it would be needless to construe the words ‘‘than men’ as involving a figure of speech in which a comparison instituted with a person or thing as a whole, properly applies only 40 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. a a a πΞ σ-πχ:--ἰτὸνΙν τα αὐ οι πἕἰπι to a part of it, or to some quality in it, as though they meant: ‘than the wisdom of men,” or “than the strength of men.” Both interpreta- tions, however, amount to the same thing.—There is still another construction suggested by what follows, viz.: that by the foolishness and the weakness of God are meant the persons themselves who are “called” (ver. 24), who experience Christ crucified as ‘‘the wisdom of God and the power of God,” so that they in consequence become Di- vinely wise and strong, and are thus enabled as the foolishness and weakness belonging to God to surpass men, ¢. 6. that portion of the race who remain out of Christ in wisdom and power. “The thought is this—Human nature delights in doing great things. God, on the contrary, in His earthly dispensations always appears weak and small at the first, and not until afterwards re- veals the overwhelming power that is concealed in His instrumentalities.”” NEANDER. DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. Christ and His cross— Christ crucified.— This is the clear light from Heaven, which comes to scatter all the darkness of man’s sinful life. This is the key to all the riddles of a history that has been deranged and confused by falsehood and sin. All God’s revelations in the Old Testament, his ordinances, institutions, promises, judgments and blessings here reach their fulfilment and find their real explanation. All the hints of truth current among heathen nations—all their sigh- ing and striving after the knowledge of God and communion with Him, all attempts to get rid of the vonsciousness of guilt, to atone for sin and to effect a perfect restoration to Divine favor—all the labor of the wise to discover a clue for the great labyrinth of human life—in short every thing which glimmered as a ray of light here and there in this darkness, obtains in Christ its pro- per goal; and in so far as it at last leads to the apprehension of this perfect light and salvation, it has been not in vain. Here is the ‘power of God” which in place of a thousand-fold yet vain endeavor on the part of man is able to insure a true Diviné life, an undisturbed peace, an all pervading sanctification—spreading from the in- most centre of a heart that embraces the holy, forgiving love of God,—and an invincible patience and steadfastness combined with the serenest tranquillity amid allthe plagues, diseases, adver- sities and conflicts which may assail us from within and without. Here, too, is the wisdom of God. From this the deepest problems of human knowledge and human activity receive light, so that they can be recognized in their truth and in the goal to which they tend; and right methods of solution for them may be attained. Here the eternal thoughts of God, and the thoughts of man which spring up responsive to these out of the inmost truth of the human heart through the operation of the all-enlightening Logos, encoun- ter each other. Here redeeming love with its wondrous plan of forgiveness and regeneration meets the manifold devices and strivings of man for the removal of guilt and, the acquisition of the chief good, and gives them a perfect satis- faction, 2. Christ and His cross—as confronting the world.—But the more this revelation of God in a crucified Saviour surpasses all the doings of man hitherto, the less can it be measured by the standard of truth and goodness existing among men, the less can it come within the scope of their ordinary conceptions. Where, therefore, the heart has not been renewed by a surrender to the truth foreshadowed by its mysterious need and corresponding to it, and so no change has been wrought in the whole course of thought, there this revelation remains an incomprehensible mystery; and where to the indolence, which refuses to stir out of the old beaten track, there is added an arrogant pride, which, with arbitrary exag- geration and embellishments insists on making what already exists the measure of the new and rejects whatever does not suit the demands thus originated, there, it is certain, that the revelation of God will be violently opposed. And this willbe so much the more sure to occur, when, for the sake of presenting a contrast with the vain parade of carnal self in adhering to what is ex- ternally imposing and brilliant, and in cleaving to its own productions which seem so beautiful and fair, the revealed truth and grace are con- strained to show themselves in an unpretending form, putting contempt upon the proud display of might by assuming a lowly aspect of weakness and setting at naught a lofty pretentious wisdom by wearing the guise of foolishness in order to lift humanity thereby out of the vanity of its conceited claims, and out of the arbitrariness of its own devices and endeavors, into the experi- ence of a true divine power and wisdom.— But the cross and its preaching, which prove such a stumbling block and foolishness to those who are bound up: in their vain conceit becomes to those who obey the heavenly calling in faith and who in the mortification of self with all its foolish conceits and pretensions yield themselves to the influences of the grace and truth in Christ, and in so doing experience its enlightening, sanctifying and beatific power, the wisdom of God and the power of God. Thus it happens that men with all their wisdom and power remain far inferior to what belongeth unto God, however foolish and weak it may seem. 8. ‘Vers. 22-24 afford us a point of observa~ tion which enables us to survey Church Histore in clearest light. The Apostles found two dis tinct tendencies setting inin strong hostility to the Gospel, the desire for miracles, and the conceit of wisdom. These two tendencies show them- selves repeatedly through all times. A false, one-sided supernaturalism and a false one-sided rationalism are ever in rivalry with each other either to resist the Gospel in open enmity or to disturb and corrupt it by secretly insinuating themselves into it. It may be said that all ex~ ternal opposition and all internal peril to the Gospel resolve themselves at last into these two opposite principles. So long as a pure Gospel withstands and excludes these it will sueceed in satisfying the genuine human needs lying at their foundation and in thus quieting them on both sides. This proves itself to be the true wonder-working power before which all other miracles must pale, and the true wisdom of God before which all other wisdom must be put to shame, and thus CHAP. I. 17-25. does it exhibit itself in both ways as the absolute Religion.” NEANDER. 4, [Since it is ‘to the called” that the Gos- pel proves ‘‘the power of God and the wisdom of God,” by bringing them at last to believe and be saved, it follows that the difference in the effects produced by the Gospel, so that on the one hand it appears to some as an offence and to others as foolishness, but to others still as a means of salvation, is all owing to the calling of God— his effectual calling. ] HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 1. The cross of Christ is made of none effect by cunning words or the wisdom of speech.—For the wisdom of speech is 1, on the one hand scholastic wisdom which a. culminates only in knowledge, not in reformation; ὦ. gives no satisfaction on the chief point, Religion; 6. being in constant strife with itself evermore corrupts rather than improves; 2, On the other hand an artificial rhetoric, which springs not from the heart or from zeal for a cause known to be true, but aims only to dazzle and please, and by this means to persurde. But a mode of proceeding so altogether unworthy of heavenly truth robs the cross of Christ of its peculiar power; sincea. the attention is turned away from the subject to the speaker, and so the heart is diverted and betrayed into vanity; ὁ. and everything is viewed according to its fitness to delight; δ. and the effect is ascribed not to the power of the truth presented but to the eloquence displayed. After HEvuBNER. 2. The preaching of the cross. 1, is foolishness for those who are lost. a. Who are these? They are such as are hardened in their own guilt— such as follow their own perverted sense and will not accept of truth or consent to self-humili- ation, so that humanly judging there is nothing to be hoped for from them. 6. Why is the preaching of the cross foolishness for them? Because to the world, which insists on its own importance, everything appears absurd which fells its pride, destroys its meritoriousness and conflicts with its wisdom and righteousness. 2, ts a wisdom of God unto us who are called.—The be- liever who permits himself to be saved, awakened and enlightened by the spirit of God, finds in the cross a divinely derived and divinely operating power, which draws the heart into peace with itself and with God, fills it with holy love, and strengthens it with a new power of life; and he recognizes therein a wisdom far surpassing all human thought and sense. After HeuBNeER. 3. The vanity of scholastic wisdom or the judg- ment of God upon conceited worldly wisdom.—l. It effects nothing, because it aims only at show and not at improvement. 2. God allows it to be betrayed into folly and shame, because it seeks to be wise and strong without God, without prayer and piety. 3. Christianity exposes it in all its barrenness, since, while Christianity re- news humanity, worldly wisdom perishes in its own schools, and is unable to maintain its own progress. After HnuBner. 4, The causes of the rejection cf the Crucified.—l. The Jewish desire for whatever was striking, imposing and externally mighty; 2. The Gentile 41 conceit of wisdom and a vain misculture; 3. The pride of both which sought to comprehend God, but which would not enter into the apparently weak and foolish ways and means of his economy. After HEUBNER. 5. The preaching of the cross has with those who are saved a threefold effect. 1. It shames, inas- much as man crucified Christ with his sins; for a long time did not recognize him; did not honor or thank him; and was willing so long to tolerate the sins which nailed Him to the cross. 2. It humbles, by reminding us of Christ’s own love, in that He, the Great God, died for us poor worms, and did so much for us when we were utterly worthless. It inclines us also to benevo- lence towards all men who differ from us only in this, that we are sinners saved, while they can and may yet be saved. 3. It awakens, gives power and life, so that we not only are ready and inclined, but also are enabled to love God, and to prove our love by works. 6. The Cross of Christ is an offence to all men who think that a good life will ensure them a happy end. These are the enemies of the Cross in the midst of Christendom. They worship it externally; they take pride in it, but in fact they hate the doctrine of the Cross. They can- not accept the truth that Christ has become our Redeemer and that we are saved out of sheer mercy, so that the holiest, the most pious, the most liberal, the most upright man is just as far from Heaven as the most miserable sinner, and that there is but one way for all. To the wise and prudent the cross of Christ is foolishness. The truth that Christ died for us they regard as a fable. There are persons even among [nomi- nal] believers who take it asa compliment if they are said not to believe. Yet should one accuse them of holding the truth, and yet of living in untruthfulness, disobedience and ingratitude towards God, it would be the same as if he pronounced them deliberate villains. Oh! could they but once hear the Gospel in a way to pierce their hearts they would certainly ask, What shall we do? Let the doctrine of the Cross be once made vital in the soul, then would there be no need of exhortation, alarm and threaten- ing in view of this or that judgment. It would be sufficient to say, ‘‘ The Saviour died for me.” If we are in trouble for our sins, and the hope of salvation vanishes, and the voice comes, ‘¢Christ has died and earned salvation for us,” how the heart not only seizes but holds fast to the declaration! How the truth penetrates like a divine power into the soul which can never be lost or forgotten! Then are our sins buried in the depths of the sea; they can no more tyran- nize over us. Then we need sin no more. Such is the effect of the Word of the Cross in them that believe. GossnER. Hepinger: —Power, wit, all human work and counsel corrupts faith, misleads in the church, and hinders the efficacy of the means of grace. In divine things, the more foolish any- thing seems to the world, the better it is. ““Wisdom, wisdom, ready understanding, science, learning out of a thousand books!” Such is the ery of the world. An evil sound is it in the churches and in the schools. One thing is needful—one book, one Christ. 42 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. SrarKxe:—The Gospel has a differencing effect according to the character of the persons who hear and use it. Mankind’ are divided into two classes: 1. Unbelievers; they are such as live on, without caring for their salvation, eitherin secu- rity or hypocrisy; each word and work of theirs is a step toward Hell. 2. Belevers; they are those who are in daily concern about their sal- vation; and this is with them so yital a point that even when unmoved by efforts from abroad, while in the midst of their labors or talk, they are not easily repelled from it (ver. 18). Wisdom is in itself something divine, and before the fall the image of God in man consisted in it (Col. iii. 10); and even now the inclination to know and learn something is a remnant in us of this divine image. But if our natural wisdom profits us but little now, and is every where scandalized, this is the fault, not of wisdom, but of our corrupted reason and understanding. None of the loftiest and most learned of this world ought to be ashamed of the simplicity of the Gospel, for God Himself, the highest and wisest of all, let Himself down to it. Sufficient is it for us that an infinite power resides in the Cross to deliver us out of all our deep depravity. (ver. 21).—God can never suit people. One will have it this way and another that. Shame on you! God does asit pleases Him (Matth. xi. 16 ff.). Mon always delight in what is strange, lofty, conspicuous. Instead of desiring that God’s name alone should be praised they seek themselves in every thing. They look either at power, wealth, faculty, or at learning, prudence, dexterity. Both are means to greatness, but they prove hinderances in the kingdom of God. (ver. 22).—God will remain unsurpassed in His words and works (Ps. Ixxviii. 41), but their wisdom and strength are vain. The world makes wisdom to consist in much learning which secures honor and regard. But a believer con- siders it the height of wisdom to know that he is a poor sinner, becomes justified and saved only in deepest humility. The greatest power con- sists in being able to overcome ourselves and the kingdom of Satan. God can put to shame all the devices of the craftiest and allithe might of the greatest in this world. Why wilt thou fear? Look to God! Hecan and will give thee enough for all things (ver. 25). —_——— ee? H. Riecer:—Let him who would even now, by the preaching of the Cross, awaken a sense of the Cross in the hearts of men, and thereby codperate for their salvation, not seek for assis- tance from the fickle arts of worldly wisdom, but let him observe what renders himself humble and subdued, and what he can thus convey with a tender spirit to others, and let him shun every thing which on the contrary tends to puff himself up and wherewith he is tempted to court the fa- vor of men. ᾿ ; [Spencer: (ver.21).—‘‘Some Christian minis- ters sumetimes think to do Christianity a very good service by philosophizing it to make it keep up with the times. In all this they do Chris- tianity no other service than rob it of its power by robbing it of its peculiarity, and do no other service to the ‘philosophic minds’ which they say they would influence, than just to mislead them and keep them away from true faith in Christ and reliance on his great atone- ment. Every thing is coming to be philosophized. Many a minister in the pulpit—shame on him— betrays his trust to the Bible and his God by teaching religion very much as if it were a new matter of reason, and human progress, and hu- man discovery, instead of taking God’s Word as his authority and instructor, and uttering in the ears of the people like the old prophets, Thus saith the Lord God. Beware of such proceedings. They tend to infidelity. Learn duty from God. The Bible is safe. Philosophy is blind.”’] [ Ropertson :—‘‘ Men bow before talent even if unassociated with goodness, but between these two we must make an everlasting distinction. When once the idolatry of talent enters, then farewell to spirituality; when men ask their teachers, not for that which will make them more humble and God-like, but for the excite- ment of an intellectual banquet, then farewell to Christian progress. Here also St. Paul again stood firm. Not Wisdom, but Christ crucified. St. Paul might have complied with these require- ments of his converts, and then he would have gained admiration and love, he would have been ~ the leader of a party, but then he would have been false to his Master—he would have been preferring self to Christ.” ] THE TRUE METHOD OF PREACHING. (ConTINUED). B. As suited to the character of the called and the ends contemplated. Cuarter I 26-81. 26 For ye [om. ye] see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the 27 flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of — > ' CHAP. I. 26-31. 43 28 the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and [om. yea, and]! things. 29 which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his 30 presence [the presence of God].’ But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God [om. of God], is [has been] made unto us wisdom, [from God, ἀπὸ θεοῦ" and [both] 31 righteousness and sanctification, and redemption: That according ds it is written, He. 8 Pp ἕ ) that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. 1 Ver. 28.—The καὶ before τὰ μὴ ὄντα is not original. [A mistaken supplement of the sense.”—Alf.] 2 Ver. 29.—Instead of the rec. αὐτοῦ the best authorities read τοῦ θεοῦ. which is repeated by way of emphasis. 3 Ver. 30.—The best attested order of words is σοφία ἡμῖν ἀπὸ θεοῦ. That in the Rec. ἡμῖν σοφία is to be explained: from the tendency toe take copia ἀπὸ θεου together in relation (Meyer). [See below]. EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. [The connection. Kling here, as usual, follows Meyer in considering these verses as confirma- tory of what immediately precedes ver. 24. It were better, however, with de Wette and Hodge, to regard the Apostle as introducing here a new argument in support of the general position taken in the previous section. It is anargument drawn from facts directly under their eye. In proof of what he had said of the true method of preaching and the utter vanity of the worldly wisdom they were tempted to prize, they could see for themselves what course the Gospel had in the main actually taken among them who were its converts and what were the ends subserved by this. Accordingly he begins by directing at- tention to the character of the called, first de- scribed negatively ]. Ver. 26. Por look at your calling, breth- ren.—The verb βλέπετε may be taken in the ‘Indicative [as in the Εἰ. V.]; but the Imperative corresponds better with the animated style of the Apostle (see x. 18; Phil. iii. 2). [*‘And is re- quired by the emphatic position which the verb occupies in thesentence” Aur. So also Words., Wickliffe, Tyndale, and the Rheims version]. Nor is this at all inconsistent, as Bengel asserts, with the use of the ‘‘for;”’ since this is to be found elsewhere also in imperative clauses. [Βλέπειν: “‘to consider, take to heart, is employed to express a more intent, earnest, spiritual contemplation than ὁρᾶν. The one denotes mental vision, the other bodily sight.”” W. WessTEer]. (Heb. xii. 3). The ‘‘calling”’ which they are requested to ob- serve is not their secular vocation, or their exter- nal circumstances [Olshausen], in which they were found when called of the Lord. Nothingis said of this in the subsequent context. Nor yet can we admit Bengel’s explanation: ‘the state in which the heavenly calling proves an offence to you.” This anticipates a thought which is not mentioned till afterwards. It is more cor- rect to understand it of the Divine call, both as to the act itself, and the method God pursued in calling them, especially in respect to the persons whom he had chosen and their condition. [This is seen in the very use of terms. ‘‘He does not say τὴν κλῆσιν ὑμετέραν, nor τὴν ὑμῶν κλῆσιν but τὴν KAjow ὑμῶν: the calling of you.” Worps.]. What this was he proceeds to state—how that not many wise men after the flesh.—The ‘flesh’? here denotes the purely human state or course of action, as utterly devoid of Divine in- fluence or codperation. It is the sensuous and ‘character. selfish life, possessed by sin. Hence a wisdom: which is suited to this life, which moves accord- ing to its ways instead of after the methods of that Divine spiritual principle from which all true higher knowledge springs, is “ἃ wisdom of this age,” ‘‘of the world” nM 20), earthly, godless, and hostile to God. Such is its essential Yet without pushing the matter so. far, we might simply abide by the idea of what. is purely human, (Comp. Herzog’s Theol. Real. Ency. under the word “ Fleisch”).*—To attach: this qualification to the remaining predicates, would be superfluous. These of themselves in-- dicate what is external, worldly, and belonging- to the lower extra-christian life-—not many mighty, duvvaroc: persons of consequence in. civil life, influential, powerful, whether it be by- wealth or any other means,—not many noble,, εὐγενεῖς: of distinguished descent, well-born. In. highly-civilized, aristocratic Corinth, all this was regarded of great importance.—are called. —There is no verb in the original with which the above nominatives can agree, and it is best to supply the defect [as in the Εἰ. V.] ‘are called” from the word ‘‘calling” in the first clause. Others prefer ‘‘are,” and take it either as the sole predicate of the clause: ‘“‘There are not many wise, etc., among you;” or they unite with it the adjectives as predicates: ‘Many are not wise, etc.” [Some of the Fathers thought that the persons employed to dispense this call- ing were here meant. So ΤΉΒΟΡΟΒΕΤ. ‘God. endorsed the nations in the evangelical net of Galilean fishermen.” Also Augustine. ‘Christ. caught orators by fishermen, not fishermen by- orators.””’ WorpswortH]. The supplying of ‘are: called,” suits as well with the preceding words, ‘your calling,” as with the following, “hath: chosen.” ‘In the early centuries it was often. flung at Christianity (by Celsus and others), that its converts were, for the most part, common. people, women and slaves.” Paul here not only confesses the fact, but also discovers in it one: cause of glory for the Gospel; for it is precisely in this that the Gospel displays itself to be the: power of God and the wisdom of God, that starting from such humble beginnings it had, nevertheless both outwardly and inwardly over-- come the world. Vers. 27, 28. The positive aspect of the case. But the foolish things of this world.— Luther translates ‘‘in the eyes of the world,” as . though the Genitive in the original were that of * [See also for a masterly analysis of the Ethical import of this word. Miller on Sin. 2 Book, 2 Chap. Also Sarto- rius, “ Von der heiligen Liebe.’’] , 44 estitmaion. But Paul is here speaking of things not as they seem, but as they are; and here, as well as in the subsequent Epistles, we have the actual quality indicated. ‘The foolish things”’ (τὰ wpa), the neuter for the sake of greater ge- neralization. We have here a strong contrast to ‘the wise,” ὦ. e. whatever is lacking in higher cultivation and insight, including, too, the addi- tional thought of being deemed foolish, con- tracted and simple.—hath God chosen, an expression which is repeated three times with great emphasis. It denotes the Divine purpose which is made known in the calling; or that Divine decision in virtue of which a separation is effected among fallen mankind, and certain indi- vidualsare selected out of it to become a possession of God in Christ, and are so made blessed (comp. ἐκλέγεσϑαι Eph. 1. 4; Is. xv. 19). The expres- sion belongs to the Theocratic language of the Old Testament (comp. “fR‘} Deut. xiv. 2ff.). “Fore- knowledge” and ‘Predestination ” are cognate terms, Rom. viii. 29; 2 Tim. i. 9, yet so, how- ever, that the word “choose” here designates the free, eternal gracious will of God, as carried out in time, and therefore includes the ‘calling”’ in itself.—The object of such a choice is to confound the wise i. 6. the wise after the flesh. By the fact that He selected the “foolish,” persons destitute of superior culture, to enjoy holy and blessed communion with Him, the wis- dom in which ‘‘the wise” boasted, is exposed in all its insufficiency and worthlessness. Or wemay say with de Wette, “the wise were put to shame by being compelled to see the foolish obtaining that which was denied tothem.” In the latter ease, it is implied that ‘‘the wise” are conscious of the preference made, ‘‘and so were stung to reform” (Osiander). But this is not sustained by the context as the parallel expression “ bring to nought” shows. Thejubilant contrast proceeds. — and the weak things of this world, i. 6. the weak of every kind, bodily, mentally, politically. —God hath chosen to confound the things which are mighty.—The antithesis here is.introduced by the neuter: τὰ to χυρά, de- noting the category in general, although persons are meant. That any thing contemptuous was intended by this use of the neuter, is not proba- ‘ble, since he just before spoke of a kindred class, ‘the wise,” in the masculine. The “ confound- ing” is seen in the fact that “the weak things,” by virtue of the indwelling ‘‘power of God,” evince an energy and an overcoming power which is denied to the strong of this world.—In the third set of contrasts there appears an expansion of thought on the one side, with which there is nothing to correspond on the other.—And the base things of the world, and the de- spised things hath God chosen — the things which are as good as not, in order that He may bring to nought the things that are.—tlere we have the antithesis only to the last expression of the first series: ‘‘ the things that are” (τὰ ὅν τα). [This is readily accounted for, if the omission of the καί as sus- tained by the best authorities (see critical notes) be correct. In that case the τὰ μὴ ὄντα : the things which are not instead of being an addi- éion to the previous specifications, would stand THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. in opposition with them, as a sort of summary οὗν their meaning, and so be the main word re- quiring the offset on the other side]. Observe also the order of thought in the specifications, ‘base things,” —a ye v7: of low origin. To this is added as a natural consequence: ‘despised things’— rad ἐξουϑενημένα: regarded as nothing. Then below both, as putting the mat- ter in its strongest possible aspect, there comes the τὰ μὴ ὄντα (to be distinguished from τὰ οὐκ ὄντα inasmuch as the μὴ is not an absolute, but a subjective negative. Winer, 2 59, 8): that which in the opinion of men is as good as non- existent. — In the antithetic τὰ ὄντα, some would insert a τί, making it read: things that are somewhat, of some importance. But this we are as little warranted in doing as in making τὰ μὴ ὄντ ατ-ετὰ μηϑὲν ὄντα : things which are of no ac- count, arenothing. What Paul here sets in contrast with the former are things which have being, are real, which are regarded as existing, and *‘ which continue to make themselves pass for sole reali- ties.” And for these things the verb “confound” would no longer suit. So we have another “bring to naught:” καταργήσῃ" make null, deprive of all validity. This is a much stronger expression, and it puts its ohject, relatively to the highest good to be enjoyed, out of existence.* The truth of the assertion has been well brought out by Neander: ‘In its scorned professors, the Gospel has in fact displayed a power of action and endurance, which far transcends the measure of the natural man. They alone never bowed to the despotism of the Roman Emperor. To them also the Gospel has imparted a steadfastness of conviction, which the proud philosophy of the Greeks never possessed; and a Christian mecha- nic, as Justin Martyr and Tertullian have af- firmed, was able to answer questions which the Greek philosopher asked in vain.” (# Whitby discovers an allusion in the above designations to the Jews and Gentiles. His observations are valuable. “The Jews looked upon themselves as the only évyeveis, — persons of true nobility, as being of the stock of Abraham. ‘ Even the poorest Israelite,’ saith R. Akibah, ‘is to be looked upon as a gentleman, as being the son of Abraham, &c.;’ but the Gentiles they horribly despised, as the base people of the earth, not fit to be conversed with, they being styled in their law, ovxédvos: not a nation; λαὸς ὃ τεχθήσομενος, a people that shall be born, Ps. xxii. 31; ὃ κτιζόμενος, that should be created in the generation to come, Ps. cii. 19, and so yet had no being, Deut. xxxi. 21. οὐ Aads, not a people, Hos. i. 10; and it being said by the prophet, that all the Heathens are as nothing, and were accounted as nothing, Is. x1. 17, they still account them as such. Hence, Mordecai prays, Lord, give not thy sceptre τοῖς μὴ οὖσι, to them that are not, Esth. iv. 11; and Esdras. As for the people which also came of Adam, thou hast said they are nothing. And now, O Lord, these Heathens who have ever been reputed as nothing, have begun to be lords over us. 2 Esdras vi. 56-57. Thus Abraham is said to be the father of the Gentiles, before that God who calleth things which are not as tf they were, Rom. iv. 17; and Clemens Rom. saith of the Gentiles, “ He called us who were not, and would that of no being we should have a being.” So filthy are the Gentiles represented here by things that are not, things base, things accounied as nothing. See also 1 Cor. vi.4. And this is the ancient exposition of Origen, who, speaking of the rejection of the Jews, or the calling of the Gentiles, and God’s provoking the Jews to jealousy by them that were nota nation, he confirms this from these words: “@od hath chosen the base things of the world, and things which are not, that he might abolish the things which were before, that Israel, according to the flesh, might glory be- fore God.” Phileal c. p. 38. Now, however much we may feel constrained to take these designations in question in their more natural and broader acceptation as above, it is very evident that they were derived from the Theocratic usu loquendi.]} CHAP. I. 26-31. Ver. 29. The reason of the above mentioned peculiarity of God’s procedure in ‘‘calling” men.—that no flesh should boast in the presence of God.—y7 καυχήσεται πᾶσα σὰρξ, lit: that all flesh should not boast. A Hebraism. The negative belongs to the verb, and v=that all flesh should give up their boasting. he sense is: ‘‘no man should boast that he, out of his own endeavors, or position, or worth, had contributed any thing to the great achievements of the Gospel.” NeanpreR. It is a question whether we are to take the word “flesh” as simply denoting humanity in general, or are to associate with this the ideas of guilt and tran- sientness which are also conveyed by it. As a general rule the expression occurs in this way only when the one or the other of these ideas is implied in the context. ‘‘Flesh beautiful, yet frail” says Bengel.—[<‘ Here then we see that God by confounding the mighty, and the wise, and the great, does not design to elate with pride the weak, the illiterate, and the abject, but brings down all of them together to one level.” Carvin]. Ver. 30. The ground in the Divine economy on which this end is obtained and the glory of salvation secured to God alone.—But of him ye are in Christ Jesus.—A two-fold construction and exposition is here possible. Either the first five words may be taken as a sentence by itself, stating the fact of their origin in God: “Of him are ye.” The subsequent words, “in Christ Jesus,” would then assert the ground of their being from God—of their Divine Sonship, and this too in such a manner as to carry the empha- sis. Such a construction is supported by the fact that the important relative clause which follows is joined directly to it. Or the words ‘ye are in Christ Jesus” may be taken together as denoting their being in fellowship with Christ, and then ‘‘of Him” assigns the cause of this fact,—shows how they came to be in Christ. The latter construction is not contrary to usage, and at least is not more forced than to suppose the word “are” to be employed as a pregnant con- struction for ‘have sprung’ or ‘been born,’ as Osiander does. We might compare with this Eph. ii. 8, «‘And that,” fo wit, being saved, “not of yourselves,” not saved of yourselves,’—stated in the positive form, ‘ye are saved of God,’ 7. 6. He is the author _ of your salvation. So here: He is the author of your being in Christ Jesus. This is sustained also by the “from God” (ἀ πὸ ϑεοῦ) in the relative clause which evidently refers back to “of Him” (ἐξ αὐτο Ὁ) andimparts to the thought additional emphasis* by repetition. In relation to the truth conveyed see Jno. vi. 44, 37, 65. The preference accordingly is to be given to the sec- ond construction. In this way, on the one hand, we preserve the Pauline expression ‘‘to be in Christ,” and avoid one which never elsewhere occurs—éx ϑεοῦ εἶναι: ‘to be from God.” By this explanation we would be compelled to refer ἐν κυρίῳ: ‘inthe Lord” (ver. 81), to God and not to Christ, contrary to Pauline usage. But this need present no difficulty, si‘.ce these 2 ae [* A question might then arise: why ἐξ was (uot repeated and instead we have amd. See below]. j which is the same as ‘and ye are | 48 words in ver. 81 are not Paul’s, but a citation from the Old Testament. Who was made wisdom unto us from God, both righte- ousness and sanctification and redemp- tion.*—Here we have the rich treasure of bless- ings contained for us in Christ all laid open, re- vealing the largeness of our indebtedness to God, for what of real worth we have and are. “From God” is not to be connected with “wisdom” as indicating the source whence it came, but with “was made” as showing the author of the act. (ἐγενήϑη, a later Doric form for ἐγένετο, not passive). This is the order of thought pre- sented in the German [as well as in the English] version. The fact that Christ has been made to us ‘‘wisdom’”’- depends on God; and not only ‘*wisdom,” but also the other particulars speci- fied. Observe, too, he here passes over into the first person plural, ‘unto us,” including therein himself as he frequently does elsewhere when specially moved by a sense of his fellowship with his readers in the salvation of Christ. The po- sition of ‘wisdom,’ coming in as it does before the words ‘“‘unto us from God,” and thus sepa- rated from the remaining predicates, is not to be explained on the ground that “wisdom” is the leading thought to which the others are subordi- nated. Such a construction is neither called for by the re xai, which only serves to connect ‘righteousness’? and ‘sanctification” a little more closely, nor by the nature of the concep- tions expressed by the other terms, which des- ignate rather codrdinate aspects of the one great scheme of salvation entirely distinct from wis- dom, and therefore not capable of being included under it. Rather we may say that in consequence of the course of thought thus far pursued, the idea of “wisdom” pressed foremost upon his mind, and so came in where it did; or that he put the qualifying word common to the several members of the sentence right in among them as a word of connection (Osiander.) It is natural to look for some antithesis to what precedes in these four specifications, ‘‘ wisdom,” etc. But it can only be called a mistake in Bengel when he at- tempts to find a contrast, as in ‘‘wisdom” to ‘the foolish things; so also in ‘“righteous- ness” to ‘‘the weak things,” in ‘‘sanctification ” to ‘‘the base things,” and in ‘‘redemption” to ‘the despised things.” +—When it is affirmed [* We have here given the exact order of the Greek in or der to render the exposition more intelligible. ] + We here insert the arguments in favor of the interpre- tation which Kling has simply set aside without refuting, and which seems worthy of consideration as best fitted to dispose of some of the difficulties under which his view la- bors—and also as fraught with valuable suggestions. This other interpretation has in its favor, that it takes in the thought as it flows upon the mind in the order of the words, “who is made unto us a wisdom from God—both righteous- ness and sanctification and redemption.” In a collocation of words so peculiar, it were natural to take the last three terms as an after thought exegetical of the main one— and such an addition was needed. Wisdom was what Paul had been disparaging throughout this section. But it was the wisdom of man. Now he glories in Christ as having been made unto us wisdom. It was necessary theretore to differ- ence this from what he had been condemning. So he adds ἀπό Ocov—not ἐξ, as in the previous clause where he wishes to express the cause of an act; but ἀπό: from denos ting derivation, showing whence this wisdom came. It is uv objection to this that the article τή is not mentioned before ἀπό, since the omission is quite in Paul’s style. Eph. iii. 18, (See Alf.: also 15). Then to characterize this wisdom, to ex- hibit its distinguishing peculiarities as practical and suited 40 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. that ‘Christ was made to us wisdom,” by this we are to understand that in Him, in His person, the fulness of which was unfolded in His history, the mystery of the Divine plan of salvation has been disclosed, and with this an insight been afforded us into the dispensations and judgments of God, and we are enabled to recognize and lay hold upon that which shall conduct us to the goal of our noblest longings (comp. ii. 7 ff.; Col. i. 9 ff; 26 ff.; iii. 2; iii, 10; Phil. i. 9 ff; Eph. v. 8 ff. etc.). As closely related ideas, ‘‘righeousness ” and ‘‘sanctification’”’ are so joined as to form a distinct whole: δικαιοσύνη τε καὶ aye ασμός. The first reminds us of 2 Cor. v. 21— ‘that we might be made the righteousness of God in him;” and of Jer. xxiii. 5—‘*The Lord our righteousness;”’ and also of the saying of Christ himself in Matth. iii. 15, as well as of Acts xiii. 38; Is. 1111. 11; Gal. ii. 16, 17; Rom. i. 17; iii. 21 ff. In the language of Holy Writ righteousness denotes that conduct which com- ports with the law of God or the disposition suitable to it. This existed in Christ in absolute perfection; and it existed in Him as the second Adam (xy. 4, 7), the son of man, the head repre- senting the whole body, and in behalf of the en- tire sinful race, whose obligations to the law He had fulfilled by a life of perfect obedience, and whose debt to justice He has cancelled by sub- miting to the penalty threatened upon sin in a voluntary sacrifice of Himself even unto death, thereby complying with the behests of the Father and revealing His holy and compassionate love towards the fallen. In this way has He become righteousness for us, that we may be counted righteous before God and enter into the posses- sion of the rights and privileges which belong to this state of righteousness—that is, be adopted into the Divine family. This, regarded as an act of God, is expressed by the terms δικαιοῦν δικαίωσις : to justify, justification; and the par- don of sin, as the negative side of justifica- tion, includes also, for its corresponding positive side, God’s cordial acceptance of us as pleasing in His sight. But in this judicial portion of Christ’s redeeming work there lies also, at the same time, an element of moral change—of sanc- tification (ἃ γεα ς μό ς), and the intimate connec- tion between these two things is expressed by the τε καί. (‘In this conjunction there is implied at once distinction and equality, an intimation of similarity, as though the one were consequent upon the other.” Ostanper. In order that the = for man’s deepest deeds, instead of being merely speculative, he subjoins the three great points it contemplated. And here is where wisdom of the Gospel far surpasses that of sec- ular philosophy. It gives him in Christ pardon, holiness, triumphant deliverance from woe to glory. Here then we find 1, an adequate reason for the order of the words; 2, not a repetition but a distinct thought in ἀπὸ θεοῦ, and so a rea- son for the change of preposition: 3, not a digression from the main course of thought as must be supposed in the other interpretation, which Stanley admits, but a glorious consum- mation of it, displaying the infinite superiority of the wisdom from God over all human wisdom; 4, an epexegesis quite in the manner of Panl. Rom.i.12. Since writing the above I see that the view above given is adopted, though not argued out, by Butler in his sermons on our text. It is substan- tiated also by the Syriac, Vul., and Rheims versions. Nean- der’s testimony may be added; “In these last three concep- tions (righteousness, sanctification and redemption), there are presented to us the practical contents of the wisdom (from God), by which it is distinguished from the wisdom ef this world.’’} relation to God, in which our justification places us, may be subjectively sustained, so that we may say ‘“‘the judgment of God is according te truth,” there must be an inward connection be tween the Head and the members who partici- pated in the righteousness of their Head; This connection is effected by the love of Christ awakening faith in us. This love at once de- stroys in the subject of it all disposition to live for himself, as the moving spring of his exist- ence, all ambitious aspiring, and transports him into a state of mind that leads him to live and to become every thing in Christ alone. And this is faith, humble, earnest faith, that works in 4 us repentance as its result. In this emancipa- tion of the individual from the thraldom of sel- fishness (an emancipation which is at the same time a deliverance from-every thing to which selfishness binds us, even the idols of flesh and sense, and the world), and in this union to Christ as the sole worthy and worth-giving Saviour, lies the germ of our ‘“ sanctification.” By this we understand becoming godly-minded—the consecration of our whole life in all its elements unto God—the offering up of self unto the Most High, so that all labor becomes a Divine service, the springs of which are joy in the Lord and the witness of the Spirit to our adoption and final salvation, This ἁγεασμός: holiness, may be regarded either as progressive—sanctifica- tion, or as a fixed quality—sanctity. The latt is the prevailing usage in the New Testame (Rom. vi. 19-22; 1 Thess. iv. ὃ, 4, 7; 1 Tim. 15; Heb. xii. 14 ete.). It is to be so taken he In reference to the thing itself see Jno. xvii. 19 and the juxtaposition of “ye are justified” ar ἐγ are sanctified” in 1 Cor. vi. 11. But wh all are agreed as to the meaning of these fore ing terms as a whole, it is not so in regard the last one, ‘and redemption” (ἀπολύτ σις). Are we (with Meyer) to take this as ἃ noting the work of Christ through which our sal tion is achieved (as in Rom. iii. 24; Eph. i. 7), that it is for us an object of faith? or (accordit to the Catholic expositors) as our final deli ance from death and all the evils and temptati of sin (asin Rom. viii. 23; Eph. i. 14), and as an object of hope? The latter interpretat corresponds better with the position of the wo since it will hardly do, after having mentio ‘righteousness and sanctification,” to go b again to the negative idea of deliverance fr guilt, which is already involved in the ter righteousness. On the other hand, its posit renders the addition of any explanatory ter like that found in Rom. viii. 23; Eph. i. 14; iv. 30, unnecessary. Comp. for a fuller development of the thought Rom. viii. 10, 11, and 21-24, . —Here then is the final stage of our salvation a deliverance from the bondage of corruption unto the glorious liberty of the sons of God. That in this, as well as in the foregoing instances, Christ exhibits himself as the ‘‘ power of God” victori- ous over the power of sin and its terrible conse- quence, death, is a proximate thought, so that here again those two chief predicates, ‘“‘ wisdom and pover,” recur to view, only the second with greater drominence. But in the case of ‘‘sanc- tification,’ as well as of ‘‘redemption,” it is im- plied that Christ is in Himself what He has be - ‘ de an : CHAP. I. 26-31, a ΄’ῤῤῤ΄ῤ᾿᾿᾿ῤῤ΄᾿᾿ὔ come for us; that He in all His life and walk was entirely severed from all fellowship with sin and wholly consecrated to God, 7. 6. holy, and as such was the principle of our sanctification; that He arose victorious from the grave and the whole realm of sin, and at once ascended up on high, exalted over all, and as such carries in Himself the power by which our redemption is to be achieved. (Comp. xv. 26, 55; Eph. ii. 6). Ver. 31. The final cause of the peculiar me- thod of God’s call and the plan of His salvation by the free gift of an all-sufficient Saviour.— In order that, according as it is written, he that boasteth, in the Lord let him boast.—Here is where the argument conducts us. There must be a boasting, a glorying; not, however, in oneself before God, but in God as the author of all our advantages and blessings. And this boasting is the expression of a lofty emotion of joy and confidence. If by the term “Lord” Christ were meant, it should be ex- plained as an exultation in His fellowship, in possessing a share in His salvation. But the re- lation to ver. 29 points rather to God, the origi- nal source of all salvation. And such an appli- cation would not militate against Paul’s usage, because, as has already been remarked, the pas- sage is a citation from the Old Testament (Jer. ix. 23), particular prominence being given to the chief thought by holding fast to the original form. Hence the anacoluthon, ἵνα---καυχάσϑω, instead of καυχᾶται. If anything were to be sup- plied it would be γένηται. For a similar case see Rom. xv. 3. DOGMATICAL AND ETHICAL. 1. God’s thoughts and ways entirely unlike those of the natural man.—What is great and glorious in the sight of men, God sets at naught. What men slight as mean and contemptible, God prizes, or makes it precious. Man’s propensity is to exalt himself, and hold in honor whatever is the product of his own powers and bears the mark of mental or physical superiority, or oan be used to personal advantage, or is of noble origin, while he treats all that is crude and powerless and vulgar, just as if it had no existence. God, on the other hand, in His work of redeeming vain man, especially at its very commencement, pro- ceeds on methods quite the reverse. Here we see the Son of the Highest, whois inthe form of God, the Fulness of Divine life‘and wisdom and power, and, as the perfect image of the Father, is infinitely exalted above the most eminent of created beings, yea, is the very substance and vital principle of all the excellence and power which these beings possess—we see Him empty- ing Himself of His glory, entering into a state of creaturely dependence, assuming the form of a servant, coming into association with a sinful race although Himself sinless, bearing in holy sympathy alltheir burdens and trials on His own heart, and sharing in their condemnation and suffering and death, even to the ignoriinious death of the cross. Thus, at the very s.art, did Divine Power and Wisdom and Holines); exhibit themselves as weakness, foolishness/and sin; Life and Light, as death and darkne/s; Riches inexhaustible, as deepest poverty; thi: All in All, 47 as nothing; Essential Being, as not being. Thus in His fundamental act did God confront and confound the vain conceit of men who aspired te resemble Him in power, wisdom and blessednegs, And this initial procedure has shaped the whole method of salvation ordained in the Gospel. As the condition of pardon and acceptance God re- quires of men the absolute renunciation of their own wisdom, power and sufficiency, and a dispo- sition to ascribe all honor and glory unto God, who has thus manifested Himself to them in Christ, and to regard His workmanship in them as alone possessing worth. But since this re- quirement is exceedingly difficult for such as have distinction in this world, it happens that. among the saved there are found not many wise, mighty and noble; but the Divine calling proves effectual rather in the sphere of the rude, the weak, the ignoble and the lowly, inasmuch as it is among these that the disposition to accept sal- vation exists in the highest degree or is most readily awakened. Thus it cometh to pass that while the wise and the noble and the mighty of earth are passed by and deemed unfit for hea- venly honors, the foolish are lifted up into the light of Divine wisdom, the weak are clothed with Divine power, the ignoble are invested with the highest nobility, those who are as if they were not, attain consideration as the only real personages, and by the contrast the pomp and pride of earth are put to shame. The reason of this is that there may be no boasting before God. To this there is the opposite. 2. Unto God the Lord be all glory—He is the author of all benefits which come to us through Christ, and as He is the author so is He their final cause. Of Him and to Him are all things. And these benefits appertain to all the aspects and relations of man’s being and life as con- nected with God and His kingdom, viz. the in- tellectual, the legal, the moral and the physical. First, Wisdom. This in its highest form is the knowledge of God, and such a knowledge we have imparted in the revelation of His Gospel— a knowledge of His character, His works and ways, of the economy of His kingdom in its: pre- paration, establishment, spread and final con- summation, by means of which the thoughtful spirit may be led to choose the way of life, and to advance from the first appropriation of salva- tion in faith on to its full fruition in glory. Of this wisdom Christ is made to us the substance and the illuminating principle. The second 15 Righteousness, 7. e., restoration of fellowship with God by the satisfaction of all the law’s demand, and the cancelling of all obligations incurred, so that the sinner can on this ground, be accounted righteous in the sight of God, and be reinstated in his forfeited rights, and have free access to the Father as one of His family. This righte- ousness Christ has been made unto us by His having fulfilled all the claims of the law, both in doing and in suffering, both by yielding a per- fect obedience and by assuming the curse out of His free, infinite love, so that we, being found in Him, may be made partakers of His merits. The third, inseparably connected with the pre- ceding, is the Sanctification of human life in all ita inward and outward movements so far as they 48 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ----- .τττ τττ----------Ὁ----ς-ς-.-.,ο-.---ς-ρ---.--------ῥ-ὔ-------------------ς----------..--- Ow are determined by man’s own will. This is effected by the shedding abroad of the love of God in the heart through the indwelling Spirit, who, consequent upon the work of Christ, comes to appropriate to us His righteousness and to as- sure us of his pardoning grace. And when, not- withstanding all past sins, we become thoroughly conscious of this love to us, there is awakened in our souls a love in return which shows itself in perfect confidence and in entire devotion to God, and in the utter renunciation of all sel- fish and worldly affections. And this is holiness. But this holiness perfects itself gradually, in the daily exercise of repentance and faith, and love more and more takes possession of the whole life to the complete regulation of all our faculties and relations, so far as they can be determined by it. And this Christ is made, unto us by vir- tue of His holiness passing over into our hearts through the Holy Ghost, whom He hath given unto us, and who transforms us into a likeness to His all-perfect character. Finally, Redemption. —tThis is the destruction of all our enemies, even to the last, which is death, so that not only is the spirit life because of righteousness, but God, who hath raised from the dead the Lord Jesus Christ, will quicken our mortal bodies through the Spirit that dwelleth in us. Thus is man, in respect to his entire organism, delivered from the bondage of corruption, and introduced into the glorious liberty of the children of God. And all this is done through the power and after the type of Christ, who, Himself victor over death, has be- come the principle of life eternal for all who be- lieve in Him. As they die with Him, so also will they reign with Him. In this that profound say- ing is fulfilled, that corporeity is the end of the ways of God; in other words, that the deliver- ance of our whole organization from the ban of death, and our introduction into the fulness and power of an indestructible life is the consumma- tion of God’s work of restoring fallen man; a work which was begun in his deliverance from the condemnation of sin. Short and good, Olearius: Christus est sapientia in verbo, quoad doctrinam, jus- tibia in merito, quoad fidem; sanctificatio in spiritu, quoad vitam ; redemptio in novissimo adventu, quoad salutem xternam. 3. [The efficiency of faith in the matter of salva- tion.—This consists not in any virtue or meritori- ousness of the act itself but in the fulness of bles- sings contained in the Being whom it appropriates or to whom it unites us. It enlightens because it lets in the light of Christ’s wisdom; it justifies because it appropriates the righteousness of Christ; it sanctifies because it puts us into fellowship with Christ’s holy life, and it proves our victory over death and the grave by associa- ting us with Him who, as the Captain of our salvation, has proved himself the mighty con- queror. Thus while the wisdom and the power of this world are limited by the weakness and imperfection of human faculties, faith proves its superiority over both by taking to itself the ful- ness of Him who filleth all in all. ] 4. [Christ cannot be divided in the benefits accruing from Him. We cannot have Him for our wisdom or for our righteousness without at the same time having Him for our sanctification and our redemption. The lack of any one of these benefits proves the absence of them all. Christ is a perfect whole, and His work a perfect whole, and to be accepted at all He must be accepted as a whole. | 5. [The surpassing excellence of God’s method of salvation is seen in the fact that he presents to us not a dead system of doctrines nor lifeless instrumentalities to be acquired and im- proved by us, but a living agency, a person, infinite, ever-present, ever-active, all-wise, all- powerful, all-good, who acts upon us while we act on Him, and saves us by an efficiency of his own. | HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 1. [The method of preaching the Gospel must be adapted to the nature of the Divine calling.— 1. As to the subjects thereof. The preaching should be of such a kind, and be set forth in such a manner, as to reach the poor, the illiterate and the weak. One sign that the kingdom of God has come is that the poor have the Gospel preached unto them. As it was in the beginning somustit still be. God’s calling has not changed its nature. But in thus suiting the Gospel to the humble, we are not to set aside the noble and learned as though excluded from salvation. At the manger in Bethlehem the worship of the shepherds was followed by the worship of the wise men from the Hast; among the disciples there was a Joseph of Arimathea; the vacancy in the Apostleship made by the fall of Judas was filled by a Paul; among the converts at Corinth was Erastus the chamberlain and the wealthy Gaius. 2. Asto the ends it has in view, viz: the humbling of man’s pride and the promoting of God’s glory.—The aim at such an end must be seen in the style and manner of the preacher himself and in the effects which he seeks to pro- duce. 38. As to its contents.—This must be Christ in all His fulness and in His manifold ad- aptations to the wants of the sinner; Christ Him- self, not a system of doctrines, nor a code of precepts, but the living person. ] 2. The reason why not many wise are called. 1. Not because God puts contempt on human wisdom, onrank or fortune, or upon man’s natural faculties and powers, for these are His gifts and were designed for good, 2, but on account of men’s guilt. They abuse these gifts into an oceasion for withdrawing themselves from the grace of God, and setting up for themselves to the darkening of their own understandings and the ruin of all their own interests through their weakness and insufficiency. SpeneR in STARKE. 3. Three classes of persons, the wise, the strong and the noble, are the special foes of God’s kingdom, partly because they think that God’s grace detracts from their power and consequence, and partly because they imagine themselves to be already in a blessed condition (John ix. 89- 41). SrarKe. 4. The fact that a majority of its professors at firs: were of humble rank redounds to the honor of Christianity. From this it is seen: 1. That it esteems all men alike.. 2. That it owes its rise and spre.d not to human might and art, but to God. 8..That it requires not learning but an honest he: rt that is anxious for its own salvation. ‘ — “5. CHAP. II. 1-5. 49 —A miserable hull often conceals a precious kernel. HEUBNER. 5. The obligations which spring from these truths. —The poor and needy owe Christianity their profoundest gratitude for being so honored by it. [At the same time they must be careful not to arrogate any superiority in the sight of God over those who are above them in learning or birth or ability. Pride in ignorance and meanness is no less abominable in the sight of God than pride in greatness, wealth and learn- ing.] On the contrary, the rich and the noble have occasion to humble themselves. Christi- anity owes them nothing, and they should be mindful of the danger of being beguiled from it. 6. The proud and self-sufficient must be hum- bled.—The Saviour did not become the Son of David until the princely glory of David’s house had departed and his descendants had come to the saw-horse. This was to show that the lofti- ness of this world must be brought low, if it would enter the kingdom of God. [The heights of earthly promotion and glory lift us no whit nearer Heaven.—lIt is easier to step there from the lowly vale of humiliation and sorrow.] God’s kingdom is a cross-kingdom. GossNER. 7. Cheer for the lowly.—What the world rejects that God lifts up and transforms into a sanctuary. Art thou small and despicable in the sight of men, rejoice at it and consider that God looks down especially upon thee (Ps. cxiii. 6-8 and €xxxviil. 6). 8. Instruction for the high.—To God belongs all the glory. If then God is to display his power in thee and make something out of thee, thou must consent to become asnothing. Everything in Christianity turns upon this one quality of humility. The blessedness of the children of God is that they possess nothing, the glory of which does not belong to God. 9. What incomparable riches in Christ! — Be- lievest thouin Him? Then thou possessest Him. Let earth’s trifles pass. Thou hast Christ, and with Him thou hast all things.—He is thine in all his offices.—As a Prophet, he is our wisdom; as High-Priest, he is our righteousness; as King, he is our sanctification; and in all three offices, he is our complete redemption. HeEpiEecer. 10. J.Spencer. Ver. 21. Thesuperiority of Chris- tianity over human science, on the subject of religion. I. Demonstrated as to a. a future state; ὁ. Hu- man duty; 6. The character of God; ὦ. The par- don of the sinners. II. Application; a. Guard against a so-called philosophical style of reason- ing; ὃ. Cling to the great distinctive doctrines of the Gospel; ὁ. Prize the pure Gospel; d. Heedlessness of sinners, strange. J. Barrow. ver. 23. The doctrine of the Gospel—the doctrine of the cross. 1. As a suffering—in appearance criminal. 2. As most bitter and painful. 3. As most ignominious and shameful. 4. As agree- able and advantageous to the intents of the passion. 5. As completory of ancient significa- tions and predictions. 6. As apt to excite devo- tion, and enforce the practice of duty. H. BusHNELL. ver. 28. The power of God in self- sacrifice. I. God is morally passible; a part of His glory is to be compassionate. 11. This com- passion exhibited in Christ’s passion on the cross.» III. The power of it as seen in the effect it has to subdue enmity. It conquers evil by enduring evil.—C. H. Spurceon. Vv. 23 and 24. Christ crucified. I. The Gospel rejected. II. The Gos- pel accepted. III. The Gospel admired. Ano- Nymous. Vv. 26-29. 716 Christian calling. I. Its nature; a. Not many mighty, wise and noble; but ὁ. The foolish, the weak, the base, are called. II. The reason: a. Not that God is un- willing that the great, and wise, and noble should be saved; but ὁ. Because the foolish, the weak, the base, are more ready to feel their need and accept grace; and 6. that the glory of God may be the more signalized. II. In its bearings; a, Shows us the periious position of the mighty, and noble, and wise; they are in danger of being passed by and confounded; ὁ. Teaches us not to disparage the foolish, the weak and the base; 6, The foolish, the weak and tiie base are not to be proud against the opposite class, as though any better in God’s sight; d. The true preparation for God’s kingdom is an entire emptying of self; e. The purport of the calling, the glory of God.— Jon. Epwarps. Vv. 29-31. God glorified in man’s dependence. I. This dependence absolute and universal; a. As they have all their good of God; a. of his grace; β. of his power; ὁ. As they have all through God; 6. As they have all ἐπ God both their objective good and their subjective good. 11. God is glorified in it. a. In that it affords greater occasion and obligation to take notice of and acknowledge God’s perfections and all-suffi- ciency; 5. In that it is hereby demonstrated how great God’s glory is as compared with. the creature’s. III. Use of the doctrine; a. It shows us God’s marvellous wisdom. in the work of redemption; 4. Those systems of doctrine, that are opposed to this absolute and universal dependence on God, do derogate from God’s glory, and so thwart the design of the contrivance for our redemption; c. We learn the efficiency, of faith; d. Our duty is to. exalt God above, and ascribe to Him all the glory of redemption. A. Burier. ver. 30. Christ the source of all blessings. C. As Illustrated by the Apostle’s Example. Carrer II. 1-5. 1. And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of 2 wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony! of God. For I determined not to know? 3 any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in 7 δ0 THE FIRST EPISTLE ΤῸ THE CORINTHIANS. Se eens tae ramet YOON ye 4 weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s [om. man’s*] wisdom,but in demonstration of the 5 Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. 1 Ver. 1.—Instead of μαρτύριον, others, according to good and ancient authorities [A.C. Cod. Sin. Syr.], read μυστήριον, But it is more probable that this arose from a gloss suited to ver. 7, than that μαρτύριον could have crept in here from i. 63 at the same time Only a few authorities read μαρτύριον τοῦ χριστοῦ. 2 Ver. 2.—The received τοῦ εἰδέναι re is not well authenticated, and the order τὶ εἰδέναι is confirmed by B.C. Ὁ. E. A. and many other decisive authorities. E. and by Griesbach, Scholz., Lach., Alf., Meyer. pretation: to know what is in you.’”’] (Wordsworth says: “ri, which is emphatic, is rightly placed before εἰδέναι by B.C. ἢ Indeed εἰδέναι τί ἐν ὑμῖν Would have been liable to an inconyenient inter 8 Ver. 4.—The received av@pwrivns has the balance of authorities against it [and is omitted by Griesb., Scholz. Lach. Tisch., Meyer.) Other variations in this ver. (e.g.) πιθανοῖς for πειθοῖς, etc., can hardly be regarded as any thing more than conjectures of an older or a later date, (See below.) EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. The connection.—Paul here affirms his own conduct to have been in strict accordance with the nature of the Divine calling. [His views were sustained by his practice and at the same time justified that practice.] <‘‘As the Lord chose no one among you on account of his wisdom, s0 I did not come to you with wisdom.”—Buraer. Ver. 1. And I.—x¢yw: “I also.” So God has dealt with you, and I have conformed to his method. [Or: ‘I also, like all true Christian preachers.”—pz Werte. Or: ‘I accordingly,” consistently with the revealed purpose of God just mentioned.”—Hopaz.] The connection with the preceding paragraph is close and direct, though aremoter reference to i. 17, 23 is not thereby excluded.—on coming to you, brethren, came not.—He has in view here his first long residence at Corinth, although a second shorter visit had been paid them just before writing this Epistle. The repetition ‘‘coming,” ‘I came,” is not foreign to classic usage, nor is it mere tautology. The former expresses the fact of his appearing among them [or the occasion of which he was about to speak,] while the second with its qualifying adjuncts states the way and mode of his appearance.—with excellency of speech and of wisdom.—[‘ As speech and wisdom (λόγος and σοφία) are here distinguished, the former probably refers to the manner or form, and the latter to the matter of his preach- ing. It was neither as a rhetorician nor as a philosopher that he appeared before them.”— Hopvae. In i. 17 what he disavowed was wis- dom of speech (σοφίᾳ λόγου), the emphasis being on ‘“‘wisdom.” Here, the two are distinguished as separate elements, and the idea of rhetoric is added to that of philosophy.] This clause some make the sole adjunct to “I came,” leaving the rest of the sentence distinct, as adducing the proof of his appearing as he did, g. d., “1 came to you thus and so, inasmuch as I proclaimed,’ etc. [‘*This mode is generally preferred not only because of the position of the words, but also because of the sense.”—Hopaer; and so Alford, Stanley and others.] But the whole clause is to be taken together, and the adjunct before us to be connected with—proclaiming to you the testimony of God.—The sense is ‘I did not come preaching with highly wrought eloquence and philosophic subtilities.’ To take the present participle here in a future sense is neither neces- sary nor suitable, since he is here speaking not of intention but simply of his mode of conduct. The matter of his preaching is ‘the testimony of God.” This is essentially the same as ‘the testimony of Christ,” i. 6, and what was there said holds good also here. It is the testimony which God bears concerning Christ (1 Jno. v. 9), or the revelation of his plan of salvation which He makes out of His own consciousness, origin- ally through Christ, and then through the Apos- tles. This is what it is incumbent on the servant of God simply to proclaim. In this work there is no need of rhetorical ornament and philo- sophic art. The very object of the proclamation itself precludes the applicability of eloquence and wisdom. (Comp. Osi.) [‘‘The Gospel is in its essence not a theory, or an abstraction, or ἃ comment, or an image of the fancy, but it is history, and indeed, Divine history. The preach- ing of the Gospel is therefore a proclamation of the doings of God, and especially of that one great act of love, viz., the sending of His own Son to die for the sins of the world. This may become a matter for theory and science in the bosom of the Church after faith in it has become established, but even then it is only as a develop- ment from faith. Science can never beget faith. Faith comes only through the regenerating power of God’s Spirit, who reveals Himself efficiently and in the most direct manner through the pro- clamation of the Gospel story.” OLSHAUSEN. | Ver. 2. His conduct in the particular above- mentioned shown to be deliberate—the result of a settled purpose. For—confirmatory—I did not determine.—[The negative particle, by. its position here, is more naturally connected with the main verb. So Alf., who interprets: “the only thing that I made it definitely my business to know, was;’’ and Meyer says that the common connection of the “not” with ‘any thing” (τι), as in our E, V., is contrary to the ~ phraseology. But Stanley translates: ‘I deter- mined to know nothing,” making οὐκ ἔκρινα like od onut. The difference of import is somewhat. In the one case, Paul tells us how far his mind was made up, that his determination did not go beyond one point; in the other case, his deter- mination was a positive one, covering the whole ground and exciuding from that all but one thing.] κρίνειν with the inf.—to conclude upon, resolved, decide, as in 2 Cor. ii. 1; 1 Rom. xiv. 13.—to know any thing among you ex- cept Jesus Christ and him crucified—~. 6. to mingle any other sort of knowledge with the preaching of Christ. His one sole aim was to portray before their eyes this one person, and CHAP. II. 1-5. eS that too in His deepest humiliation, as He had suffered for them the shameful death of the cross. [So far from seeking to conceal his ig- hominy, so offensive to the worldly spirit, he would make it prominent and glory init.] Hence it was that he would not indulge in any rhetori- cal or dialectic arts, in any high-flown discourse or philosophic argumentation. In this way cer- tainly he mighce fail to attract the educated classes, so called, but he would be the better able to bring to light men’s actual’ religious needs and satisfaction. And this, with him, was the great point, for which he was willing to renounce every attainment in which he excelled, for he knew that those who wilfully neglected the reve- lation he brought could be gained by no reason- ings from the light of nature. (See Bengel in loco.) [Furthermore, it must be observed, that it would be to mistake entirely the drift of the Apostle’s discourse, were we to take the name of Christ here, according to the fashion of many divines, as put by metonymy for the whole sys- tem of divinity, or for the doctrine of the Atone- ment. The purpose of Paul here is to avoid theorizing of all kinds, and to adhere rigidly to Christianity in its most concrete form as seen in the person and work of its founder. In his view, preaching was to act the part of a herald, to proclaim, not opinions, but the facts and messages as intrusted to him, and to let them speak for themselves. Hence we are here to take his lan- guage most literally. What he resolved on pro- claiming to the Corinthians was Christ in His person and work, as the living revelation of the Father, as the Truth and the Life, as the One in whom were hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, as the source of all salvation and blessing, whom to believe in, love and serve was life eternal. His Gospel was not theory or science, but history, and the glory of this history is, to use the words of Olshausen, that «it lives and repeats itself in the Church as a whole and in every member of the Church. It there- fore never grows old any more than God himself can become antiquated; and it maintains itself to this day in all that fulness of power which it manifested in the first establishment of the Church.” —‘“‘To know any thing.’ There is a force in the use of the word ‘‘know,”’ instead of “preach,” or ‘‘teach,’’ which is not to be over- looked. Itshows that his determination covered not only the range of his words and acts but also of his thoughts. He meant that Christ should fill his consciousness. }. Ver. 3. ‘‘Describes the preacher, as the for- mer verse did his theme.” Bengel.—And I was with you, ἐγενόμην πρὸς ὑμᾶς. This might be rendered: I came to you, as 2 Jno. xii. (according to the better reading). But Paul is here speaking not of his coming, but of his residence among them (ver. 4). In like manner yevéotat πρός occurs also in xvi. 10. (πρός : be- fore, in presence of, xvi. 6,7; Gal. i. 18; Jno. i. 1.) How he was with them he proceeds to state in three substantives. a. in weakness. Since he is here speaking of his personal bearing, we are not to understand by this any physical infirmity, such as weak organs, or feeble chest, or ungainliness of form [as Stanley]; nor yet any sickness, or feebleness, bringing with it depres- 51 sion of spirits [as Riickert and Stier], though this would be more plausible; and, least of all, any thing happening from without, like persecutions, and sufferings inflicted by others [as Chrysos- tom], which would be inconsistent with the use of the singular number. In view of the expres- sions of Paul himself (2 Cor. x. 1, 10; xii. 10; iv. 7-12) it were better to refer this to inward weakness, but not so much to any sense of defect in science and education (so de Wette, Osi.), as to a feeling of utter inadequacy for the greatness of the work and for the resistance he would have to encounter (see Acts xviii. 9, ff.). [Bengel says: ‘‘opposed to power (ver. 4). We must not suppose that the Apostles were always in an agreeable frame of mind or quite free from per- turbations.] ὁ. in fear and c. in great trem- bling.—Terms expressive of great timidity as contrasted with a bold and confident demeanor maintained by the overweening consciousness of his own abilities, ‘‘such as appeared in the eyes of ancient Paganism to be the highest morality.”” Neanper. It has been justly ob- served that such anxiety, arising from a sense of insufficiency for the work on hand, is a marked characteristic of the most distinguished servants of God (see Osiander). The interpretation of Olshausen and others is less consistent with the idea expressed in the foregoing term (‘‘in weak- ness.”) They understand Paul as intimating 8, modest fear lest he shoald corrupt the Divine truth with a mixture of human elements, and failin the proper discharge of his duty. The sense of the phrase, ‘in fear and trembling,” which is a proverbial one (Gen. ix. 2; Ex. xv. 16; Is. xix. 16) is determined by the connection. Elsewhere, as in Eph. vi. 5; 2 Cor. vii. 15, it denotes: sollicita reverentia; or, as Bengel: “A fear which abounds so as to effect even the body in its gestures and movements.” Ver. 4. Describes the mode of preaching. — And my speech and my preaching.—The ‘‘and”’ in ver. 8 and the ‘‘and” in ver. 4 are not so related as to be rendered: ‘‘As well I my- self—as also my speech.” But the first of these conjunctions simply joins ver. 3 to the preceding, and the second, ver. 4 to ver. 8, putting the matters stated in harmonious connection. On account of the repetition of ‘‘my,” we are not at liberty to take the two words here as identi- cal, nor yet are they so related as to indicate the first the form and the second the substance of his preaching [so Stanley]. It were bettér to dis- tinguisb them as denoting, the first (λόγος), his private discourse, and the second (κήρυγμα), his public discourse [so Olsh., Riick., and most others]; or, the first, discourse in general, and the second, discourse in particular, viz., the proclamation of the Gospel [so Hodge]. Less probable is the opinion of de Wette [adopted by Alf.], who takes the two words as designating the same thing but in distinct aspects; the for- mer his style and course of argument, the latter his announcement of Gospel facts and conviction of their certainty.*—was not,—The verb here has to be supplied; either éyévero for ver. 8, or * [Why de Wette’s view should be termed “less probable,” when it is in perfect consistency with the use of the terms thus far, it is difficult to see.] 52 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ἦν, meaning: was not furnished with (Luke iv. 32); or: did not consist in. The character of his speech and preaching is described, 1, nega- tively—not in the persuasive words of wisdom, οὐκ ἐν πειϑοῖς σοφίας λόγοις.---[ἀνϑρω- πίνης : man’s, is a gloss, inserted most probably through a failure to perceive that the word thus far has been used in a strict and single sense, and from the consequent opinion that it needed some qualification. ‘‘Wisdom”’ is, all through, “synonymous with philosophy.”] The adjective πειϑοῖς has, from the earliest times, proved a stumbling block. It is found no where else in all Greek literature, though its use is warranted by analogous forms, as φειδός from φείδομαι. But the explanation, which would take πειϑοῖς as a substantive, in the sense of: persuasions, and put σόφίας λόγοις in apposition, is inadmissible, if only for this reason, that the plural of πειϑώ no where occurs. Hence have arisen manifold conjectures for changing the ordinary reading, none of which are well grounded, not even the suggestion so acutely maintained by Semler, Rincke, Fritzche, that the original read thus: οὐκ ἐν πειϑοῖ σοφίας in fitting antithesis to ἐν ἀποδείξει πνεύματος, since it is decisive against this, that this reading no where appears alone without λόγοις or λόγων. Even in the ordinary reading, ‘“‘wisdom”’ may be regarded as expressing the main idea, inasmuch as ver. 5 demands this. πειϑός, otherwise πέϑανός [and as Meyer sug- gests, ‘probably a word in common, oral use.”’ ] convincing, winning, enticing, comp. rudavo- yoyia, Col. ii. 4. [Corinthia verba, pro exquisitis, et magnopere elaboratis et ad ostentationem nitidis. WerstEIn ad loc.| 2, positively—but in de- monstration of the Spirit and of power,— ‘‘Demonstration” stands in strong contrast with ‘‘persuasive words,” since the word is often used elsewhere also to denote strong, cogent proof in opposition to winning speech. The way in which it is to be taken here, depends upon the manner in which we construe the associated genatives. These express either the object of the demonstration or its subject. In the former case the phrase would mean the practical exhi- bition of the spirit, as the source of spiritual life, renewing, enlightening and sanctifying, and of the power which resides in this spirit and which it imparts to man. In the latter case, the Spirit must be regarded as dwelling in the Apostle himself, and working through him, dis- playing His power in the facts he proclaimed, by rendering them effective to salvation. What ability he had to convince and convert would thus be ascribed to the living energy of the Spirit whose minister he was. In this way, as Neander says, ‘‘the demonstration furnished by the Spirit would be in contrast with that pre- sented through words, and the demonstration of gi with that of logical argumentation. It is he testimony of the Spirit which alone Paul admits as valid.” This interpretation is to be preferred, since in the antithetic clause ‘ wis- dom” is to be regarded as the subject or source whence the persuasive words originate, or which begets and presents them. Hardly deserving of more than mention are expositions like that which takes “Spirit and power” as equivalent to: powerful spirit, or which explains the ‘de- monstration of the Spirit” to consist in the proof afforded by prophecies, and that ‘‘of power’ Ja the miracles Paul wrought (Origen and Grotius Even were prophecy and miracle to be thought of in this connection still they could not by any means have been exclusively intended. In any case, the reference must primarily have been to that moral power from above which ever accom- panied the preaching of the Apostle, and which acted upon the hearts and consciences of his hearers, awakening, agitating and quickening them to a new life. In all this there was a de- monstration of a higher sort, more influential for faith than the strongest arguments of philosophy. Ver. 5. Expressive of ultimate intent both of God in sending Him to preach as He did, and of Himself -acting in compliance with it,—that your faith should not stand in the wis- dom of men, but in the power of God.— The end of preaching is faith in Christ. But if this faith was grounded upon human wisdom and its arguments and persuasions, which .were only a superficial assent, then would the founda- tion be loose. It could remain only until assailed by strong arguments of a contrary sort. But if, on the other hand, faith rested upon a Divine demonstration, which while it convinced, con- verted also, and so took possession of the whole man, it was then fixed and immovable, and could victoriously withstand all the assaults of human power and art. [‘‘Longinus alludes to the abrupt and unsys- tematic style on which the Apostle prides himself, ‘Paul of Tarsus was the first who maintained positive assertion without elaborate proof.’ ”— STANLEY]. DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. The nature of faith in Christ.—It is a trust- ful surrender of soul to Him; a conviction con- cerning Him, which involves at the same time a union with His person, even as He is offered unto us for our salvation—hence, with Him as ‘the crucified.” It is a reception of Him in such a way that He dwells in us and we in Him. But this pre-supposes a renunciation of all self- confidence, and of all trust in any thing crea- turely and human, whether it be in the line of action, or permission, or of suffering, as avail- able before God for working out or earning sal- vation, or for establishing and restoring our fel- lowship with God. It isan act which can proceed only from a mind renewed and strengthened by the might of Divine love, since God’s Spirit and power are operative in it, showing and convincing the sinner on the one hand of his own guilt and insufficiency for himself, and on the other hand of the holy and compassionate love of God, His saving righteousness and His almighty grace in Christ; and this, too, in a way to take down all boasting, and beget an implicit reliance upon God alone. 2. The sole means to produce faith.—This is 8 style ofpreaching which presents the great facta of redemption directly to the heart in their sim~ ple Divine energy, without the accessories of human science and art. In such preaching, God’s Spirit and power can bear testimony, and glorify Christ, and bring to man’s consciousness CHAP. II. 1-5. the greatness, and holiness, and wisdom, and glory of His redeeming love in such a manner as to qualify the heart for an exercise of faith. Wheresoever, on the contrary, human rhetoric with its artifices, and human philosophy with its speculations, are mingled up with Gospel truth, there offered some obstruction is to the operation of the Divine power; there some purely human influence, such as the charm of style or of fine reasoning, it may be, supersedes the Divine in- fluence, and we fail of being drawn into the sphere of the truth itself, ‘“‘as it is in Jesus;” there human selfishness and pride still have free scope. As the result, we have instead of a firm and lasting faith, only a feeble, sickly opinion, which is ever ready to yield to counter-influences, or to changed humors, or to new systems of thought; which does not carry in itself the life of man in Christ, or of Christ in man; which is not heavenly, but earthly, not deeply rooted, but superficial, and ever ready to vanish away. ὃ. The mood and attitude of the Christian preacher. He who clearly perceives what faith is, and what is requisite for it, and what depends on it; who sees what barriers of every kind, especially of false culture and foolish pride, oppose themselves to it; who understands how the pure and artless preaching of Christ alone has power to awaken faith, and yet what prejudices there are against such preaching, and how little it is acceptable to men, especially to the highly educated classes, and to those who either practise or tolerate the grosser or more refined forms of wickedness, and how the whole life and being of a man strives against the truth which seeks to slay their sel- fishness and their sensuality,—a person who comprehends all this as he ought, will recognize and feel it to be a task transcending all human ability, and too difficult for him in the imperfec- tion of his spiritual life, to go abroad into the world, especially into the circle of the refined and learned, as a simple preacher of Christ crucified, and there maintain his stand. The persons he there meets, seek their satisfaction in art, and science, and learning; they take delight in lux- ury and sensual enjoyment; and the knowledge of this fact abates confidence, takes away boast- ing, begets timidity, awakens anxiety, yea bows a man to the very dust with a sense of his own, weakness. But for this very reason does he be- come all the more suitable an instrument for Christ. The more emptied he is of self, the more can God impart to him of His spirit and power, and work in him and through him, the more will he be disposed to cherish a holy courage and confidence in God. With ‘‘the foolishness of preaching” he will be ready to encounter a world full of obstacles, and find himself strong enough to overthrow all its bulwarks, while he will feel ashamed to resort to secular arts for gaining an entrance for himself. And the earnest endeavor _ of every one, through whom God achieves exploits, is to become just such a simple instrument of the Spirit in subduing the hearts of men through the word of truth, and winning them to Christ. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. [1. Paul the pattern of an Evangelical preacher. On entering Corinth Paul was confronting his . 188 severest task. He had just left Athens, where, notwithstanding his brilliant audience and great speech on Mars Hill, he had met with compara- tively small success. We read of no Church hav- ing been founded there. And now he is to offer the Gospel in a city that presented in many re- spects far greater obstacles than Athens did. In addition to the pride of philosophy there was to be encountered here a degree of luxury and vice no where else to be found. And if there was failure at Athens, how much more the likelihood of failure at Corinth? It is in view of these dis- couragements, that the picture which the Apostle has given us of himself obtains its peculiar inte- rest. The main features of it are 1. His inward feelings. He is not bold, defiant, self-assured, as an earthly warrior pushing up to an assault. On the contrary, he is much cast down, conscious of weakness, full of fear. To the outward sight, there is every thing against him. But while the flesh trembles, the spirit has courage to go on, being trustful in God. 2. His determination as to the course to be pursued. a. He will not cater to the tastes of the Corinthians, and think to win them by gratifying these. Fine oratory and subtle philosophy, however capable of these, he lays aside. They are not the means for winning faith, for saving souls. ὦ. He will simply pro- claim the testimony of God, holding up Christ in all His glory, and in all His shame, as the only means which God hath appointed to make man wise and holy, believing that however much this might scandalize the natural heart, it was the demonstration of God’s spirit and power which would alone prove mighty for the overthrow of Satan, and the setting up of God’s kingdom. 3, His aim. The faith he might awaken should rest in nothing he might say or do of himself, but solely in the exhibition which God should make of Himself through the Son whom He had set forth, and whom Paul was intent on holding up before the minds of men even to the utter hiding of himself from view ]. 2. Heuspner:—The Christian must first unlearn in order to learn. To preach Christ the Cruci- fied is to put Him and His atoning work at the top, to set all truth in connection with these, and to derive all good from these (ver. 2). Self-dif- fidence in a preacher helps more than self-confi- dence. It isa great thing to stand in place of God and proclaim His word in presence of an- gels and men (ver. 3). Christianity is sufficient for itself and needs no adventitious aids. No preacher should so far humble himself as to seek these, nor should the people expect them. What is the demonstration of the Spirit and of power? (ver. 4). It is the conviction of sin and of the need of a Saviour, which the Spirit works in the heart through the Gospel. This is something which no man can effect of himself. Hence what the preacher has preéminently to strive for, is that the Spirit may operate through his word; and the hearers, that they may experience this heavenly power. In order that the preacher may make ‘demonstration of the Spirit,” he must have the Spirit. A faith which rests upon regard for a philosopher is 1, impure—a man’s name is put for Christ’s; 2, unsafe and fickle— human systems crowd each other out; 3, inope- rative—the Spirit of God is not its source; 4, not 54 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. SS, TAT ee genuine—science has no faith-begetting power. Therefore a Christian’s faith should not rest upon scholastic wisdom, but on the power of God re- newing the heart. What a person has experi- enced within cannot be argued out. Hepincer:—Christ Crucified the preacher’s Alpha and Omega. Away with finery and feath- ers! Let the Spirit of God speak in thee. He knows how to hit the heart (ver. 2). Those con- ductors to salvation who have been proved in the furnace of affliction are the best approved. To the mariner on a wild sea, experience is every thing. To have only studied maps at school will prove of little account (ver. 3). Gossner:—The death of Christ must be recog- nized and credited. This is what captivates the heart, and kindles the fire that burns. Faith in the Son of God is the greatest miracle of grace. It is a great consolation that here and there one soul that hears us is made to experience the power of Christ’s blood for the forgiveness of sins. He who preaches Christ crucified must himself be ready for a crucifixion. Paul trem- bled while preaching that which blessed the world. Many false teachers, who betray the world and lull it into a death sleep, speak with bold front and without sense of danger. RirGer :—It is a question whether ministers and fear, and are not too assiduous in filling up the gaps and pauses with artificial efforts; whether they do not shrink too much from the criticism of the world, when it insists so strenu- ously upon calmness, fluency and ease in a speaker. But where there is life, there will be fluctuations. Living growth has to break through obstructions. [CuALMERS:—A minister has no ground to hope for fruit from his exertions until in himself he has no hope; until he has learned to put no faith in the point and energy of his sentences— until he feel that a man may be mighty to com- pel the attention, and mighty to regale the ima- gination, and mighty to silence the gainsayers, and yet not mighty to the pulling down of strong- holds]. [THoLuck. Vers. 1-5. Paul a type of the true preacher. 1. Contents of his sermon, ver. 2. IL. Tone of the preacher. Turremin. ver. 2. The knowledge of Christ the crucified. It includes a threefold knowledge. I. What man is. 11. What God is. III. What man should be. CHALMERs. vers. 4, 5. The necessity of the Spirit to give effect to the preaching of the Gospel. 1. Success of the teacher dependent on God in the ordinary branches of learning. II. The specialty in the work of the Christian teacher. ] : do not try too much to conceal their weakness : IlIl.—THE GOSPEL, WHICH ABJURES HUMAN WISDOM, HAS NEVERTHELESS A WISDOM OF ITS OWN. Cuarter II. 6-16. Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom [a wis- dom not] of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to naught: But we speak the wisdom of God [God’s wisdom]' in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory; Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known 7t, they would not have crucified the Lord of 9 glory. But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which? God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us’ by his* Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth (οἶδεν) the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth [¢yvwxev ]® no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost [the Spirit]® teacheth ; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually oOo ao 15 discerned [judged of]. But he that is spiritual judgeth’ [of] all things*, yet he him, 16 self is judged of [by] no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ? 1 Ver. 7.---ῤᾷ θεοῦ σοφίαν, so in all the best authorities, A. B. O. Ὁ. E. F. Cod. Sin., instead of σοφίαν θεοῦ. The emphasis being on θεοῦ. Then σοφίαν ev μυστηρίῳ come together, forming one complex idea.] Ver. 9.—a is better than ὅσα [the former, as it is found in A. B. C., Meyer, Stanley and Lach. prefer. But the Text, Rec. is supported by Ὁ, EB. F. G. Cod. Sin. and is adhered to by Words. and Alf.} : 8 Ver. 10,—[{The proper order, supported by all the best authorities, is ἡμῖν δὲ ἀπεκάλυφεν 6 θεος. The emphasis is op the first words. “ Zo us, however, hath God revealed them.’’] Pa CHAP. II. 6-16. δᾶ - ------- 4“ὙοΥ. 10.—Many good authorities omit αὐτοῦ : his. The omission is more explicable on the ground of what follows (τὰ yap πνεῦμα) than the omission of αὐτοῦ. [Yet it is omitted by A. B. C. Cod. Sin., doubted by Alf., rejected by Stanley. ] 5 Ver. 11.—Instead of οἶδεν. ἔγνωκεν." κύριος γινώσκει. So the best MSS. and editions. The former simply means “knoweth;” the latter “to know by acquisition.” Words. [‘* There is a difference between the two words oidev and Yet we have in iii. 20 6 Ver. 13.—ayiov, holy, is not well attested. A Gloss. [Omitted by A. B. C. Dl. F. G. Cod. Sin. and rejected by Words., Alf., Meyer.) 7 Ver. 15.—év after avaxpivec is not original: has been inserted on account of the δὲ in the following clause [yet it is found in B. D3. BE. J. Cod. Sin., and is retained by Words., De Wette.] 8 Ver. 15.—ra before πάντα 15 well supported. The omission is probably to be explained from the fact that some thought it necessary to take πάντα as accusative masce. in antithesis to οὐδενὸς. E. J. Cod. Sin.) 9 Lach. instead of χριστοῦ reads κυριοῦ. ical repetition of νοῦν κυριοῦ above. ] EXEGETICAL AND ORITICAL. [In this section we have the other side of the matter under discussion. In view of Paul’s re- pudiation of “‘ wisdom,” it might be inferred by the Corinthians that Christianity was a narrow, partial, one-sided religion, suited only to one particular portion of human nature; that while it professed to be the friend of true piety and sound morals, it was at the same time a foe to science and free thought; yea, that it stood in entire antagonism to that which both universal opinion and the declarations of the Old Testa- ment esteemed ‘‘ more precious than rubies,” and was the ally of ignorance and barbarism. Such inferences it was important to obviate for the credit of Christianity, and in the interest of truth. Hence the Apostle goes on to state that the Gospel, which ignored human wisdom, and in some of its aspects carried the appearance of folly, did not abjure all pretense to wisdom, nor put contempt on the human intellect. He shows furthermore that while he deemed it expedient to confine himself when with the Corinthians to simple preaching, there was a sermonizing which went beyond this, and before fit audience could expatiate largely on the deep things of God]. Ver. 6. Wisdom however we do speak. —[The dé here as is in the E. V. is to be taken as strongly antithetic]. 2odi/av—the higher religious wisdom of Christianity. By this we are to understand not what merely concerns the form of discourse, such as an inspired way of speaking; nor yet what concerns its subject mat- ter, such as the future relations and events of the Kingdom of the Messiah, to which the immediate context is said to point. (Meyer). The correct view has been given by Osiander, and Bengel says: ‘‘Wisdom here denotes not all Christian doctrine, but its sublime and secret principles (capita sublimia et arcana) ;” he also puts λαλεῖν, to speak, in antithesis with κηρύσσειν, to preach, making the former to mean private instruction and the latter public speaking. But his inter- pretation of the word ‘‘wisdom” is too atomistic, and of the word ‘‘speak” too restricted. There is no reference here to any system of secret doc- trine. [What he does mean will be more fully considered hereafter, when all the characteris-, tics given of it have been surveyed]. But traces of this true wisdom are to be seen in several of Paul’s Epistles, especially in those to the Romans, Ephesians and Colossians, also in 1 Cor. xv. Its foundation is Christ (i. 30; comp. Col. ii. 3).— among them that are perfect, ἐν τοῖς τε- λείοις, τοῖο audience for this wisdom. The ‘‘per- fect” staud opposed to the beginners, ‘‘ the babes This is neither paramountly supported nor internally probable. Stanley; but Meyer, Alf., Words., sustained by A. C. Cod. Sin., (Some have it πάντας.) [Ta is not found in B. De, [So also adhere to the received text. Meyer regards it as a mechan- in Christ” (iii. i.), and are identical with ‘the spiritual.”” He means that what he had not been able to deliver to the Corinthians in the imma- turity of their Christian life, because they could not as yet apprehend it, he did announce among those of riper Christian experience. Thus we see that wisdom is the same as that which he calls ‘‘ meat” (iii. 2) as contrasted with ‘‘ milk.” The same antithesis appears in xiv. 20; Eph. iv. 13ff.; Heb. v. 11-14. To the Corinthians, as they were, he could only communicate what was suited to their yet weak powers of appre- hension, viz., the great facts of redemption, with their immediate practical consequences, with their christological presuppositions an their theological foundations. And this was done in the simple form of preaching, or of bare state- ment that the things were so, or had been so, or would be so as declared, accompanied by Scrip- ture proofs, such as are found in the book of Acts, and with applications to the inner and outward life of the hearers. But where, on the other hand, a greater maturity of Christian life and a capacity for the deeper comprehension of truth existed, there he was able to set all this forth in their fundamental proofs and in their intimate connections. There he was able to un- ‘fold the whole Divine economy in accordance with its eternal principles and its progress through time and its fixed laws and in relation to its final consummation, so that that which Grecian wisdom was in search of within its own sphere was actually attained in a way that was incomparably higher and Divine, and better fitted to satisfy the deepest needs of a thought- ‘ful spirit. The interpretation we have here given, which would seem to be decisively confirmed by what follows, is opposed by another on the ground, 1, that it is one entirely foreign to the Apostle, since he nowhere in his Epistle contemplated ‘‘the perfect’ as his readers (but how of Phil. iii. 15: Let us therefore as many as be perfect, ete )? 2, that it is in contradiction with ver. 2, (where, however, he is only speaking ef the first proclamation of the Gospel); and the sense given is this: that the simple, scandalizing doctrine of Christ crucified contains in itself the pro- foundest wisdom, encloses a Divine mystery which is intelligible only to the perfect. But this explanation, which is conveyed also in Luther’s translation, 1, has no sure grammatical support, since the preposition ἐν carries the idea of ‘‘in the judgment of,”’ only when the persons are mentioned, who appear to decide a case by their own opinions (comp. Passow Worterbuch, I. 2, p. 910), and especially in connection with such verbs as denote to be and to appear; 2, it 56 does not correspond with usage elsewhere to un- derstand ‘the perfect” to mean true Christians who seek true wisdom in Christ, or as Calvin does: ‘those who possess a sound and unbiased judgment.” —[The view just given is in the main that which is advocated by Calvin, Olsh. and Hodge, who in favor of it argues, “1. that those who regarded Paul’s doctrine as foolishness were not the babes in Christ, but the unrenewed, “the wise of this world;”’ consequently those to whom it was wisdom were not advanced Chris- tians, but believers as such. Throughout the whole context the opposition is between ‘the called,” or converted, and the unconverted, and not between one class of believers and another class. 2. If ‘‘the perfect’? here means advanced Christians, as distinguished from babes in Christ, then the wisdom which Paul preached was not the Gospel ‘as such, but its higher doctrines. But this cannot be, because it is the doctrine of the cross, of Christ crucified, which he declares to be the power of God and the wisdom of God, i. 24, And the description given in the follow- ing part of this chapter of the wisdom here in- tended, refers not to the higher doctrine of the Gospel, but to the Gospel itself. The contrast is between the wisdom of the world and the wis- dom of God, and not between the rudimental and the higher doctrines of the Gospel. Besides, what are these higher doctrines which Paul preached only to the élite of the Church? No one knows. Some say one thing and some an- other. But there are no higher doctrines than those taught in this Epistle and in those to the Romans and Ephesians, all addressed to the mass of the people. The New Testament makes no distinction between (πίστις and γνῶσις) higher and lower doctrines. It does indeed speak of a distinction between milk and strong meat, but that is a distinction, not between kinds of doc- trine, but between one mode of instruction and another. In catechisms designed for children the Church pours out all the treasures of her knowledge, but in the form of milk, ἡ. 6., in a form adapted to the weakest capacities. For all these reasons, we conclude that by ‘the perfect” the Apostle means the competent, the people of God as distinguished from the men of the world; and by wisdom, not any higher doctrines, but the simple Gospel, which is the wisdom of God as distinguished from the wisdomof men.” The argument is notconvincing. It seems obvious on the very face of his exposition, that the Apostle is here making a distinction between that simple “preaching” of Gospel facts which he had been adhering to among the Corinthians, and what he calls “wisdom” which he had thus far held in reserve at Corinth by reason of the incapacity of the converts there to apprehend it. And surely the distinction is one which is practically observed by all preachers. There is a Christi- anity embodied in facts which a child may learn and profit by; and there is a philosophy of Christianity, a system of doctrine, a theology, which is dispensed only to those of mature intel- lect and experience. And so far from admitting the custom of the Church in teaching children the Assembly’s Catechism, which surely cannot be called “milk,” as a valid argument in sup- port of the exposition, it may be a question THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ------ FH whether the custom itself does not fall under condemnation through the Apostle’s argument, The contrast is indeed between the wisdom of the world and the wisdom of God; but there ig also another contrast indicated by the ‘‘how- ever” with which the verse is introduced—a con- trast between κήρυγμα and σοφία, preaching and wisdom]. Accordingly we hold to the first ex- position as the only one well established: “In order to obviate all misapprehension of his lan- guage, Paul here asserts that the Gospel does include in itself the true wisdom. It is alto- gether foreign to his intent to set up an opposi- tion here between reason and revelation. On the contrary he here distinctly expresses the validity of a demand for a science that is to be unfolded out of Christianity; a science which must be the sole; true and all-satisfying science.” NEANDER.—but a wisdom not of this world. —He here distinguishes that profounder develop- ment of the fulness of Christian truth designated as “wisdom” from all that which passes for such in the world without. It was not anything which sprang up in the natural progress of the race, either before or apart from Christ. δέ as in Rom. iii. 22. ‘‘Like the German aber, it is used in particular when something is annexed in illustration as the complement of a sentence. That by ‘this world,” he does not mean sim- ply the great mass of mankind, the commonality only, but has in mind especially its leaders as those to whom this Christian wisdom was utterly foreign, is shown in the added words—nor of the princes of this world.—Does he mean by this the demons mentioned in Eph. vi. 12, as κοσμοκράτορας ἢ Hardly. *Apywr with this sense appears only in the Sing. John xii. 831; Eph. ii. 2. And in any case these are not intended in ver. 8. According to Bengel the expression em- braces the leaders both of the Jews and of the Greeks. Not simply influential, learned men, philosophers; also not merely the members of the Jewish Sanhedrim, but all those of high sta- tion in general, the multitude of those who bear sway either by their authority -or by the respect which they command. These are described as persons who come to naught.—That is, they are bereft of all authority and consideration in the kingdom of God, in the world to come. He is not speaking here of their being overcome by the higher wisdom and power of Christianity, but of the utter destruction of their importance as leaders in that higher economy, at the insti- tution of which everything which springs out of this lower order of things is done away, however respectable it may appear. Ver. 7. Now comes the positive part of the description, which is introduced by an emphatic repetition.—But we speak God’s wisdom, i. e., ἃ wisdom which He has, and which He has imparted to us.—in a mystery.—lIt is doubtful with what this should be connected. Certainly not with the following participle, ‘ hidden,” which would be hardly grammatical and also tautological, but rather either with ‘*we speak "ἢ or with ‘‘wisdom.” The first_is to be preferred, because in connecting it with ‘* wisdom” the article in the Greek should be put before it for the sake of distinctness; and then the sense would be: we speak the wisdom of God asa The . CHAP. II. 6-16. mystery, i. ¢., as “something which does not proceed from the human understanding, but from the Divine revelation.”—NranpeR. Or ‘‘hand- ling it as a mystery.”—Meryer. Not however in the sense of any esoteric communications anala- gous to the Grecian mysteries to which neither here nor yet in the expression ‘‘perfect” (— initiated) is any allusion to be sought. But does not the explanatory participle following, viz., ‘‘the hidden,” which certainly relates to wisdom, require us to connect the words ‘‘in a mystery” with ‘“‘wisdom?” The article after the anarthrous σοφίαν is neither necessary nor admissible if we translate it: ‘‘a wisdom consisting in mystery” [although, as Meyer says, ‘‘its omission would be at the cost of perspicuity.” Paul would, in that case, have expressed himself ambiguously which he might easily have avoided by the use of the article.” But, it may be asked, whether it is not quite in the Apostle’s style to put nouns in relation through a preposition in this way? Is not the σοφίαν ἐν μυστήρῳ exactly analogous with σοφία ἀπὸ ϑεοῦ ini. 80. What is meant by ‘‘speak- ing a thing in a mystery,” we cannot compre- hend, unless it is speaking it secretly or in a dark and obscure manner. Such must be the meaning of the term when made to qualify a verb. But certainly this was not what Paul intended to say, nor is it in accordance with the use of the terminthe N. T. Here ‘‘mystery”’ denotes not a quality or condition of obscurity but a fact or truth which is made known by re- velation. Hence it would exactly express the very thing in which Paul’s mission consisted, and instead of being connected with ‘‘speak” seems to us most naturally associated by the preposition ‘‘in”’ with ‘‘wisdom.” This view would seem to follow from Kling’s definition of the word ‘‘mystery.”] This in the N. T., and especially in Paul’s phraseology, denotes some- thing unknown to man—shut out from his com- prehension, and which is made known only through Divine revelation. I+ is used in parti- cular of the Divine purpose of redemption, es- pecially in respect to the participation of the Gentiles in the salvation wrought by Christ (Eph. iii. 3 ff.; Col. 1. 26 ff.) of the final restoration of Israel (Rom. xi. 24), and of the physical change which is to take place at the resurrection (1 Cor. xy. 51).—the hidden means either that which was concealed or zs concealed. It is the first, when a statement is added of the thing having been made known as in Rom. xvi. 25; Eph. iii. 9; Col. i. 26. But it is the second, when it is meant, that the thing in question is withdrawn from human knowledge. In our passage, where the fact of concealment is first enlarged upon (ver. 8), and then afterwards a revelation to the elect of God is spoken of in contrast with a con- cealment from others, the latter meaning is to be preferred.—which God ordained.—This expression shows still more conclusively that “‘wisdom” is to be understood in an objective sense, not of the knowledge of the enlightened and of the doctrine flowing from it as such, but of its subject matter, that which elsewhere is called ‘‘a mystery ;” the Divine plan of salvation itself, in reference to the wisdom revealed therein; 57 complishing it.—before the ages.—He here goes back to the original ground of this redemp- tive scheme in the eternal purpose of God formed before the world was (comp. Rom. viii. 29 ff; and Eph. i. δ). The supplying of ““ἴο make known,” or “to reveal,” for the purpose of filling out a supposed elipsis, is not necessary. On the expression, ‘‘ before the ages,”’ compare the simi- lar expressions in (Rom. xvi. 25; Eph. i. 4; iii. 9, 10; Col. i. 26; 2 Tim. i. 9). ‘God deter- mined on redemption before creation, 7. 6., al- ready at the very foundation of creation there existed a Divine purpose to establish a kingdom of God in the world and therefore He made it.” NreanpER.—unto our glory.—From the eternal ground of salvation he here turns to its final end, which also stretches forward into eternity. The glory he here speaks of is not the glory of the Church of the New Testament as cémpared with the Old, but as everywhere with Paul, when dis- ἡ coursing of believers, it denotes their full resto- ration to the Divine image. It is the state of redemption completed, wherein the spiritual life shines out in the effulgence of an incorruptible state. (Comp. Rom. ν. 2; viii. 18, 21; ix. 23; Col. i. 27; iii. 4; 1 Thes. ii. 12; 2 Tim. ii. 10.) What is said in 2 Cor. iii. 18 does not justify us in including here that inward glorifying of the soul which is involved in our regeneration, and which takes place in this life. If, with Meyer, we interpret the wisdom of God to mean ‘His spiritual philosophy which He has revealed to His ministers,” then we must understand this clause thus: which God has fore-ordained so that it should redound to our glory. This glory, which stands in contrast with the utter evanish- ment of this world’s princes, is supposed by some ta be that destined to be revealed at the coming of Christ in which Christians are to be partakers through that Divine wisdom. Butis this thought Pauline? Itmay be doubtful. Unquestionably, however, this thought is, that God’s eternal pur- pose, which comprises His plan of salvation, or in other words His wisdom, which proposes sal- vation for its object and devises the best means for its accomplishment, has for its final end our glorification. (Com. Rom. viii. 29 ff.) Ver. 8. Shows more fully how thoroughly hidden this wisdom was—which none of the princes of this world (or age) knew.— [The relative ‘‘which”’ is taken by Billroth and Stanley and others to refer to “glory.” ‘That which belonged to eternity and was before the ages, was not likely to be known to those who lived in time or in this age,” and this is still fur- ther justified by supposing an allusion to this in the expression ‘‘ Lord of glory.” ] But we are neither compelled nor justified in adopting this construction. The main thought of the passage is ‘‘God’s wisdom,” and it is to this that the relatives refer both in this and in the previous verse. What the Apostle here brings to view is the concealment in which God’s wisdom was kept, by showing how entirely it remained un- known and unsuspected by even the leaders of this world, who were deemed persons of keen insight and took the management of affairs, and the argument for this was,—they would not or we may say, the work of redemption including | otherwise have crucified the Lord of in itself its chief end and the sure means of ac- | glory.—For it was through Him that this Divine 58 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ooo 232 90900000000 .--ΠΠΠΠΠΠΡὃΡὃΡῚ'͵᾿. wisdom, which devised the plan of salvation and aimed at the glorification of believers, was made known and carried out. And this, it were fair to suppose, they would not have done could they have seen the fulness of Divine wisdom and power which shone in him and which was flowing outupon others. ‘Paul here contemplates those who directly took part in the crucifixion as the representatives of that worldly spirit which was exhibited in the Greek phitosophy. They acted in the name and in the entire spirit of the ancient world.”—Neranver. ‘The Lord of glory.”—So also in Jas. ii. 1. This expression is not to be taken as equivalent to ‘glorious Lord,’ but, as in the analogous expressions, ‘‘ Father of glory” (Eph. i. 17); ‘The God of glory” (Acts vii. 2), “The Lord is the possessor of glory.” The genitive case used here in the Greek is the geni- tive of possession. ‘Lord of glory” is a title of Divinity. It means possessor of Divine excel- lence. ‘Who is the King of glory? The Lord of hosts, he is the King of glory” (Ps. xxiv. 10; Acts vii. 2; Jas. ii: 1; Eph. i. 17). The person crucified, therefore, was a Divine person. Hence the deed was evidence of inconceivable blindness and wickedness. It was one that could only have been done through ignorance. ‘And now, brethren,” said the Apostle Peter to the Jews, “T wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers,” Acts iii. 17. The fact, that the princes of this world were so blind as not to see that Christ was the Lord of glory, Paul cites as proof of their ignorance of the wis- dom of God. Had they known the one, they would have known the other. This passage illustrates a very important principle or usage of Scripture. We see that the person of Christ may be designated from his Divine nature, when what is affirmed of Him is true only of his human nature. The Lord of glory was crucified; the Son of God was born of 2 woman; He who was equal with God humbled Himself to be obedient unto death. In like manner we speak of the birth or death of a man without meaning that the soul is born or dies, and the Scriptures speak of the birth and death of the Son of God without meaning that the Divine nature is subject to these changes. It is also plain that to predicate ignorance, subjection, suffering, death, or any other limitation of the Son of God, is no more inconsistent with the Divinity of the person so designated, than to predicate birth and death of & man is inconsistent with the immateriality and immortality of the human soul. Whatever is true either of the soul or body may be predicated of @ man as a person, and whatever is true of either the Divine or human nature of Christ may be predicated of Christ as a person. We need not hesitate therefore to say with Paul, the Lord of glory was crucified; or even in accordance with the received text in Acts xx. 28, ‘God purchased the Church with His blood.” The pa who died was truly God, although the ivine nature no more died than the soul of man does when the breath leaves his body.”—Hopar]. Ver. 9. Confirmatory citation.—But, as it has been written, what things eye hath not seen, and ear hath not heard, and into the heart of man have not entered, what things God hath prepared for them that love Him.”—[We have here given a literal translation of this passage as nearly as possible in the order of the Greek text]. to be considered here is the connection both logi- cal and grammatical. This has been attempted in various ways. One is, by supplying a supposed ellipsis after ‘‘but,”’ either by inserting the words ‘it has happened,” so as to make it read, “but it has happened as is written” (Bengel); in which casea demonstrative clause would have been required after the relative clause ; or by inserting ‘we speak,” taken from ver. 7. It would be more correct, however, without supplying any thing, to go back directly to ver. 7, and connect there, and to find in ver. 9 an expansion and enhancement of what is said in ver. 8. ‘* which none of the princes knew,” so that ἀλλά instead of being translated “but” might be rendered “yea, rather.” [This rendering is adopted by Stanley]. The reading would then be, “we speak God’s wisdom, which none of the princes knew, yea, which no eye hath seen.” In this case the clause, ‘for if they had known they would not have crucified, efc.’”’ would be taken as a sort of parenthesis, in order to facilitate the connec- tion with what precedes. We would then connect ver. 10, ‘‘but God hath revealed them to us” di- rectly with the previons words, ‘‘ what things he hath prepared,’’ inserting only a comma after ‘‘him.”’ In this case, only, the repetition of the name ‘‘God”’ would appear strange, and would have to be regarded as done for the sake of em- phasis. If this does not suit, then wemay either assume an anacoluthon, so that in this break the sentence would seem to lose itself in mystery and distance inaudible (so de Wette and Osi.), or we may find the sentence completed in ver. 10, the proper antecedent being introduced with dé, but, as in ch. i. 23, to signify the antithesis there to ver. 8. It would then read ‘but what eye hath not seen, etc.;” these, ‘‘on the contrary, God hath revealed to us” (so Meyer and Alford) — Since the last mentioned mode of connection seems forced, and the reason assigned for the anacoluthon is not very clear, we prefer to assume a climax as above stated, introduced by ‘‘yea, rather,’ without joining ver. 10 directly to the preceding clause. [Hodge prefers the anacolu- thon, and very justly says, in reference to this citation and to that in chap. i. ver. 81, ‘in quoting the Old Testament the Apostle frequently cites the words as they stand, without so modi- fying them as to make them grammatically cohere with the context.’’].—There is yet another diffi- culty to be considered. Whence is the citation taken? Since no passage in the Old Testament is found exactly corresponding to it, the patris- tic expositors supposed that the words were taken, either from some Old Testament ‘Scrip- ture now entirely lost, or from some apocryphal prophety; and Z. Chrys. asserts that he had read these words in the apocalypse of Esaias. Gro- tius, however, supposes that they were taken from the writings of the Rabbis who had pre- served them out of an old tradition. But in op- position to these opinions it must be regarded as settled that Paul uses the formtla ‘as it is writ- ten” only in introducing citations from the Old Testament. Accordingly Meyer has adopted the solution that Paul quoted an apocryphal passage The first point — CHAP. II. 6-16. CE under the idea that the words were in the Old Testament. But before we resort to any such explanation, it is to be seen whether the dissimi- larity between our passage and the: Old Testa- ment texts in question is so great, as to prevent us from supposing that he quoted freely here, as he has also done elsewhere, and as other New Testament writers have also occasionally done. Certainly Paul could hardly have had in mind Isa. 111. 15. 5 For that which hath not been told them should they see, and that which they had not heard, should they consider;” nor yet lxv. 17; ‘For bebold [ create new heavens, and a new earth, and the former should not be remem- bered nor come into mind,” unless perhaps the last clause, in the ring of the expression. But he may have had in mind Isa. lxiv. 4, ac- cording to the original text: ‘‘For since the world have men not heard, nor perceived, nor hath an eye seen, O God, besides’ Thee; he will do it for him who waits upon Him”* — here there is a transition from the second person to the third, as is frequently the case in prophetic diction — since the formula, ‘‘as it is written,” admits of a free quotation, and Paulis not always precise in adhering to the words (1. 19, 31; xiv. 21; Rom. ix. 88). We therefore unhesitatingly accord with Osiander in maintaining a reference here to Isa. lxiv. 4. The sense common to both passages is, that God has prepared for His people who wait for Him, things far exceeding all human experince or observation, ἐπὸὲ καρδίαν ἀναβαίνειν Heb. Εν by my lit. to come upon the heart, to become a matter of experience and thought.—In the word, ‘‘prepare”’ we have the carrying out of the “fore-ordination”’ mentioned in ver. 7.— But what does the Apostle mean by ‘‘the things prepared?” Meyer says the salvation of the Messianic kingdom (comp. Matth. xxv. 34.) Very well, but not simply in its future glories. What is intended is the whole work of redemption in all its essential particulars, from the foundation laid for it in Christ, on unto its final consumma- tion. They are the benefits never before known or imagined, and far transcending all concep- tion and surmise which are contained in God’s revelation, and the glory aimed at and procured by it. ‘“‘They are the gracious gifts and disclosures of blessedness, an insight into which, and an en- joyment of which are afforded us even here in faith, whose full fruition is reserved for a higher world.” Ostanper. That deliverance from exile to which the passage in Isaiah primarily refers, +7 Γ The margin of the E. V. renders the last part of this verse, “neither hath seen a God besides Thee, that doeth so for him, etc.” ‘his version is given by Ewald, de Wette, and Lowth. It is found also in the lxx. Luther’s version, following the Vulgate, gives it as in the English text. Un- questionably the former are correct in putting “‘God ” in the accusative case. It is also noteworthy that the clause “ nor perceived by the ear,” is not in the lxx., and Lowth thinks either that this passage has been corrupted by the Jews, or that Paul quotes from some apocryhal book, either “ The Ascension of Esaias,’”’ or “ The Apocalypse of Elias,” in both of which the passage is found as cited by Paul. It will be seen, likewise, that this clause is omitted by Paul, and that he has inserted another phrase instead—* Neither have en- tered into the heart of man;” καὶ emt καρδίαν ἀνθρώπον ovK ανέβη; and these words are so similar to οὐ μὴ επέλθῃ αυτῶν ἐπὶ τὴν καρδίαν found in the ΙΧχ. Is. Ιχγ΄ 17, that one can hardly avoid the belief that the two passages were blended together in the Apostle’s mind, and were freely quoted to suit his case.] 59 — is in truth only a faint image of that which is to be considered as the literal fulfilment of all such expression (comp. also Matth. xiii. 17). Vers. 10-12. The revelation of this wisdom: and its means. —But to us God hath revealed. them through His Spirit.—‘‘ To us,”’ that is, Paul himseir and his fellow-Apostles; for of Christians in general he is not speaking. See: vers. 6 and 16—also iii. 1. [So Hodge; Stan- ley, however, says ‘‘ believers generally, but with. a special reference to himself’’]. The communi- cation here is not of an external, but of an in~ ternal sort. (Comp. the expression, ‘‘to reveal in. me,” Gal. i. 15). This is clear also from the: agency employed. This agency is the Spirit,. who executes God’s purposes of redemption and is the means of enlightening them in the know~- ledge of their nature. He does this work so far- as He is “freely given of God,” ver. 12. The: possibility of this revelation by the Spirit is. shown in the following words—for the Spirit searcheth all things. yea, the deep things. of God.—‘‘ The Spirit” here is evidently, by reason of the connection, the same as ‘‘ His Spi-- rit” in the previous clause. Only there He is: introduced as proceeding outwards and working: ad extra, but here and in what follows as immi- nent or existing within the Godhead. An analo- gous expression occurs respecting the Son of’ God in Jno. i. 18, where the phrase ‘who is in. the bosom of the Father”’ corresponds with “the. Spirit searcheth all things,” etc.; and the word: “declare” with ‘‘hath revealed by His Spirit.” The ability to make known the thoughts of God unto the Apostles is here grounded upon the knowledge the Spirit has of these things in their inmost source and profoundest depths. This is expressed by épevvay: lit. to explore, to search through and through; but here, and wherever else it is used of Divine knowledge, it denotes the result of that exploring, ὁ. 6. a complete and thorough knowledge (comp. exxxix.1; Rom. viii. 27—xapdioyvaoryc of Acts i. 24; xv. 8 and Rey. ii. 23. Chrys. ἀκριβὴς γνῶσις κατάληψις.) Bad: ϑεοῦ: inmost recesses of God, the otherwise un- explorable depths where His thoughts and voli- tions have free play, the hidden mystery of His. personality which correspond to those mysteries. of His kingdom and of all His works and ways. which the Spirit reveals. The image is drawn from the sea, whose depths are supposed to be. unfathomable and bottomless. (Ps. xxxvi. 75- xcii. 6; Job. xi. 8). Meyer says: ‘The entire. abounding fulness which God has in Himself,. every thing which goes to make up His being,, His attributes, thoughts, plans, decrees.” (Not. the latter exclusively). See also the phrase: ‘depths of Satan,” Rev. ii. 24, That such must be the office of the Spirit, and of Him alone, is: now illustrated by an analogy.—Ver. 11. For- who of men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which isin him? Even so the things of God no one know-. eth save the Spirit of God.—tThe logic is this: “The Spirit and only He can know the depths of God. For as the spirit of man which is in him can alone know what is of him, so only the Spirit of God can know what is of God.” The Apostle puts the first member of the com- parison in the form of ἃ question. ‘‘Who of men 60 knoweth, etc.?” men, is not superfluous. The ignorance here implied is not an absolute one, inasmuch as God is to be excepted from it (Osi.); or, we may say, it carries a prominent emphasis: ‘*no MAN knows what is of man” (Meyer)—rd τοῦ ἀνϑρώπου, not Baty: “the things of a man” in general; not his ‘depths.’ According to the context, the things alluded to must be limited to those of his inner life, his secret thoughts and purposes. The ‘‘spirit” of man is the breath of God in him, ‘‘the candle of the Lord searching all the inward parts of his belly” (Prov. xx. 27), the inner eye or light (Matth. vi. 23), that whereby he becomes evident to himself, recognizes his own distinct individuality, is conscious of him- self, and of his thoughts and acts as belonging to himself, the Divine image in man, the princi- ple of his personality. (See Delitzsch, Bid. Psychologie, 8. 116 ff.; Beck, Bibl. Seelenlehre, 8. 947). By the words “which is in him,” the spirit, as the principle of self-consciousness, is distinguished from the spirit in others, as the principle of objective knowledge. A like addi- tional qualification to ‘‘the Spirit of God”? would be out of place, either because God is absolutely one, or because His Spirit is also dispensed to others, as seen in the next verse: ‘‘which is from God” (Meyer). De Wette says: ‘Paul conceives of the Spirit not as being in God, as though He were the principle of God’s self-consciousness ; but he very wisely says merely ‘the Spirit of God” in order that he might thus hold the way open for saying afterwards ‘the Spirit from God.” The substance of the comparison is this: as the knowledge of the inward man is possible only through self-consciousness, so is the know- ledge of God possible only through the conscious- ness of God obtained by means of the Holy Spi- rit. De Wette, however, overlooks an important element in the Apostle’s course of thought, in that the Apostle makes the immanent beholding of the depths of God on the part of the Spirit the ground of his function asarevealer. But the Spirit of God (in accordance with the analogy of the human spirit which is derived from Him and is his image) is the principle of the Divine self-knowledge, the ground of God’s life as a self-conscious existence—that whereby God is personal life, is the One who is eternally and ab- ‘solutely cognizant of Himself in all His thoughts, volitions and decrees, in His doing and working, —the One who is revealed unto Himself and then reveals Him abroad to others—the One who sees through Himself and also shines through the. human spirit and so qualifies it for looking into the work of God. [*‘ The analogies of Scripture, however, are not to be pressed beyond the point they are intended to illustrate. The point here is the knowledge of the Spirit. He knows what is in God as we know what is in ourselves. It is not to be inferred from this that the Spirit of God bears in other points the same relation to God that our spirits do to us.” Hopaz.] Having thus shown the ability of the Spirit to reveal the things of God, he reaffirms and corroborates the declaration of ver. 10.—Now we have re- ceived, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God.—The expression is antithetic. But what are we to understand by Here the gen., ανϑρώπων, of | the spirit of the world?” THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. Certainly not any mental peculiarity; as most imagine, (Beza: in- genium humanum, [Barnes and others]: doctrina humana; [de Wette and Stanley: spirit of hu- man wisdom; Hodge: a paraphrase for human reason]), since the thing contrasted with it cannot be explained inthis manner. Neither can it be construed ironically, as denoting an utter © want of that which is spiritual, or that show of — spirit which the world calls spirit (see Osi.}, nor yet as the finite spirit, in so far as it sets up independently for itself (Billroth). But it means that principle which controls the world in its thought and volition, and which is elsewhere termed ‘‘the prince of this world (Jno. xii. 31); also ‘the god of this world” (comp. Eph. ii. 2; vi. 11 ff.; 1 Jno. iv. 3; v.19). Meyer says: “The diabolic spirit under whose control the world is held, and which profane humanity pos- sesses.” Osiander discovers in it ‘a demonic element, blending in with, however, and mani- festing itself in connection with splendid natural powers —a principle of selfish curiosity which excites and stimulates the mental faculties to knowledge, but does not overcome their weak- ness, and which, while alienated from God, ever remains involved, not merely in weakness and ignorance, but also in perverseness and error.” — but—lInasmuch as he is treating no more of operations imminent in the Godhead, but of acts of external revelation, the subject in contrast is denominated—the Spirit which is from God. —‘‘He brings to view the spirit as having been already bestowed.” NeanpER. This spirit, coming as it does from God, and the bestowment of which conditions the knowledge of Divine things, and which belongs only to the children of God (comp. Rom. v. 5; viii. 9 ff.; 14 ff.; Jno. xv. 26), is to be entirely distinguished from the “spirit of man” which belongs to us as men, and makes us akin to God (Acts xvii. 29), and which consti- tutes our personality (ver. 11), and which is the immediate organ of the Spirit of God, needing, however to be renewed, and, because of its weak- ness, requiring to be strengthened. (Eph. iv. 23; Rom. vii. 22 ff.; 1 Thess. v. 28; comp. Matth. ii. 15, 16). The object of the bestowment of the Spirit is—that we might know the things which are freely given to us by God.—These things are the same as those spoken of in ver. 9 as having been ‘‘ prepared” for us (comp. i. 830; Rom. viii. 24; vi. 28; Eph. ii. 8,9). τὰ χαρισϑ ἐν τα, (from χαρίζεσϑσι, as Rom. viii. 82)—gifts of free grace. By these are meant the blessings of God’s kingdom which™ Christians already possess in faith and hope, but which they will enjoy in full perfection when the kingdom of God has been set up in glory. [Hodge very singularly says: ‘‘not so. The connection is with ver. 10, and the subject is the wisdom of God, the Gospel as distinguished from the wis- dom of this world.” But what are the topics of this Gospel but the spiritual blessings here seen and known in part, but afterwards to be known as we also are known? A distinction here is untenable]. The persons to whom they are given (ἡμῖν) are Christians generally, as must appear from the very nature of the case [and the know- ledge they obtain is ‘‘the assurance of confi- dence.” Catvin. Those who receive the Spirit , ὡ oie CHAP. II. 6-16. 61 .-.- oo va a not only have a clear apprehension of the bless- ings God hath provided, but discern them as ‘freely given unto them.” This must be so, as knowledge in the Scriptures is one with expe- rience. There is no real perception without possession ]. Ver. 13. Having indicated the source of Gos- pel-wisdom, Paul proceeds to show how he pro- claimed it, taking up the thought of ver. 4.— Which things we also speak.—That the speaking here is directly connected with the fact of having received of the spirit from the purpose of knowing and declaring, and proceeds from it, and is of a sort corresponding to the nature of the objects received, is shown by word, καί: “also.” How he spake is exhibited antitheti- cally.— Not in words taught of human wisdom, οὐκ ἐν διδακτοῖς ανϑρωπινῆς σοφίας Adyorc.—The Gen. hereis governed not by λόγοις but by διδακτοῖς. (Comp. διδακτοὶ ϑεοῦ, taught of God, Jno. vi. 45). [Most of the older English versions and Calyin construe the other way. Wiclif: not in wise wordes of mannes wisdom. Tyndale: not in the connyuge wordes of mannes wysdome. Rheims: not in learned wordes of humane wisedom. Cranmer and Ge- neva translate very nearly as the authorized version]. He means not in an artificial style of discourse, fashioned after the rules of scholastic rhetoric and dialetics, but in those taught of Spirit.—Ilvetimuaroc without the article asin ver. 4, because it is to be taken qualitatively as denoting a principle higher than that of human wisdom. Weare not here to suppose that any actual dictation of the language is intended, but only an operation of the Spirit upon the mind, ‘‘which strongly pervades and controls even the speech and modes of exhibition;” in short a simple discourse which proceeds directly from a heart possessed by the Spirit of God. [Hodge says: ‘‘This is verbal inspiration, or the doc- trine that the writers of the Scriptures were con- trolled by the Spirit of God in the choice of the words which they employed’ in communicating divine truth. This has been stigmatized as the mechanical theory of inspiration. It is ob- jected to this, that it leaves the diversity of style which marks the different portions of the Bible, unaccounted for. But if God can control the thoughts of a man without making him a machine, why not also his language?—rendering _every writer infallible in the use of his charac- teristic style? If the language of the Bible be not inspired, then we have the truth communi- eated through the discoloring and distorting medium of human imperfection. Paul’s direct assertion is that the words he used were taught by the Holy Ghost.” Wordsworth adds: ‘ Here is a sufficient reply to the assertions of those who allege that the inspiration vouchsafed to St. Paul was limited to a general perception of divine truth and that he was left himself without divine guidance as to the form in which that truth was to be expressed. A caution also is thus supplied against the notion that there are verbal inaccura- cies, and blemishes, and defects in St. Paul’s re- presentations of the supernatural truths which he was commissioned to deliver. Comp. Hooker, II. viii. 6, and Serm. vy. 4; also Routh, Rele- quie Sacre, Vol. V. pp. 890-841]. This is clear from the explanatory clause [which we render—Combining spiritual things with spiritual. 1---πνευματικοῖς πνευματικὰ συγκρίνοντες. The interpretation of this depends on the expla- nation we give to συγκρίνοντες. This signifies originally, to combine together with judicious selec- tion, then to unite in general, to join, the opposite of διακρίνειν; with this then comes the idea to hold together, t. e., by way of comparison (2 Cor. x. 12), [this is the meaning adopted in the E. | V.]; out of this there follows the idea of mea- suring, estimating according to something; and then of interpreting or expounding, as it is used in Gen. xl. 8 and Dan. v. 12 in reference to dreams, in which cases the signification to judge must be referred back to the idea of holding together the various elements of the process so as to get a proper view of them. At any rate there is nothing in these last passages to justify our taking the word in the text to mean unquali- fiedly to explain [as Stanley does] whether we take πνευματικοῖς as Masculine [rendering as Bengel, Riickert, Stanley: ‘‘to spiritual men” ] (which is by no means required by the ver. 14, since a new paragraph opens there), or as Neu- ter; rendering it ‘by spiritual things,” mean- ing thereby either the Old Testament types used to explain the New Testament (as Chrysostom and others), or the testimonies of the Prophets, which, being inspired by the Spirit, are the fit illustrations of the things which Christ has re- vealed by His Spirit (as Grotius and others), -both which ideas are remote from the connec- tion, or ‘with spiritual words” (as Elsner and others). [Wordsworth interprets this clause comprehensively. ‘Blending spiritual things with spiritual,” 7. ¢., not adulterating them with foreign admixtures (2 Cor. ii. 17; 1 Pet. ii. 2) also ‘‘combining,”” for the purpose of comparing and explaining, ¢.g., the things of the New Testa- ment by the Old Testament, or one spiritual truth by another]. Nor yet do we agree with Neander’s view, ‘‘that which has been commu- nicated to us by the Divine Spirit we explain in a form which is suited to that communica- tion.” The only correct interpretation is to take συγκρίνειν in its original import, and mvev- ματικοῖς as Neuter, and to render as above, car- rying the meaning: uniting the spiritual mat- ters which are the subject of our discourse (λαλοῦμεν, ver. 12) with words and forms that are taught of the Spirit. So Castalio, Calvin, Osiander, Meyer. [Hodge and Barnes]. Thus understood the clause serves to illustrate still further the suitableness of the style of discourse just before advocated, and as Osiander rightly observes, contains no tautology, since rather ‘‘the thought is here stated in the form of a fundamental principle, and is taken up and set forth with stronger emphasis.”* [* The view given, but not advocated by Bengel and Stan- ley, seems deserving of more attention than Kling has be- stowed upon it, and may fairly dispute the ground with that he has given. Svyxpivew, whatever may be its classical meaning, is used in the LXX. in six places at Jeast, with the unquestioned signification of: to explain, to make that which was mysteriously hinted in visions clear to ordinary minds. This was what Joseph did to the chief butler and chief baker, and to Pharaoh, and what Daniel did to Bel- shazzar. And Paul is here speaking of dealing with things of like nature, 7. ¢., supernaturally revealed, which eye had not seen, etc. And what more natural than for him to use 02 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. Ee τ τ ey PELE MR ER Rat PANU συ συ. Ver. 14. [Explains the reason why this higher spiritual wisdom is notindiscriminately imparted, but ‘spoken only to the perfect.” It is seen in the incapacity of multitudes to apprehend it, and to discern ‘‘the Divine impress it bears both on its contents and style of delivery.” It is an in- ability arising from ‘‘their essential character, which is as opposed to the Gospel as it is in every respect harmoniously consistent with it- self.” ].—But the natural (or psychical}) man. —yuyixog δὲ ἄνϑρωπος. Here we have the character described. Luther explains it thus: ‘‘the natural man is one who, though he stands apart from grace, is still endowed to the fullest degree with understanding, sense, capacity and art.” He is the opposite of ‘‘ the spiritual man,” see Jude ver. 19. ψυχικοί, πνεῦμα μὴ ἔχοντες, lit.: ‘‘psychical, not having the spirit.” ψυχή: Psyche, soul, Latin, anima, is the intermediate between mvevua, spirit, and σώμα, body (1 Thess, γ. 23). It is the personal life of the individual (Ichleben) arising from the entrance of the spirit into the earthly organ of ‘the body as its breath of life, in which personal life the spiritual and the sensuous elements are combined, the one entering into the other. The spiritual element, by becoming psychical or natural, forms a power of consciousness and volition, sinks into the life of sensation and impulse and embodies itself in the man and becomes organic. The sensuous element on the other hand (which taken out of the world of sense the soul fills with its life of sensation and impulse), being possessed by the spiritual power, becomes itself spiritualized in conscious self-directed activity and made capable of intelligent knowledge and volition. By reason of this its double nature, the soul becomes depen- dent on springs of life that belong as well to the world of sense as to the spiritual world. But, with particular individuals, the soul exercises a free choice in regard to the degree and order in which from time to time these influences from "συγκρίνειν in precisely the same sense as in the former cases. The allusion is almost palpable. Rendering the word then explaining, the train of thought requires that we take πνευματικοῖς as Dative Mas: . to spiritual persons. Here, then, we see the Apostle reverting back to the thought with which the paragraph opens, “that of speaking wisdom among the perfect.” “The spiritual things” here are the contents of this wisdom, “ the perfect ” are “ the spiritual.” And thus we have a hinge on which the course of thought passes easily over into what follows, and the δὲ of ver. 14 has its natural antithetic force. ‘Explaining spiritual things to the spiritual, but the natural man,” etc. ‘This, it is inte- resting to note, is the first construction given of this passage in an English version. Wiclif renders: ‘*‘ Maken a liknesse of spiritual things to goostli men, for a besteli man per- suyued not through thingis,” ete. Here, how-ver, we have a new meaning to ovyxpivovres, equivalent to: making spi- Titual things match with spiritual men. And is this the meaning of the Rhemish version: “comparing spiritual things to the spiritual?” This evidently is a literal trans- ferring of the Vulgate “comparantes,” which is derived from “compare,” and has for its first meaning to match to pair. Calvin has still another interpretation: “adapting spiritual words to spiritual things,” which Beza snbstan- tially adopts. Here there is simply an inversion of ideas.] [t It is to be regretted that there are no adjectives in English which distinctly preserve the important distinctions observed in Scripture between body, soul, and spirit. Much obscurity oftentimes arises in consequence, and we fail to perceive the profound philosophy which underlies Paul’s doctrine. The adjective corresponding to the noun soul our translators render “natural.” This is not a bad translation if we bear in mind the equivocal use of the word nature: that it either may mean, the course of things as they are, or the course of things as they ought to be,” and that it is in the former sense the text takes it.] above and below shall be appropriated and em- ployed. It depends on its pleasure whether it shall isolate itself, and, with this, sever its own spiritual part from the Divine life of the Spirit, or whether it shall receive this life into itself, Now in separating from the life of the spirit, man, as a natural or psychical creature, gets divested of his spiritual character and becomes fleshly. There is, indeed, in him still a spiritual element: but then it no longer rules as a con- trolling principle, regulating his impulses and desires. On the contrary, being in subjection to the soul (ψυχή), the spirit becomes more and more subservient to the soul’s perverse and car- nal tendencies, from whence there springs deceit, falsehood, defilement in spirit, through contact with corresponding evil, and also that earthly and worldly wisdom spoken of in Jas. 111, 15. The soul, in itself robbed of the spiritual element, as a personal life (as spirit), is also unable to work out the spiritual things into a clear, intel- ligent apprehension by a free conscious effort of its own. Hence the mere soul-man, in other words the psychical or natural man, has neither inclination nor eye for the spiritual. He is closed up against all higher wisdom as if it were but folly. (Comp. Beck, Bibi. Seelenlehre, 3 14 ff, 83 ff; Lehrwiss, δῇ 207 and 2138. From all this it will be seen that the translation ‘‘sensu- ous,” ‘‘sinnlich,”’ is not exhaustive. With this there is included also the idea of the selfish. Besides, both the intellectual and ethical aspects are also to be taken into account. See Osiander, de Wette, Meyer*.—The ethical side of ‘the psychical man,” v7z., his disinclination towards the higher sphere of life, appears in what is affirmed of him.—receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God.—For δέχεσϑαι here is not—to understand, which thought is afterwards expressed by γνῶναι, but it means: 10 accepl, to receive, as always in the N. TT. (Luke viii. 13; Acts viil. 18: xi. 1; xvii. 11; 1 Thess) τ δ 18, ete.). οὖ δέχεται--εἀπωϑεῖται, Acts xiii. 46. ‘“‘He will not accept them, although they are offered.” —Brnaet. The phrase, “the things of the Spirit of God,” combines what was distin- guished in ver. 13, the Divinely spiritual both in form and substance. The reason of this rejec- tion is explained,—because they are foolish- ness unto him.—‘Whereas,” adds Bengel, ‘she is seeking after wisdom.” And these things seem foolish, because they conflict with his narrow, foregone conclusions and prejudices.— [* See also Owen, vol. iii. p. 247, where, basing his exposi- - tion on 1 Cor. xy. 44, he says: “ὙΠῸ ψυχικός (7.e.) the natural man, is one that bath all that is or can be derived from the first Adam, one endowed with a rational soul and who bath the use and exercise of all his rational faculties.” He takes strong ground against those ‘ who tell us that by this ‘ na- tural man’ isintended ‘a man given up to his pleasur.s and guided hy his brutish affections and no other.” See his citations from Augustine and Chrysostom to the same effect. A profound analysis of this important subject, in all its con- nections, is given also in Miiller on Sin, vol. i. p. 457, vol. ii. p. 367. Calvin: “The natural man (7.e.) not merely the man of gross passions, but whoever is taught only by his own faculties.” And Bengel quotes Ephraim Cyrus: “The Apostle calls men who live according to nature natural, ψυχικούς, those who live contrary to nature, carnal, capxixovs; but those are spiritual, πνευματικοί, who even change their nature after the spirit.” An able disquisition on the “ Tri- partite Nature of Man,” in all its bearings on Christian doctrine has lately been issued by Rey. J. B. Heurd, of Eng land.) CHAP. II. 6-16. and he is not able to know them.—This clause is either to be joined to the previous one, as assigning an additional reason for the natural man’s not receiving spiritual things, g. d., ‘‘he considers it absurd, without being able to un- derstand it” (Meyer, [Alford, Stanley, Tischen- dorf]); or to be taken as parallel to the.clause, ‘he receiveth it not,” and expressing the in- tellectual side of the case in an independent manner, so that the following words stand related to it alone ([Calvin, Hodge, Barnes, and others, in accordance with 1 6. y.]). The first is the more correct. The natural man contemns spiritual things through prejudice and lack of ap- prehension,—because they are spiritually judged of.—The reason here assigned bears upon both the previous clauses which together explain why the Gospel is rejected. It appears all™ foolish and incomprehensible, alike from the fact that it requires to be looked at in a way for which the natural man in unfitted. ἀνα- κρίνειν, to judge of, a8 in iv. 3; ix. 3; xiv.24. It denotes the result of investigation and proof, which it primarily in fact signifies (Acts xvii. 11; iv. 9; xii. 19.) πνευματικῶς: spiritually (i. e.) either by the spirit of man (not soul: ψυχή) quickened and filled by the Spirit of God, or in a spiritual manner, so that the Holy Spirit, whose are the things to be judged of, both asto form and substance, directs likewise in the judgment of them by His illuminating grace. In either case, the sense is essentially the same, although the latter comports better with the use of the word “spirit” in the context, [While it is the office of the Spirit to take of the things of Christ and show them unto us, it is His also to purge the mental yision so that it can see theeobjects pre- sented, for the eye of the natural man is blinded by the god of this world, and to him, however presented, the Gospel is hidden. Hence the mani- festation towards the man must be supplemented by a change in him, rendering him spiritually minded, and so producing ‘‘a congeniality be- tween the perceiver and the thing perceived.” ] Ver. 15. Presentsacontrast._But the spiritual man. ἴ. 6. he who, in conformity with the image of God (Col. iii. 10), has been renewed to an exist- ence in the Spirit, Who, in turn lives in him as his life and to a constant exercise of his power in the strength of the Spirit; in other words, he who has the Spirit as rule, guidance and might (Beck, Scelenl. S. 35 ff.); judgeth of all the things— τὰ πάντα [see Crit. obs.] all the things. By these we are to understand in accordance with the context, at least for the most part, or pre- eminently the things of the Spirit which the na- tural man is not in a condition to judge of. This reference is indicated yet more distinctly by the article τά : the [if genuine]. Besides the saying of Beck (Lehrwiss 5. 210) here holds good. «Only by being made spiritual is a man capaci- tated for the apprehension of spiritual objects. Such as God and Divine things, and only by the energy thus obtained is he able critically to test, and spiritually to govern all the remaining por- tion of his being as something inferior and sub- servient to the Spirit.” So also Meyer (ed. 3) [only giving the passage a much broader scope, since he refers the ‘‘all things’? not simply to those of the Spirit, but includes under it ‘‘all 63 objects which come within the sphere of his judgment”’]. “On all this can the spirituai man pass a correct estimate by means of a judg- ment enlightened and controlled by the Holy Ghost.” [In illustration of this, Meyer alludes to instances of Paul’s nice spiritual discrimina- tion, exhibited ‘‘in matters not belonging to doc- trine, and under the most varied conditions, e. g. in his wise improvement of circumstances amid persecutions and prosecutions, and during his last voyage, eteg also in his judgments respecting marriage cases, judicial causes, slavery, and the like; in all which he understood how to place every thing under the level of a higher spiritual point of view with wonderful clearness, certainty and impartiality; also in his estimate of different personages, etc.” But it may be fairly ques~ tioned whether Meyer does not here go beyond the proper scope of the passage. The object in view throughout the whole of it is a Divinely revealed spiritual ‘‘ wisdom,” which transcended the apprehension of ‘‘the natural man;” and it is not easy to see how affairs altogether pruden- tial could be brought into the account]. The acceptation of tavra as Acc, Sing. Mase. is against the previous context (see Meyer).—But he himself is judged of by noman.—Thepre- vious clause leads us to supply here, ‘‘ who is not spiritual.” For such as these the position of the spiritual man is too high. They cannot compre- hend the inner life, or pronounce suitable judg- ment upon it. ‘‘ Undoubtedly Paul said this with special allusion to such in the Corinthian Church as took the liberty of criticising him.”” NEANDER. Of course what is affirmed in this verse of the spiritual in general, must in particular cases be limited according to the measure and degree of perfection attained in the spiritual life (comp. Calvin and Osiander). One proof of the sense perverting exegesis of the Romish Church may be seen in their reference of this passage to the hierarchy and itsjudicial office in doubtful ques- tions (Corn. a Lapide, Estius). Ver. 16. Proof of the foregoing.—For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him ?—The question is taken from Is. xl. 18: according to the lxx., with the omission of the words καὶ τίς σύμβουλος αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο ‘and who hath become his counsellor,” which come in between the words “Lord” and “that.” The ‘“‘mind of the Lord” is here iden- tical with ‘‘the mind of Christ” in the following clause. We might, indeed, on looking at the passage in Isaiah, refer it to God; but since the words are introduced freely without a formula of citation, there is no necessity for this, and the identification of them with ‘the mind of Christ,” is more in accordance with the course of thought. The νοῦς, mind, is the spirit as the source of thoughts, counsels, plans. The spirit, not how- ever, as shut up within itself, but, so far as what is contained therein, is imparted and operates abroad. Hence it is not absolutely the same as πνεῦμα, spirit (as Billroth and Neander). [‘*This is rather the substratum of the vovc,—mind, and which being imparted to the man, makes his mind one with the mind of Christ.”” MryEr]. Ὃς συμβιβάσει --- ὥστε συμβιβάζειν [Buttmann, 3 148,1., or Kiihner 3 834,2]. Συμβιβάζειν, to bring together, metaphorically, to put one’s self to rights, ts 64 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. make oneself intelligible; and hence transitively, to prove, to instruct; elsewhere with τὰ, in the Hellenic idiom, also with a personal object; io teach some one, [This use of the word, Alford says belongs to the lxx; in the New Testament it means to conclude, to prove, to confirm]. The object in this case is not any spiritual truth, but the Lord,— but we have the mind of Christ.—[‘‘ We,” the Apostles, himself included, and in the view of his issue with the Church, perhaps emphasized. Of course other spiritual persons are not excluded, but they are not now brought into the account]. Hence, ἔγομεν, not—perspectum habemus. The word denotes that inward possession which is founded upon commu- nion with Christ, upon haying ‘put on Christ” (Gal. iii. 27).—The thought now brought outis this, the judgment of the spiritual man on the part of him who is not spiritual, would require such a knowledge of the mind of the Lord as would quali- fy a person to instruct the Lord Himself, since the persons who are to be judged are such as have the mind of Christ, inasmuch as His Spirit dwelling in them, and directing their thought, fashions them to His mind, and identifies their thinking with His thinking. [‘Syllogistically stated, the argument would stand thus: no one can instruct the Lord. We have the mind of the Lord. Therefore no one can instruct and judge us.’ Hopes. ] [Obs. We are now prepared to consider what this wisdom is, that is spoken of in this passage, according to the characteristics given by the Apostle. 1. It is a system of objective truth ana- logous to that taught by the Greek philosophers, and destined to supplant it: the true σοφία sent to supersede the false. 2. It is one that can be advantageously taught only to persons who by a practical faith in the rudimental facts of Chris- tianity, have made some advances in the Divine life. 3. It is a wisdom beyond the reach of hu- man reason or conjecture to discover—a verita- ble mystery preserved in God’s keeping until He should choose to make it known. 4. It is one which has been revealed by the Holy Spirit out of the depths of the Godhead; hence 5. It must comprise such things as are found there, and carry the mark of the Divine personality, viz.: the nature, attributes, and constitution of the Divine Being, His plans and purposes as Creator, His laws as the Supreme Ruler, His aims and methods, and decrees, and works as Redeemer; all these more particularly as bearing upon man, and shedding light upon his condition and des- tiny. And these are truths both ontological and ethical; truths for the intellect and moral sense at once; truths spiritual and eternal in their highest and broadest sense, 6. The forms in which this wisdom is communicated, are also Divinely cast. They are they the words and illustrations suggested to the minds of the Apos- tles by the Holy Ghost, who inspired them, and which must ever constitute the best statements of this wisdom. It is a wisdom whose truth and excellence are not directly obvious to the natural man. In order to discern intuitively its force and beauty, and to perceive its Divine character, there is required the spiritual eye that is con- formed to the light of the glory of God as it shines in the face of Jesus Christ, and can by direct vision recognize its truth and heavenly source. | DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. [1. There is and must be a Divine philosophy is Christianity. The historical facts on which the Gospel rests embody living and eternal truths, which it is the life and joy of the spiritual man to contemplate and explore. In Jesus, the Son of man, there is incarnated the Word of God the Logos, from whom emanate all those Divine ar- chetypal ideas which inform and regulate the whole created universe. By Him all things con- sist. His province it is also, as the Son of God, the Father’s express image, to reveal that Father in the glory of His perfections, in His laws, pur- poses and workings, and thus to exhibit the principles on which the world is governed. Moreover, as the Son of Man, it is His office te show what man properly is in his true ideal, and what are the problems of his destiny. Still fur- ther, as the Son of God and the Son of man com- bined to constitute the mediatorial King, He be- comes the centre of all human history, the Head of that kingdom with reference to which all things in the world are controlled and governed. Christianity, therefore, carries in itself the sub- stance of all sound theology, and anthropology, and ethics, and historical science. Jesus Him- self being the absolute Truth and Life, in Him there must be hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, and these treasures it will be the province of an enlightened intelligence to ex- plore, and bring forth, and make known to the apprehension of mankind as that which is alone worthy of study and fitted to nourish alike the mind and heart. Thus it will be found in the end that the researches of right reason are directly in the line of faith’s leading—that the scheme of Christianity as set forth in the doctrines of the Gospel is in accordance with true science—yea, its very substance—and that ‘‘religion passes out of the ken of reason only when the eye of reason has reached its horizon, and that faith is but its continuation,” revealing to the devout worshipper the things which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, nor hath entered into the heart of man to conceive]. [2. This Divine philosophy is distinctly appre- hended only by a renewed. sanctified intelligence. Here life and light coincide. We believe in order that we may understand, and experience becomes the only fit guide and teacher. Sin and the remains of sin prove a disqualifica- tion for knowledge and beget folly. Hence it is that the communication of this Divine wisdom is suited only to such as have made attainments in piety, and must be measured out in proportion to their attainments by a wise economy. Christ being our light, so far as He is our life, it must follow] that with the unfolding of this new life in us, and to the degree in which the principle of this life, even the Divine Spirit, mortifies the works of the flesh and breaks down our narrow~ minded selfishness, and clears our intelligence of all prejudices, and emancipates us from human authorities, and from our self-complacency, and from our delight in whatsoever flatters and pleases self, will this Divine wisdom dawn with — a «0 CHAP. II. 6-16. 65 ever-growing clearness upon our apprehensions, and our understanding of God’s thoughts and ways become enlarged, and our susceptibility for still further disclosures be increased. If on the awakened conscience of the sinner there arises at the start the light of Gud’s pardoning and re- storing grace beaming from the person of Christ evidently crucified before his eyes, and under its radiance he sees the follies of the past and the obligations of the future, and learns his indebt- edness to redeeming love, and experiences its saving and gladdening influences, and feels in himself the quickening of a new and higher principle with all its uplifting powers and emo- tions, then in™all this there will be laid the foun- dation of a knowledge of Christ, and what He is, and what is the nature of the life that proceeds from Him, to which each day’s experience and reflection will constantly contribute. As his piety matures, the more he will come to under- stand something of the riches that are to be found in Christ—of His relations to the Godhead as the Eternal and Only-Begotten of the Father—of His relations to humanity as its Prince and Head— of the atonement founded upon the intimate union of His two natures—of the method and means by which His redeeming work was begun and is carried on and will be perfected at last—of the operations of the Holy Spirit in the instrumen- talities of the Gospel—of the gifts of grace—of the foundation and increase of the Church—of God’s superintendence over the race in guiding it to a participation in the blessings of his salva- tion—of the way in which these things condition each other, and how they all come to rest upon the decree of the all-wise and merciful God which infinitely exceeds all human imaginings, and to the realization of which the whole history of the race in all its main branches, both before and af- ter Christ, must tend—of the manner in which God will consummate His redeeming work, both in its direct progress and in its remoter connection with what precedes, and in its resemblances to the work of creation (1 Cor. xv.), and finally of the immanent relations of the Godhead which lie at the foundation of this whole process. These are some of the truths which will gradually un- fold their glorious meanings upon the mind of the growing Christian, making his path shine brighter and brighter until the perfect day. Mere beginners cannot be expected to comprehend them. They transcend the apprehension even of the most distinguished sages of the world, and range beyond the scope of man’s natural experi- ence and observation—yea, beyond the flights of human imagination and hope. But to the sincere believer they are made known with ever greater clearness through the illumination of the Holy Spirit. 8, The office of the Holy Spirit as the revealer rests upon essential distinctions in the being of God. His external operations and His indwelling in the hearts of men are owing to an earlier and independent existence in the Godhead, by virtue of which He is called ‘the Spirit of God” in a manner analogous to ‘‘the spirit of man which is in man.” Hence he must be supposed to exist in God not merely as a power or an attribute, but as an essential life-factor in the Divine nature, maintaining at the same time that independence 4 which is already seen to follow from His inde- pendent activity abroad, and from the perfection of the Divine nature. He 1s (‘od’s proper self, as certainly as man’s spirit is his own self; yet not however the entire God, just as the spirit of man is not the entire man. More exactly defined in the light of ver. 11, He is God as looking through and recognizing Himself, even as we may define the. Logos to be God imaging and expressing Himself objectively. And if the Divine fiat which creates life abroad is, when contemplated inwardly as the Logos, a self-subsistent and creative Life, so is the Divine cognition which illuminates and creates truth abroad—when con- templated inwardly as Spirit, an independent and creative truth or light. God’s being and begetting as Spirit, 7. ¢., the Spirit ἐπ God and the Spirit from God, is Truth—is the Light and the Father of Lights. On the ground of these essential dis- tinctions within the being of God, there is as- cribed to the Spirit in ver. 18 a vision and a knowledge, which not only penetrates all God’s works in their profoundest depths, and comprises in its scope all creaturely perception and all the mysteries of the kingdom of God (ver. 9), but also comprehends the inmost secrets of the Di- vine personality and most hidden attributes of God’s own self. And precisely because He is this inwardly illuminated inmost self of God, and the all-penetrating vision of God, is He the Truth. Spirit is God (Jno. iv. 24) as being a per- sonality which is in itself invisible, but which is conscious of itself in the whole circumference of its being and which thoroughly discerns and re- veals every thing external to itself. And the Lord is that Spirit, in so far as He taketh away the veil from the heart and discloses His glory unto the believer, from one degree of splendor unto another, until the fulness of His light shines upon them (2 Cor. iii. 17 ff; cf. iv. 6).” Ac- cordingly inasmuch as God is throughout trans- parent to Himself, and manifest in His own pecu- liar and hidden self, shining through every thing, and glorifying all who are devoted to Him in Himself, He is Light in Himself, Light through Himself on all abroad, and Light to Himself. This is the inward significance of the Divine: Spirit, and such is He in godlike self-subsistence as the living and creative truth,” etc. (Beck,. Lehre., S. 103 ff.). 4, While the psychical (ψυχικός) man imprisoned: as he is in his own natural selfishness, living and. moving ever outside of the sphere of God’s en- lightening Spirit, has no sense to receive the Divine spiritual communications so that they all appear to him irrational and absurd, the spiritual: (πνευματικός) man, who has received the Spirit of God and is controlled by him, carries in him- self a standard for determining that which is of the: Spirit; so that he is able to estimate it, both. according to its substance and its form of expres-- sion, and is therefore qualified to judge of every-- thing which comes within his sphere, by this the highest measure of all true worth. But he him. self is exalted above the judgment of the un. spiritual. Persons of this sort are capable of comprehending or instructing him so far as he is governed in his conduct by the Divine spirit, about as little as they are in condition to know the mind of Christ, which the spiritual man hath,. 66 and so to instruct Christ Himself. But the spiritual man judgeth of all things, because he hath received the anointing of the Holy One, even Christ, and knoweth all things (1 John ii. 21, 22). These are they who are ‘taught of God.” (ϑεοδίδακτοι, Jno. vi. 45.) This exalted state is maintained in the same manner in which itis won, in true, humble self-denial, in poverty of spirit, in steadfast, determined mortification of all selfish desires and unrestrained devotion to do what is good and wise, and in that simple- hearted abandonment which allows the Spirit of God to work in the heart, to will and to do of his own good pleasure. So far as these qualities fail, and self is suffered to hold sway, the man is betrayed into spiritual pride and into gross errors which arise from commingling and con- founding what is human with what is Divine. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. 1. Rieger: The great distinction between the wisdom of this world and the wisdom of God.—1. a. The former changes its opinions and principles well nigh faster than its fashions. ὃ. It is am- bitious to give the tone to that which shall be esteemed proper and conducive to the public good, and to fill every sphere with its own taste and judgment so as to be in favor with the princes of this world. c. But, alas! those to whom it so devotes itself soon fade and pass away but too apparently. The greater part of them outlive their own credit for wisdom, and a false garnish of their youth is soon succeeded by the lustrelessness of an old age which is all the more wretched from the contrast. 2. a. The hidden wisdom of God emerges out of eternity, and is on this account liable to no change. 3. Its benefits also stretch onward into eternity, and when the work of redemption shall be completed it will be found in glory long after the fashion of this world has utterly vanished. c. Its instruc- tion flows with such purity that only those who lay the foundation for it in the fear of God are introduced therein, step by step, along the path of obedience. d. Against its demands the heart of man is so apt to be hardened that it is a rare thing for one of the princes of this world to attain unto the knowledge of it (vv. 6-8). 2. The mystery of the Divine wisdom.—What is here held up to faith transcends the sight and hearing, the knowledge and understanding of men (6. g.) the manifestation of the Son of God in this world, the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven declared by Him, His sufferings, death, and resurrection, the setting up of His Church through the power of the Holy Spirit dispensed in such lowly vessels, the ways and judgments of God with His people on earth hitherto and the numerous humiliations of the cross which yet issue in the clearer victory of the truth. Nothing of all this could have entered the heart of man, had it not been first declared by the Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, and afterwards more fully disclosed by the Spirit (ver. 9). 8. The revelation through the Spirit of God.—1. Its indispensableness to the knowledge of God, because God is alone, and is known only to Him- self, therefore less capable of being ‘searched out” than men are by each other, since they THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. :--ΡΟ΄ῦ-. j possess ἃ common nature. 2. Its sufficiency; — what the Spirit searches out and can consequently impart is perfectly substantiated, since He a certainly belongs to the being of God as our spirit belongs to our human nature, and knows every thing respecting God with as much cer- tainty as our consciousness reports to us what is inus. 38. Its contents and operation; what God has in mercy ordained respecting us, the reason why He has made us His children, and what He prepared for us for all eternity, this we learn from the Spirit of God. He teaches it; He awakens also our desires for it; He works faith in us, and He establishes and quiets the heart in this knowledge (vv. 10-12). 4. The preaching that is acceptable to God.—a. Ts one that follows the lead of the Spirit, and ὃ. It is attainable by the diligent perusal of the words of the Apostle, learned from the Holy Ghost, by inquiring into their meaning, and also by submitting our hearts and minds‘to the dis- cipline and guidance of the Spirit. In other respects at the same time we are not to omit re- flection upon the suitable construction of the discourse and the right use of all human aids, yet aiming, however, always to keep aloof from all that is purely our own, or is prized by the world, or is extravagant in diction, and to bring forth whatever is impressive and soberly con- sidered, according as the Spirit of God has ex- pressed it to us in the Scriptures. c. But even for this reason, can the true preacher not expect to please every person; for in preaching spiri- tual doctrines he is obliged to direct his attention largely to the spiritually-minded, who are assisted in the apprehension of his message by the help of the Spirit working in them also (ver. 18). . 5. The natural man neither receives nor appre- hends what the Holy Spirit teaches in the Gospel.— Such is every person who rests in his own na- tural powers and has not bowed his heart to the influences of the Holy Ghost, since in his love of self he trusts too much to his own understanding, whose insight and evidence he over-values, and is thereby betrayed into an aversion to Divine things. But such corruption is not simply a bond- age to carnal lusts. It is also a wisdom that is after the flesh (vv. 12,13); and the words of hu- man wisdom excite an opposition to the doctrines taught by the Spirit, as well as to the simplicity of preaching. But this has its degrees: a, strong prejudice even to the avowed rejection of Divine truths; ὁ, neglect of spiritual things, so as not to deem it worth while to lay aside prejudices and candidly to confer with any one in reference- to them; c, assent to the truth, but without any strong faith wrought by the Spirit of God to the entire change of mind, hence accompanied still by hostility to the light, and by an incapacity to judge spiritual things spiritually. 6. The spiritual man: a, his ability to judge; b, his elevation above the judgment of others.— a, He who has been brought by the Spirit of God to the knowledge, faith and obedience of the truth, and daily learns, under Divine tuition, the things which are given us of God, judges everything which is presented to him appertaining to the knowledge and service of God, not indeed with entire infallibility, yet according to correct grounds. ὃ, But in this he } / CHAP. II. 6-16. 67 Oe ee τοΠροΠ' πΠΠπΠπΠΠΠΠΠπΠΠππΠΠ πτοΠΠ ν τ πΞ'Ρρ 0 ὉῦῦῸ π΄ .....ῦῦ. Σ is neither subject to the judgment of any man, nor bound to allow himself to be governed by it. For with the force of the declaration, ‘‘ Who has known the mind of the Lord? but we have the mind of Christ,” he can swing himself clear of all human judgments and repose in that which Christ has revealed. But it must be remem- bered, that in order to be able properly to boast that we have the mind of Christ there must be in us daily communion with the word of God, an entire indifference to human glory, fervency in prayer, and a patient love towards others. O God, teach me by thy Spirit, for thus it is I live. 7. SrarKke:—The longer and more truly a Christian serves God, the more spiritual wisdom he obtains (ver. 6). Christ and everything that is in and with Him, is an incomprehensible mys- tery; fail but to explore it, and thou art but a fool; but believe what is revealed to thee of it, and it is enough for thy salvation (ver.7). Won- der not that the greatest in the world, the most gifted, the wisest, do not only not accept Christ, but on the contrary altogether torture and cru- eify Him. They understand no better, and think themselves able by means of their reason to comprehend the faith and religion of Christ, just as they do everything else (ver. 8). The royal dignity of the children of God is shown in the fact, that they perceive and spiritually judge all things, especially the internal state of the godless, while they themselves are wholly un- known to the latter; and hence it is that they will one day become, as it were, occupants of the great judgment seat as Christ’s associate judges in the world’s assize (Lg.). Oh, how unqualified is the unconverted teacher for the office of the Spirit, especially for judging correctly of the true state of the souls of his hearers (Lange), (ver. 15). The mind of Christ is the mind of the Father and of the Holy Ghost, and it is revealed in the Scriptures. Whoever then wishes to know the mind of Christ need not climb on high and seek it from far (Rom. x. 7), but let him hold fast to the revealed word. There he will learn what God means and what he intends to do with us (ver. 16). 8. Hepincer:—Listen how a man ought to preach: Not in the stilted phraseology of ro- mance, nor in the use of wretched wit; but he should utter the mysteries of God in the form of sound words (1 Tim. vi. 3), and as the Holy Ghost lays them to the heart and brings them to the tongue of His faithful servants (Matt. x. 20). (Ver. 13).—Is he that judges unregenerate? What better is he than a blind man undertaking to judge of colors? Is heregenerate? Then he has a mind akin to that he judges. And al- though opinions in reference to topics that are aside from Christ, the foundation (iii. 11), may be divided, yet will he pass no judgment on these contrary to love and mildness, much less set himself up to be the lord and judge of an- other’s faith, in an arrogant, unbecoming man- ner (ver. 15). 9. Gossner:—It is not well to communicate everything to all. There are truths which can fitly be expressed only in certain circumstances and in certain degrees (ver. 6). Only to those who have come to the just consideration of their sin and misery will the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sins of the world, become the founda- tion and centre from which everything proceeds and to which everything returns (vv. 7,8). Best of all is it to preserve everything in a pure, still heart, and let there be for every pulse a thanks- giving and for every breath a song, until all come together at last, and we can praise our Re- deemer for everything with one accord in the right place and in society of the right persons (ver. 9). A glance into the deep things of God might awaken in us proud thoughts, as if it were possible for us to scan the Divine Majesty. But within this depth there is nothing else to be dis- covered but infinite love; that love whereby God condescended so low and stooped to commune with wicked, fallen, degraded humanity. These are the deepest depths and the most indescrib- able mysteries of the Godhead. This is what the natural man cannot understand—that God should make Himself so small. A glance into this mystery therefore does not elate, but it humbles (ver. 10). As we are obliged to learn men through men, so can we learn God only through God, or through His Spirit (ver. 11). The spirit of the world is at bottom the evil spirit, Satan, the god of this world, who has his seat in the hearts of the children of disobedience, and rules the world from thence. He must be expelled by the Spirit of God. He who has this Divine Spirit knows out of his own experience and inward observation what is given to him of God. He believes not at random, but what he believes that he knows, possesses, and enjoys (ver. 12). If a preacher surrenders his whole heart and mind and conduct to God, he will become so possessed by the Holy Ghost that it will be ob- vious to all that the Spirit speaks through him (ver. 13). There are honorable people with whom we can converse on many truths of Chris- tianity, such as the omnipresence of God, etc., and they will hear and understand gladly. But as soon as we speak a word concerning the Saviour and His meritorious sufferings and death, then they say: “ΑΒ, that I don’t under- stand; that is too high for me.”’ This doctrine does not suit one who has not the Holy Spirit. To the old man in us it is only foolishness (ver. 14). If we ‘‘have the mind of Christ,” think as He thinks, will as He wills, put all matters be- fore us as He puts them, then will it be granted us to understand the mysteries of the kingdom of God (ver. 16). 9. Heusner:—The man who is enlightened by the Spirit is able to estimate and judge all things, even the moral worth of the principles and acts of the unconverted, and the vanity of the earthly mind with its pursuits, because he knows what sin is from his own experience, and has torn himself loose from it, and because in the knowledge of the will of God, the absolute Good, he has a standard to measure everything else according to its real value (ver. 15). 10. On vy. 10-12. Schleier. Serm. 5th coll. Vol. 2d. From what the Apostle has said of the in- most nature and origin of the Spirit of God, it follows 1. that the operations of the Spirit are unique in their kind; 2. that every thing which comes to us from the Spirit is perfectly certain and reliable; 3. that it is amply sufficient for all our spiritual needs. On1. To all othe Ltt 68 ters the world arouses us by means of our com- mon understanding; but to ‘‘search the deep things of God,” and to ery ‘‘Abba Father,” this is youchsafed to us only by the Spirit when He descends into our spirits. On 2, Since the knowledge imparted by the Spirit, respecting what is in God is as eternal and unchanging as the Spirit of God Himself, the conviction thus obtained that ‘“‘God is Love” becomes also the deepest and most reliable truth of our existence, etc. On 8. There is nothing wanting to our most blessed communion with God,—if only the Holy Spirit reveal to us the love of God as the innermost depth of his nature,—if only we are made to see that benevolent purpose of God, which has been actuating his paternal heart to- wards the race from the beginning,—if only it become evident to us that all the wounds of our nature may be healed through the fulness of the Godhead which dwells in Christ as He has be- come partaker of our nature,—and if only through Him the Spirit of God, who is poured out upon all who believe in Christ as a quicken- ing and strengthening power, glorifies the Sa- viour in their view and causes them to realize the presence of Christ in Him. 11. [We must be cautious not to pervert these statements into arguments for the disparage- ment of human reason and learning in the mat- ters of religion. See this point argued in ex- tenso by Richard Hooker (III. viii. 4-11). So Wordsworth]. 12. [THotvuck. vers. 6-13. Apostolic Preach- ing. 1. Its source—derived: a. not from” the teaching of men, but ὁ. from the revelation of the Divine Spirit. II. Its form: a. not a demonstra- tion of the human understanding, but a witness of the Divine Spirit; 6. not the product of an ac- quired eloquence, but the offspring of a Divine necessity. Vers. 12-14. Apostolic preaching. 1. It proceeds out of the Spirit of God in the preacher. II. It addresses itself to the Spirit of God in the hearer.—R. Sourn. Ver. 7. Christianity mysterious,* and the wisdom of God in (* An evident misapprehension of the word “mystery,” as used in the text.) THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. making it so. I. The Gospel is the wisdom of God. IL. It is this wisdom in a mystery. The reasons of the mystery: a. the nature and qual ity of the things treated of, being surpassingly great, spiritual and strange ; ὁ. the ends designed with relation to their influence on the mind in impressing with awe and reverence, and hum- bling pride, and engaging our closer search, and reserving fuller knowledge as a source of bless- edness hereafter. Inferences: 1. The reasona- bleness of relying on the judgment of the Church and on spiritual teachers. The unreasonableness of making intelligibleness the measure of faith. 3. The vanity and presumption of pretending to clear up all mysteries in religionJ. Sprn- cer: Ver. 7. Wisdom of God in mystery.* I. The matter of mysteriousness which the Apos- tle had in mind. Christ slain for us. 11. This mysteriousness is wisdom, as being what might be expected in accordance with other mysteries, such as: a. Sin: ὁ. Incarnation; 6. Christ’s per- son and history; d. The mode of God’s treatment of Christ; e. The mode of the believer's restora- tion to God.—J. Barrow: Ver. 6. The Lxcellency of the Christian Religion as suited for ‘the per- fect:’’ 1, in the character it gives of God; 2, in the description it gives of man; 3, in the rule it prescribes; 4, in the service it appoints; 5, in the living example it affords; 6, in the solid grounds it gives us to build on; 7, in the help it affords; 8, in the way it satisfies conscience; 9, in the simplicity of its communication.—F. W. Rozpertson: Vers. 9, 10. God’s Revelation of heaven. 1. Inability of the lower parts of human nature, the natural man, to apprehend the higher truth: a. ‘‘Eye hath not seen ’’—not by sensa- tion; ὁ. ‘‘ Ear hath not. heard ”’—not by hearing; 6. ‘‘Neither have entered the heart’’—not by im- agination or affection. II. The Nature and Laws of Revelation: a, by a Spirit to a spirit; 5, on the condition of Love.—N. Emmons: Ver. 12. The peculiar spirit of Christians. II. Describe the Spirit. II. Show the peculiar knowledge it gives. [* A mistake, as above.] IV. THE UNFITNESS OF THE CORINTHIANS TO RECEIVE TRUE WISDOM. Cuaprer III. 1-4. Anp I, [I also"] brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto 2 carnal, [fleshy] even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and [om. and*] not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither [nay, not even*] yet 3 now are ye able. For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you enyying, and 4 strife, and divisions, [om. divisions®] are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal [men*]? 1 Ver. 1—The Rec. has καὶ ἐγώ. but with the far better and preponderant authorities A. B. 0. D. B. F. G. Cod. Sin, Lach. and Tisch. read κἀγώ [which, as Words. says, “ gives less prominence to the L., and accords more with the Apostle’s humility ”’}. CHAP. III. 1-4. 69 2 Ver. 1.—The Rec. has σαρκικοῖς according to ver. 3, where a preponderance of authorities declares for σαρκικοί, and only a few, governed by the original reading in ver. 1, have σάρκινοι. Here as in Rom. vii. 14; Heb. vii. 16 we must read according to best authorities σαρκίνοις. [So A. B. C. Ὁ. Cod. Sin.—followed_ by Gries., Lach., Tisch., Words., Alf., etc.]. 3 Ver. 2—The καὶ, according to the best manuscripts [A. B. C. Cod. Sin. ], is rejected by the great majority of transla- tors and by the old church fathers. 4 Ver. 2.—The Rec. οὔτε instead of οὐδέ is feebly supported and verbally incorrect. 5 Ver. 3.—Kai διχοστασίαι is wanting in good authorities, A. B.[C. Cod. Sin.] and in the majority of versions and church fathers. Its omission is not to be explained. tains 10]. ὃ Ver. 4.—Rec. οὐχὶ σαρκικοὶ ἐστε. [Instead read οὐκ ἄνθρωποί ἐστε Probably inserted as a gloss from Gal. νυ. 20. [Wordsworth re- So A. B. C. Cod. Sin. Alf., Stanley, Lach., Tisch., etc.] οὐκ is better attested than οὐχὶ and ἄνθρωποι still better. The Rec. reading is probably taken from ver. 3. ; EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 4 Ver. 1. As inchap. ii. 1,so here Paul turns from his more general exposition to the consideration of his own ministry at Corinth. The points of connection are furnished in ii. 6, 14. The com- munication of wisdom on the part of the Apos- tles belonged only to the sphere of the perfect, of the spiritual; it could not be extended to those who were natural psychical (Seelische) and un- receptive of that which was of the Spirit. As every other person must have done therefore, I also was obliged to treat you as persons of the latter class:—was not able to speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto (merely) fleshy (persons), as unto babes in Christ.— Instead of ψυχικός, natural, lit. psychical, Ger. seelisch, he now uses σάρκινος and σαρκικός, fleshy and fleshly or carnal, the ordinary antithesis to πνευματικός, spiritual. The sense, however, is not changed by this, for the natural or psychi- cal man is also at the same time a ‘‘fleshy” and ‘carnal’? man (comp. ii. 14), and we can neither say, with Bengel, that these latter expressions are milder, nor with Riickert, that they denote simple weakness, while the former implies hos- tile opposition; nor with Theophy. that they are stronger epithets than ‘‘ psychical,” nor that the latter refers to the intelligence, while the former apply to the moral side of human nature, such as the desire and passions. Meyer 2d ed., «ἐψυχικός denotes the category to which σαρκινός and σαρκικός belong.” 3d ed., ““ψυχικός: one who stands outside of the influence of the Spirit, who either has not received Him at all, or has been again deserted by Him.”’ Such a person is also σαρκικός. But not every σαρκικός as such is still a ψυχικός, because a σαρκικός may be also one who experienced the influences of the Spirit, but is not sufficiently actuated by his enlightening and sanctifying power to overcome the hostile power of the flesh; he still thinks, feels, judges, acts κατὰ σάρκα (according to the flesh). ‘‘He is here not speaking of Christians as distinguished from the world, but of one class of Christians as dis- tinguished from another.” Hopau.—Again it is a question how odpkivoc, fleshy, and σαρκικός, fleshly, stand related to each other. The for- mer elsewhere is used to denote made of the flesh, carneous. [Barytones in ἐνος denote the material of whichathing is made, λίϑενος of stone, ξύλινος of wood, etc.]. The LXX. employs it to signify partly the earthliness and weakness of man in contrast with God (2 Chron. xxxii. 8), and partly what is tender and easily impressed in contrast with what is hard and stony (Ez. xi. 19; xxxvi. 26. In like manner it occurs in 2 Cor. iii. 3). But σαρκικός is used in the New Testament, and afterwards by the church fathers, to designate the disposition and character as contrasted with πνευματικός. [Denominatives in κός express that which pertains to the noun from which they are derived, and are like our adjec- tives ending in dy]. Bleek in Heb. vii. 16 is of the opinion that in the first introduction of these terms they were used alike,-and that it was not until later that the ordinary ethical signification was limited to the form σαρκικός which occurs but rarely in the classics. Meyer on the con- trary sharply distinguishes. According-to him σάρκινος designates the unspiritual state of na- ture which the Corinthians still had in their early Christian minority, inasmuch as the Holy Spirit had as yet changed their character so slightly that they appeared as if consisting of men flesh still. But σαρκικός expresses a later ascendancy of the hostile material nature over the divine principle of which they had been made partakers by progressive instruction. And it is the latter which, as he thinks, the Apostle makes the ground of his rebuke. In so far, however, as both epithets are of kindred signification, he could, notwithstanding the distinction between them, affirm, ‘‘for ye are yet carnal.” So Meyer. The distinction between an intellectual weakness and narrow-mindedness in the first beginnings of Christianity (to which also the parallel ex- pression νηπίοις, babes, refers), and a moral im- purity and perverseness manifesting itself in the progress of Christian development, and involving also an intellectual incapacity for a true heavenly wisdom, is a distinction fully justifiable and con- sonant with the use of the terms σαρκικός and σάρκινος by the Apostle elsewhere. But that the term σαρκίνοις is to be here understood relatively, and as not denoting an entire lack of the πνεῦμα is clearly indicated by the phrase ‘‘as unto babes in Christ.’’ The time here referred to is that when they had just begun to receive Christian instruction, and were but recently admitted into fellowship with Christ by faith and baptism, and so become the children of God. They were of course then wholly immature and spiritually de- pendent, so that their conduct did not indicate the full impress of the Spirit. Their con- scious will, the I, was still fettered by carnal and selfish habits, and their ability to compre- hend the deever grounds and relations of Chris- tian truth was yet undeveloped. In short the allusion is to that crudeness which is seen in children. [And does not the word ‘fleshy,” seeing that the Apostle had in mind the image of babyhood, also clearly refer to the appearance of the babe also—a little lump seemingly of mere flesh, as yet evincing but little signs of mind or conscience, although containing these elements in the germ? One can hardly avoid discovering here one reason of the use of the word ‘‘fleshy ” instead of fleshly, which is an opprobious epithet, applicable only to later years. That mere ani- malness, which is one of the beauties of the babe, 70 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. a A AS: a A aa a a a ἀπτ΄-πτττ πὐπ πὐ πῶσ -- becomes deformity and a disgrace in an adult. ; good sense, zeal, emulation, and in a bad one, Hence the change of terms when the Apostle comes to speak of their after condition. They were σάρκινοι at first, but not developing their spiritu- ality they become σαρκικόι]. That fondness for showy eloquence which was natural at the first passed over into the vanity and corruption of an egotistical partisanship, and so instead of at- taining progressively a confirmed Christian cha- racter, they become carnal. In like manner the Rabbins also speak of little ones and sucklings. Schoettgen in loco. Wetstein 1 Pet. ii. 2; Matth. x. 42. Οη νηπίοις comp. xiv. 20; Heb. v. 18; otherwise Matth. xi. 25. Ver. 2. The figure introduced in the previous verse is still further carried out.—I gave you milk to drink.—That is, he gave them nourish- ment suited to their age. To the beginners in the Divine life, He imparted such instruction as was easy to be understood, the rudiments of Chris- tian knowledge (Heb. vi. 1), not strong meat such as adults only could digest, not the deeper truths of wisdom, which only those who had advanced in religious experience could properly receive, ii. 6 ff.—not meat.—This is connected to the foregoing in the way of a zeugma. [Winer, ἢ lxvi.c.]. Instead of ἐπότισα, have given to drink, which can only be asserted of the ‘‘milk,” and not of the ‘*meat,’ some other verb, such as ἔδωκα, have given, is to be supplied. ‘The dis- tinction between ‘milk’ and ‘meat’ can lie only in the formal treatment of the same funda- mental truth.” Neanper. ‘To refer the distine- tion here to the subject-matter of the preaching, is required neither by the figure used, nor by the connection.” Bureer. [‘* The same truth in one form is milk, in another form, strong meat.” Hover. ‘Christ is milk for babes, and strong meat for men.” Catvin]. The reason of the above preceience was,—for ye were not as yet able to bear it.—The time here referred to was the commencement of his ministry, and that of their first conversion, and the verb ἐδύ- νασϑε, able is to be taken in an absolute sense, as it is used also in the classics, ‘ye were not strong or capable enough.”” Mreyer.—nay, nor yet now are ye able.—The ἀλλά [which we render ‘*nay”’], is climacteric: not only were ye unable, but indeed ye are so still.” It might ap- pear inconsistent with this declaration that Paul proceeded in the xv. to expound to them the doc- trine of the resurrection which certainly is strong meat rather than milk; but there was a special demand for such an exposition, which saved him from the charge of contradicting himself. Ver. 8. [Assigns the reason of the inability. —For ye are yet carnal—here we have cap- κικόι---ποῖ σάρκινοι, as the word of censure appli- cable only to their advanced stage, and showing that though they had been Christians for a long time, they had yet the fleshiness of children upon them, now become fleshliness. The proof of this]—for whereas there is among you en- vying, and strife, and divisions [?], are ye not carnal, and walk according to man ?— Here he refers back to what was said in i. 10, ff. In Gal. y. 20 he also counts these same things as among the works of the flesh, comp. likewise Rom. xiii. 13. Ζῆλος, envying; in classic as well as in Hellenic usage, this word occurs in a Jealousy, envy. Here it signifies partisan rivalry, Out of this arose ἔρες strife, 7 6. verbal disputa- tion. If διχοστασίαι, divisions (see Crit. notes) were genuine, we should have in this a climax, indicating the schisms before referred to. Ὅπου, whereas, occurs in the classics, also in a causal sense, because, in so far as, since. Passow. Ac- cording to de Wette, it is like εἰ, a conditional designation of the reason, ‘‘if there be,” ete. According to Meyer it implies a local conception of the conditional relation: ‘‘where there is” (comp. Heb. ix. 16: x. 18).—Kara ἄνϑρωπον (also Rom. iii. δ)--εσαρκικῶς. It is the opposite to ‘“‘walking in the Spirit,” Gal. v. 25. What he means to say is, ‘your conduct conforms to the ways of men as they ordinarily are in their apos- tate and irreligious condition.’ Ver. 4. A further confirmation.—*‘ For when one says, ‘Iam of Paul;’ and another, ‘I am of Apollos.’—The allusion to the parties is not as full as in i. 12, inasmuch as he has in this paragraph only to do with that of Apollos, or rather with the opposition existing between this and that called after himself.” Mryrr. ‘These were at the same time the most important parties at Corinth.” OstanperR. Here likewise the distine- tion is not stated according to grammatical rules, The ἐγὼ μέν, however, brings out the contrast with emphasis: ‘I, on my part;’’ or, “1, at all events.” (Comp. Passow μέν, A. I., 11. 7; vol. IL. I. p. 175 and 177),—are ye not men.—The same usage as in ver. 3: κατ᾽ avUpwrov: “ after man’s fashion.” It was natural for the Jews to see in man (2 ΔΝ}, the earthly, an implication Tree of what was defective, imperfect, indeed the exact antithesis to God, and whatever was god- like. Hence the expression in the Old Testa- ment: ‘the children of men,” and especially ‘the daughters of men” (Gen. v .', in opposition to ‘the sons of God.” (This is, according tothe only interpretation suited to the connection and the spirit of the Old Testament, which sets the sanctified portion of the race over against those who represent men, human nature severed from God). The expression as here used, is certainly unique, but. entirely in accordance with the ana- logy of Scripture. ‘It means people who have not been lifted above human infirmity, and in whom the Divine element is utterly wanting.” MEYER. DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. Comp. on i. 12 ff.; ii. 6 ff.; ii. 1 ff. 1. [Christian truth is of different grades, and suited to different capacities. It has rudiments for the simplest child, and profundities which the angels desire to look into, and can never fully penetrate. It begins with the plainest facts of history, furnishing in these the foundation of a saving faith, but every one of these facts con- duct us down into the deep things of God. Thus the Gospel is adapted to all classes of mankind. Its storehouse is furnished with all kinds of pro- visions, from the milk for babes to the strong meat for adults. In this we have one token of its ‘Divine wisdom, and of its celestial origin and eternal destiny. Infinitude lies back of all its lowliest approaches to man in his fallen state, CHAP. III. 1-4. ,.,.-- τ΄, “ “ 8“ ΄ς--..---- and in all it presents to faith, it furnishes that on which mind and heart shall feed for ever- more]. 2. The vanity of man apart from God. Human nature, originally so exalted in its likeness to God, so glorious in knowledge and voluntary power, has sunk so low by reason of sin, that God’s word, uttering ever thé language of truth, associates with man (when regarded apart from the person of Jesus, and from what may be realized through Him) the conception of something small, weak, incapable, transient, vain, false; in short, of such imperfection and depravity as results from a rupture of our communion with God. Hence the inquiry, ‘“‘ who art thou, O man?” (Rom. ix. 20; comp. ii. 1, 3); and, ‘what is man?” Ps. viii. 4; exliv. 3, ff; and the saying, ‘“‘all men are liars.” Rom. iii. 4. Indeed, as used in common parlance, the term is often one of contempt. Luke xxii. 60: ««Man, I know not what thou sayest.’”’ Matth. xxvi. 72: “1 do not know the man.’”’ On the contrary, in Christ everything wins a different aspect. While in the Old Testament the term, ‘children of men,” is a disparaging epithet, Christ on the other hand, as ‘“‘the son of man,”’ wears the honors of One, who, though He entered into all the weakness of human nature, and in- curred its worst ills, yet rose again, and on this very account became the Mediator of a perfect communion with God, and the vehicle of all its consequent blessedness to the human race. By His righteousness He counterbalanced the sin of the old Adamic nature, and averts all its bitter results. He becomes also the sole Mediator be- tween God and man, and appears as the One who from the lowest depths of humiliation, has been raised to utmost height of majesty. Comp. xx. 18; xxiv. 27, 830: xxv. 31; xxvi. 64, ete. All this was foreshadowed in the vision of Daniel, where the Son of man is seen to come in the clouds of heaven, and to whom is given eternal power and a kingdom without end (vii. 13), and where human nature thus honored by God, is contrasted with the brute nature, the beast, which develops itself in the kingdoms of this world. The oft- repeated title conferred on Ezekiel, HN ja: LORY a thou Son of man, may also be regarded as typical of this One who is preéminently the Son of man. It was bestowed on the prophet as the re- ceiver of the Divine communications, and was as honorable as it was humiliating (comp. Gerlach on Ezek. ii. 1). Of the same sort was the epi- thet, ‘‘Man of God,” which was conferred on the prophets and other messengers of God, and passed out from the Old Testament into the New Testament. In fine, it may be affirmed generally that wherever, and to the degree in which com- munion with God is in any way predicable, the designation ‘‘man”’ at once obtains a higher sig- nification, and becomes one of honor, and is pro- phetic of exaltation. Elsewhere it carries the opposite import. > HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. Hevener:—l. The wisdom of the Christian teacher is shown in knowing how to adapt him- self to different ages, and to regard the necessi- 71 ties of his congregation; and to build up begin- ners unto perfection (ver. 1). 2. To the carnal nature belong self-love, vanity, ambition; these traits are exhibited in strife and partizanship. There is a zeal which is nothing more than an eagerness to maintain our own opinion, cause, or party, simply because it is ours, and we ex- pect to stand or fall with it, and not because conscience bids. From this comes strife, con- tention about points of difference. The issue is division. Since neither will yield, they separate. This accords with man’s fashion. Just as if Christianity were an affair of schools and sects, or as if one could act in the Church just as he does in the political world where factions and jealousies abound (ver. 2). Rircer:—l1. God’smethod of instruction requires that we do not overload. Novices are to be treated as children. Weare to be considerate of their weaknesses, and not to crowd upon them those deeper doctrines which can be properly judged of only by such as are spiritual and strong. 2. In regard to “milk” and ‘strong meat” let us not err. ‘ Milk” is a designation not of cheap- ness and meanness, but of what is most truthful and most nourishing to the spiritual life.— ‘Strong meat”’ signifies not every thing which our intellectual curiosity may lust after, but the deeper disclosures of the fundamental verities of God’s kingdom, the knowledge of which pro- motes growth in grace. 3. The carnal mind, suspicious, opinionated, and thus divisive, not only begets oppositions in doctrine, but also diversities in practice, which end in schism. Srarke:—l. Cr: to become a believer is not the result of a fit of enthusiasm, as if the wind were to blow upon a person and he straightway became perfect; but we must hear, learn, pray, read, inquire until we are transformed from one degree of conviction unto another. 2. Hep: God’s children often have gross and unacknow- ledged faults which linger in them until they have waxed in faith and grown strong to over- come. 8. To discourse to young converts of the deeper mysteries of Christian doctrine were as irrational as to give strong meat to babes. And since with the majority growth is slow and diffi- cult, we must often continue longer to deal out to them ‘the sincere milk of the Word.” Gossner :—Every one thinks his party has the kernel and others only the shell. Whereas they all are apt to let the kernel alone and dispute about the shell, as if that were the kernel (ver. 4). So is it with those who, having begun in spirit, go back to the flesh. Mistaking inciden- tals for essentials, they grow weak in the inward man and are soon puffed up (vv. 1, 21). W. F. Besser:—The mind of Christ tolerates no party-spirit, and no love of divisions. The. conscience of many in this day is not sufficiently tender on this point. Indeed there are numbers who consider their Christianity so much the purer in proportion as they disregard the visible exhibition of Church unity, and are reckless in breaking the bond of peace which outwardly unites companions in one faith. R. W. Rosertson :—‘‘ Strong meat” does not mean high doctrine such as Election, Regenera- tion, Justification by faith, but ‘ Perfection,” strong demands on Self, a severe and noble Life 72 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. .-ιιιιιι Ά Ά τι ι ι..δι:.-ς.Ἐςςς-ς-ςος..-Ὁ-.----ς- ͵ῳ ΄ή᾽ »-η ------------.-ς--,-.- -ς-“ τ Sans The danger of extreme demands made on hearts unprepared for such is seen in the case of An- anias. | [N. Emmons. Ver. 2. Doctrines of the Gospel food for Christians. 1. What doctrines the Apos- tle did preach to the Corinthians: a. Depravity; ὃ. Regeneration; 6. Love; d. Faith; 6. Sanctifi- cation; f. Final Perseverance; g. Divine Sove- reignty; A. Election. 11. Why these are called milk:* a. Because they are easy to be under- the pious heart; 6. Because they are nourishing. Ill. Why the Apostle preached these rather than others to the Corinthians: a. Their internal state required such preaching; ὁ. Their external state required it. Improvement. 1. If these doctrines are milk, what is meat? a. The rites and cere- monies of the Mosaic Law; 4. The types and predictions of the Old Testament; c. The predic- tions of the New Testament. 2. The doctrines which Paul preached to the Corinthians, as shown above, have been misrepresented. 8, We stood; ὁ. Because they are highly pleasing to have a criterion to determine who are the plain- est preachers. 4. No people are incapable of hearing the doctrines Paul preached to the Co- rinthians]. [* One would suppose the aforementioned doctrines to be the str ngest kind of meat. The sermon is interesting as a specimen. ]} Vv. THE ESTIMATE TO BE PUT ON TEACHERS AND THEIR WORK. THEIR VALUE TO BE PROVED IN THE DAY OF TRIAL. Cuarrer III. 5-15. 5 Who then is Paul, who zs Apollos, but? ministers by whom ye believed, even as 6 the Lord gave to everyman? I have [om. have] planted, Apollos watered; but God 7 gave [was giving] the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither 8 he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man [each one] shall receiye his own reward accord- 9 ing to his own labour. For we are labourers together with God: ye are God’s hus- bandry, ye are God’s building. According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise master builder, I have [om. have*] laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this® foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire [itself: αὐτόν] shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. If any man’s work [shall] abide’ which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. 15 1 Ver. 5.—The Ree τίς, instead of which Lach. and Meyer read τί [following A. B. Cod. Sin. and others] is sustained by nearly the same preponderance of authorities as declare for the mention of Apollos first. The received text, which puts Paul first, is to be explained from vy. 4 and 6. The repetition of ἐστίν is also established by the better authorities. 2 Ver. 5.—Before διάκονοι the Rec., which Tisch., 6th ed., follows, has ἀλλ᾽ 7. This makes the question continue to ἐπιστεύσατε. But the best authorities are against this reading, and it is therefore rejected by Lach. Tisch. and others. {For the true rendering see thé Exegetical comment.] ; ' 8 Ver. 10.—The Rec. τέθεικα is retained by Tisch. ed. 6 [also Alf., Words.]. But Lach. following A. B. C. [Cod. Sin.] reads ἔθηκα. 4 Ver. 11.—The Rec. Ἰησοῦς 6 Χριστός is feebly supported. Better Ἰησοῦς Χριστός. Tisch., ed 6, Χριστός "Inaods. 5 Ver. 12.—rovrov is rejected by Lach. according to A. B. C. (Cod. Sin.] but is retained by Tisch. in accordance with many weighty authorities [so too by Wordsworth, Alford]. 6 Vey. 13.—avro is inserted after πῦρ by Lachmann, Meyer, Tisch. [Aiford, Wordsworth, Stanley] according to the best authorities. [A. B.C. Cod. Sin. Origen, Chry. Eus., etc.] 7 Ver. 14, μενεῖ, future, is better authenticated [Latin version]. Received μένει [see note]. Lord who employs them; then, from yy. 10-15, EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. “From this point onward to ver. 23, Paul proceeds to explain in what light the Corinthians were to regard their spiritual teachers, and the work which these performed among them. And first, from vy. 5-9, he deals with the relation which the human instrumentalities sustain to the with the responsibility which they have for their work and the decision to which it is liable; and, finally, from vv. 16-28, with the position which the Church holds and ought to pursue towards them.”—Buraer. Ver. 5.—Who then is Ap- ollos ? and who is Paul ?—The reading τί: what, is at least as easily explainable on the ground that the answer given appears to point CHAP. III. 5-15. 73 rather to “‘what?’ than to “‘who?” as the read- ing τίς is capable of being accounted for from the effort to assimilate the genders. —[‘‘odv: then, follows on the assumption of the truth of their divided state.”—ALrorp.] The question here put is not to be regarded as coming from the readers (Riickert) g. d. ‘Who are Apollos and Paul, if we may not have them as our lead- ers?” This thought would have been expressed in quite a different manner—more his own.— (Comp. xv. 34; Rom. ix. 19 ff.). It is simpler to understand the connection thus: ‘You call yourselves after Apollos and Paul. Who are these persons, then? From the answer given, it is clearly implied that the partizanship of their followers does not accord with the spirit of the leaders they have chosen, and is condemned as a carnality.—Ministers, through whom ye believed.—Were ἀλλ᾽ ἢ: but, to be taken as genuine (see under the text), then we should have here an emphatic implication that Apollos and Paul were nothing else than mere ministers. There is in these words a mixture of two con- structions: οὐδὲν ἄλλο, ἀλλά: nothing else but; and οὐδὲν ἄλλο 4: nothing else than. So Meyer on 2 Cor. i. 13, Fritzsche, according to Her- mann on Viger, construes it otherwise: ‘but either—or I know not what.” The phrase is to be found in Luke xii. 15, where its correctness is undisputed. It was plainly, therefore, not rejected because of its objectionableness. δεά- κονοι: deacons, ministers, is here to be under- stood in its broadest sense, as contrasted with leaders. We may supplement ‘‘of your Church,” comp. ver. 21, and Matth. xx. 28; or ‘of God,” or ‘‘of Christ,” comp. ver. 6 ff; 2 Cor. vi. 4, etc. The words following would favor the one as well as the other, or perhaps hint at a combination of the two—‘‘ ministers of Christ in your behalf.” (Col. i. 7.)—through whom ye believed.— Bengel says briefly and forcibly: ‘ Through whom, not in whom” (Jas. i. 7). They are thereby designated as instruments in God’s hand for the production of faith. And such they were in their function as preachers and teachers of truth. But this instrumentality was of different kinds; that of Paul, for the exercise of the faith, of Apollos, for its further development. This process is expressed in the aorist tense, as in Rom. xiii. 11; Gal. ii. 16.—even as the Lord gave to each one.—This statement is made to bring forward prominently the fact of the depend- ence of the ministers on the Lord, both for their gifts and their ministry, and so to dampen the disposition ‘‘to boast in men.’ καὶ ἑκάστω ὧσ ὁ κώριος ἔδωκεν, not an instance of attraction, as if ἕκαστος se. διάκονος ἐστιν, ὡς---- ἔδωκεν av7@. But ἑκαστῷ stands first by way of emphasis, as in Rom. xii. 3, because having spoken of them in general, he wishes next to designate what is peculiar to each one. There is no need of taking ‘‘the Lord” to mean God, instead of Christ [so Hodge], contrary to the usage of Paul, nor are we compelled to this by vy. 6,9, 10. The endowment of ministers with manifold gifts is also ascribed to Christ in Eph. iv. 7 ff. In what follows, when ‘‘God”’ is intro- duced, the Apostle is speaking of something else, viz. of the Divine blessing, and of the dependence on God for desired results. Ver. 6. I planted, Apollos watered, but God was giving the increase.—Under these figures Paul exhibits partly the diversity of ope- ration between him and Apollos, and partly their equal dependence on Divine favor for success. Paul labored for the founding of the Church, for the planting of the spiritual crop; Apollos for the further development of the life of faith thus begun, for the edification of the Church; he watered and helped to mature the growing crop. But after all it was to God, as the efficient cause, that both owed the results obtained. It was His power, working in them and through them, that caused the faith to strike root, and spring up, and bring forth fruit. ‘‘Av&dvewv: to increase, a designation of the attainment of an object which had been furthered by the Divine powers at work in the instruments, and by divers other auxiliary operations of grace which accompanied or pre- pared the way for them. [““ηὔξανεν : was giving. Observe the force of the Imperfect, intimating a continued bestowal of Divine grace as distin- guished from the transitory acts of His ministers whose operations are described by aorists.”— Worps. |. Ver. 7. So then [‘‘dore: an illative particle of frequent occurrence”? Worps. | neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth, but He that giveth the in- crease, even God.—The inference here drawn goes to the discrediting of all human organs taken by themselves, and to the rebuking of all partisanship. ἔστι re: is any thing, either in numero est: in account (comp. Acts ver. 386) or yet more strongly, is absolutely any thing. On the other hand, to the last clause we naturally sup- plement τὰ πάντα éoriv: is all (xv. 28; Col. iii. 11). Bengel: “418. something, and, because He is alone, all things.” What is here viewed sepa- rately for the purpose of counteracting the ten- dency to unduly exalt the instrument is elsewhere taken together; the agency of the instrument and the agency of God in their coricrete unity (Rom. xi. 14; 1 Tim. iv. 16). [‘‘In this passage ministers are brought into comparison with the Lord, and the reason of this comparison is, that mankind, while estimating grudgingly the grace of God, are too lavish in their commendation of ministers, and in this manner they snatch away what is God’s, with a view of transferring it to themselves.” CALVIN. ]. Ver. 8. Now He that planteth and He that watereth are one.—[‘‘év: one thing neuter. God is ὁ εἷς, mas. He is the one agent; they are an instrument in His hands; and they are one a8 united together in Christ. But they are not what you would make them by your party factions to be, separate persons and rival heads and leaders of opposing sects.’”” Worps. ]. Paul does not here intend to deny the different merits of ministers or their separate worth, as though they all stood at par (Bengel, Billroth); he is referring only to their office and services. They are alike ministers. And in so saying he means to counteract all rivalry and all exaltation of one over another. The unity and mutual connection, which he asserts, do not, however, exclude diversities both in their labors and in the recognition of these labors, on the part of the Lord, in ways corresponding thereto.—And 74 each one shall receive his own reward according to his own labor.—The words ‘his own” —‘his own’? stand in contrast with ‘“‘are one.” Bengel styles it ‘‘an appropriate repetition antithetic to the ‘‘one.” κόπος de- notes not the result, but the labor, the effort put forth. This, however unsuccessful, involves a fidelity and devotion which can be estimated by God alone. κατά indicates also the qualitative, and not merely the quantitative relation—i δέον: own, that which especially belongs to each one, both in the labor expended and in the reward. The μεσϑός, as the context shows, signifies the Divine recompense. The full λήψεται (λῆ- μψεται, Altice Ionic form) points to the reward which will be conferred at the coming of Christ. (Comp, iv. 5; 1 Thess. ii. 19; 2 Tim. iv. 8; Dan. xii. 3;. Matth. xxv. 20 ff; 1 Pet. v. 4). This reward is praise bestowed for the labor done. According to Bengel, ‘‘Something more than salvation.” It is an addition to the blessedness common to all the subjects of grace, which, as Osiander observes, consists in the various degrees of glory (δόξα) conferred on them (comp. Luke xix. 17 ff.); moreover it is a reward of grace, since the whole thing rests upon the plan and promise and operation of grace. Yet it is ap- portioned in righteousness, ‘‘to each one his own.” ‘Relatively to redemption nothing can be said of desert. But within the sphere of re- demption, the question comes up, ‘how faithfully has a person employed the grace received, and wrought with it. Here it can be asserted ‘To him that hath shall be given.’ This is what Paul means by reward.” Neanver. That such a reward is to be expected appears from what fol- lows:— Ver. 9. For we are God's fellow-labor- ers, God’s husbandry, God’s building are ye.—tThe emphatic word here is ϑεοῦ, God’s. Since it is God’s work to which we devote our labor, each in his own part, we are therefore to expect it from His truthfulness that He will not refuse to us the corresponding reward. This reference to what precedes (Meyer) has a decided advantage over that interpretation which regards these words as a comprehensive exposition of the calling of spiritual teachers, and their debt of service to the congregation (ver. 5 ff.), and espe- cially of their oneness in it (ver. 8). In this case the γάρ, for, in relation to the first clause, would be explanatory and in reference to the second, causal (Osiander). ‘It is also prefera- ble to that interpretation which, in order tomake out here a rebuke of party spirit, takes the sense to be: Every thing is to be ascribed to God; therefore to God be all the glory.” Burerer. In- asmuch as the idea of a reward recurs also in what follows, it perhaps would be more proper to regard these sentences only as confirmatory of what was said respecting the reward. [Stanley takes the ‘‘for” as giving the reason for the oneness among the teachers. ‘Their object is the same (though their modes of working are different), for it is God who is our fellow-laborer, etc.; therefore they cannot be set against each | other.” Hodge combines the two ideas]. Θεοῦ ovvepyoi—God’s helpers, who work with God,— not: ‘*who do God’s work associatedly”’ [as Olshausen], for this would be etymologically in- THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. a aie ἐπε τσ σπ θ -- admissible. Even so συνεργὸν ἡμῶν, 1 Thess. ili, 2. Although God works all in all, yet He works through His servants, whom He recognizes as helpers in His work, and whom he suffers to work, each one in his own peculiar way. Calvin: Eximium elogium ministerii, quod, quum per se agere possit Deus, nos homunciones tanquam adjutores ad- siscat, per quos ita solus agit, ut tamen vicissim cum eo laborent (cf. Osiander in loco). Here we have a hint of the dignity of the ministerial office, and of our obligation to keep in view God’s objects in it. [Though, indeed, it must be said that the de- sign of the argument is not to dignify the teach- ers, but to abate the excessive estimate put upon them]. Θεοῦ γεώργιον, a field belonging to God; so also ϑεοῦ οἰκοδομῇ, God’s building. The Geni- tive of cause (—it is God who built you) [so Al- ford] is less fitting here, since Paul is speaking in the context concerning the performance and the reward of teachers, and in these statements he is establishing the expectation that God will grant to them their reward on the ground that that on which they are at work, belongs to Him. Γεώργιον (also in Proy. xxiv. 80; xxxi. 16)= tilled land, a field, a garden, a vineyard; oixodouh, a word of the later Greek—oixodouia, οἰκοδόμημα. Both indicate the kind of labor pursued by God’s co-workers: the cultivation of a field, the rear- ing of a building. But in making God (ϑεοῦ) prominent, the subjects on both sides retire into the background in a corresponding degree. Hence neither “we” (ἡμεῖς) nor “you” (ὑμεῖς) is expressed. Taking the whole context in its broader scope, and considering the aim of the whole paragraph, we might suppose with Chry- sostom, that in the repeated mention of God in the last clause there was an implied rebuke of the tendency in the Church to call themselves after men [so Words.] (ver. 4) (cf. Osiander). The figure in οἰκοδομὴ (building), analogous to that in the ‘‘temple of God” (ver. 16; 2 Cor. vi. 16; Eph. ii. 21) is carried out still further in what follows. Ver. 10. Paul here proceeds to state what he himself had done towards erecting God's build- ing.—According unto the grace of God, which was given unto me.—By “grace” he means not the Apostolic office as such, but those peculiar endowments which qualified him for laying the foundation (comp. i. 8, 4). Lit. ‘by virtue of the favor shown unto me.’ And this favor was manifest both in the call to office and — in the bestowment of those gifts which enabled him to become a co-worker with God. By this acknowledgment οὐ his indebtedness in advance, he obviates all misconception with a wise humi- lity, and avoids all appearance of arrogance. The same expression occurs in Rom. xy. 15; xii. 8; Gal. ii. 9; Eph. iii. 2—as a wise master master-builder I laid the foundation.— This was done in that preaching of Christ cruci- fied, which had first elicited their faith (ver. 11; ii. 2). [‘*eué2cov, a foundation. St. Paul uses the masculine form, ver. 11,:and 2 Tim. ii. 19, St. Luke the neuter (Acts xvi. 26); which is At- tic. The masculine is very appropriate here, be- cause the foundation is Christ.’? Words. In say- ing that he laid this ‘‘as” a wise masterbuilder, ‘he does not vaunt himself, but propounds himself as an example.” Curysostom]. The Dal a! ie. CHAP. III. 5-15. τὸ wisdom he claims, might be regarded as that be- tokened in the act of laying a foundation, since the attempt to build without such preliminary work would indicate a lack of sense. Yet ver. 11 seems to imply that he had reference to the nature of the foundation, in that it was the only one suited for a ‘“‘ building of God,” and such a one as a wise builder would alone lay. [Why not both?]. Σοφός, wise, skilful—thoroughly un- derstanding his art. The same usage occurs in the classics. The claim here made, tells against the partisan disparagement of his labors.—and another buildeth thereon.—dAdoc another, not merely Apollos, but also every person who had engaged in the work of the ministry at Corinth, ‘‘more especially those successors of his who werestill laboring inthe Church.” OsiANDER. (Comp. iv. 15). To such, he, as the Apostolic ‘‘masterbuilder,” gives the caution.—But let each one look how he buildeth thereon.— ‘sHow,” ὦ 6. in what way, and with what mate- rial. He thus warns them of the greatness of their responsibility, and of the importance of making the edifice correspond with the founda- tion. On this point he explains himself further by showing what is the only proper foundation of a church. ᾿ Ver. 11. For other foundation can no man lay besides that lying there.—He here explains why he speaks simply of building the superstructure, and says nothing in regard to the foundation. This had been already laid, and was confessedly all right. There could possibly be no idea of changing or modifying that. [‘‘In taking this for granted, he implies the strongest possible caution against attempting to lay any other.” Alf.]. The emphasis here rests on “foundation,” whichisaccordingly putfirstin the sentence. δύναται, not may, but can. Paul here wishes to express the absolute impossibility of change, without entirely destroying the character of the building. And hence there naturally fol- lows the utter inadmissibleness of attempting to lay any other foundation. The thing is so con- trary to the nature of the case, that no Christian teacher can be supposed willing to undertake it. παρά, alongside of, and yet not touching; hence, besides, beyond, contrary to. In regard to κείμενον, lying there it may be asked, whether the idea in- volved in τέϑεικα, J laid, of ver. 10, is here re- sumed, so that it refers to what Paul had done [‘‘in which case it would have been tedévra.” Worps. ], or whether it implies what had been done by God in sending His Son to be our Re- deemer, and laying him as the precious corner- stone of His Church [or whether it is with Words. to be taken in the middle sense as lying .there ‘“‘by His own free will and act.”]. Adopt- ing the second of the above interpretations, the verb “1 laid,” in ver. 10, would indicate Paul’s accordance with the Divine prodedure. He had laid in its place at Corinth that foundation which God had provided for the Church universal, by proclaiming Christ there as the only proper ob- ject of faith. This would accord better with the more general form κείμενον, and also establish the impossibility declared in the words, ‘‘can no man.” ‘If God has laid a foundation, then surely no Christian teacher will think of laying any other. Accordingly, I also have made this the —— basis of the Church at Corinth, and could do no otherwise.’ [This word, κεῖται, from which keiwevov comes, descriptive of Christ’s character as the one foundation of His Church, is applied to Him in His first presentation in the material temple at Jerusalem. Luke ii. 34, οὗτος κεῖται εἰς πτῶσιν. It is observable also that the man of sin, who places himself as a foundation of the: Church, in the room of Christ, is called ὁ ἀντι- κείμενυς. 2 Thess. 11. 4. Worps.]. What. this: foundation is, is expressed in the relative clause, —which is Christ Jesus.—By this he means: Christ in His own person, not simply the doctrine of Christ as being a fundamental doctrine. [‘‘The former interpretation which is adopted. by many distinguished commentators (de Wette,, Alf., Stanley), is more in accordance with the common representations of scripture, and per-- haps also with the form of expression here used.. The second, however, is certainly more consist-- ent with the context. In saying that he had: laid the foundation, Paul could only mean that he had in Corinth taught the doctrine concerning: the person and work of Christ.”” Hoper. but surely it was not the doctrine as such that was. the foundation. The doctrine availed only as it: brought Christ directly and personally present to the mind of the Church, and induced them te. build on Him. The distinction Kling maintains. is a very important one. There is constant dan- ger of persons mistaking the doctrine of Christ for the person of Christ. The former is the founda- tion of a theology, the latter of a life. ] Ver. 12. The nature of the foundation being, settled, he now proceeds to consider the several ways in which superstructure might be carried: up.—But—|[ ‘The dé implies that though there: can be but one foundation, there are many ways of building upon it.”” Atr.]—if any man build upon the foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble.—He here illus- trates the various kinds of material that might be employed in the edifice, either worthy and durable, that could stand the test of fire, or- worthless and incapable of passing the ordeal. Both sorts are mentioned in lively succession, without any express exhibition of the diversities. implied. According to the best and largest num- ber of commentators, from Clem., Alex., down to: Osiander and Meyer, Paul here intends to denote: by this building material,not persons, but doctrines, such as when joined with faith in Christ may or may not suit the foundation; such as in worth and durability do or do not correspond with the: precious indestructible corner-stone. That the: wood, hay and stubble were designed in general], to signify such teachings as mingled the weak. and disfiguring products of human wisdom, art,. philosophy and Jewish traditions with the truth. of God, is very evident. But any attempts to. particularize, either as to the dogmas referred: to, or as to the parts of the building they were intended for, would be futile and out of taste. Moreover, we are to hold fast to the idea of but one building contemplated, into which all the different kinds of material specified are worked, and not to imagine [as Wetst., Billr., Stanley] that two sorts of building are had in view, such as a palace and a hut; or that a whole city was intended, ‘‘the city of God,” for instance. We 76 THE FIRST EPIS’LE TO THE CORINTHIANS. might also very appropriately, but rather by way of accommodation, bring under consideration here the distinctive practical fruits produced under the different kinds of teaching and the different sorts of church members brought in and trained under the same. [So Theodoret adopted by Stanley, who deems the practical fruits the main thing referred to, and adds, ‘‘He is here preparing the way for the accusation of the in- cestuous person.” ]. To suppose, however, with Olsh., that there is any allusion to the private work of personal sanctification, would be untena- ble, inasmuch as the entire context treats solely of ministerial functions. Riickert’s interpreta- tion is too abstract and general. Proceeding on the ground that ‘‘ work” (ἔργον) with Paul signi- fies the entire business of life, he takes the sense to be: ‘‘only he who builds upon the true foun- dation in a right manner, so that his work will abide the test, is entitled toa reward. He who builds on it unsuitably, can expect none. This only, however, can be said for his comfort, that he will not forfeit his salvation since it was his will at least to further the work of the Lord.” On this whole subject, consult Osiander and Meyer. ([/‘‘Precious stones” here means stones valuable for building, such as granite and mar- ble. ‘‘Gold and silver,” were extensively employed in adorning ancient temples, and are therefore appropriately used as symbols of pure doctrine. ‘‘ Wood, hay and stubble” are the perishable ma- terials out of which ordinary houses were built. Wood for the doorsand posts, hay mixed with mud for the walls, and straw for the roof. These ‘materials, unsuited for the temple of God, are the appropriate symbols of false doctrines.” Hover]. Ver. 13. Every man’s work will be ‘made manifest.—The worth or worthlessness, the durability or perishableness of what a man has wrought is not to remain concealed.—For the day will declare it.—i. ¢., will make evi- dent what is genuine or not genuine, what is truth and what mere show. This is a matter which often remains for a long time uncertain. But what are we to understand by this day of revelation? Not certainly the time of Jerusa- lem’s overthrow [as Starke], for the Apostle is not speaking here of Jewish traditions, the va- nity of which would then be exposed. Nor yet time in general, or any prolonged lapse of time, for the term ‘‘day” is never used in this sense by the New Testament writers, nor would it suit the following context. Ever since the period of the Reformation, Calyin’s view has widely prevailed, that the allusion here is to the time when the pure knowledge of the Gospel should spread over the earth. So others also. But the apos- tolic usage and modes of thought warrant our understanding it only of the day of Christ’s second coming (comp. iv. 5; Rom. ii. 16; 2 Cor. v. 10). This is the period of that searching, sifting trial which is to begin at the house of God (1 Pet. iv. 17), and which after manifold preludes will reach its consummation in the appearance of our Lord. In this sense the word ‘day’ stands without any explanatory term in Heb. x. 25; 1 Thess. v. 4ss.— Because it is revealed in fire.—What is revealed? The work of which he has just said ‘it shall be made manifest.” To this it is objected that the sentence would in that case be tautological. But a repetition of this prominent thought will appear less strange in view of the fact that it is more distinctly de- fined by the additional words, “by fire,” and that the following clause appears to be a fitting further development of them. It would indeed be most natural to regard ‘‘day” as the thing revealed. [So Alf., Stanley, Words., Hodge]. But nowhere is it said that the day of the Lord is revealed. Such a mode of speech would be unusual. It were better, with Bengel, to supply “‘the Lord” as the nominative, since indeed it is the day of the Lord that is referred to, and this construction would have its parallel in 2 Thess. i. 17: ‘* When the Lord Jesus shall be re- vealed from heaven in flaming fire.” Here fire is represented as accompanying the manifesta- tion of Jesus, (not, however, as a means of ven- geance). But such a supplying of a word is warranted only in case no other suitable ex- planation can befound. If then ‘‘ work” be the proper subject, ‘‘the fire”? must be taken to de- note that by which the work is tested. The re- lation of this clause to the foregoing then would be this: because fire is the agency by which the work is tried, therefore will the day of the Lord, who is to appear in flaming fire (2 Thess. i.), the day which is to burn as an oven (Matth. iv. 1), make this work manifest. [‘* To show the cer- tainty and perpetual imminence of that fiery trial of the Last Day, Paul uses the present tense (ἀποκαλύπτετα ἐ) ts revealed.” Worvs. |—And each one’s work, what sort it is this fire itself shall prove.—tThis clause stands inde- pendently of ὅτε, because, and sums up the whole truth, stating once more the ordeal con- templated and the peculiar means of its accom- plishment. It is the fire that is to try the work, and demonstrate its quality—ré πῦρ αὐτό, the Jjire itself, by its own specific action. That this means neither the Holy Spirit nor yet persecu- tions of any sort is evident from the interpreta- tion given to the word ‘‘day.” Still less tenable is the Roman Catholic interpretation, which dis- covers herein an allusion to purgatory. (Council of Florence). [‘‘The fire of which St. Paul speaks is the Fire of the Great Day; not a Fire of any intermediate state. And the Fire which he describes does not cleanse, as that intermedi- ate fire is feigned to do, but dries and destroys. It is not a Purgatorial but a Probationary Fire.” Worps. Besides ‘“ Paul is here speaking of min~ isters and their doctrines, and not of believers in general.” Hopar,9,v. 1]. ‘We deny not that anticipations of the judicial fire of the Last Day may be traced in the fiery trials with which God will visit His own house (1 Pet. ivy. 12-17); but the fire by which Christians will be refined and purged before the end comes will burn not on the other side but this side of death.” W. F. Besser. Neanper onthe contrary says: ‘*The fire is an image of the progressive purifying pro- cess which goes on along the course of the de- velopment of the Church. This process will al- low only what is genuine and Divine to stand.” It is, however, the outward and substantial mani- festation of the judicial energy of the Lord, who will work as a purifying flame, so that everything in the labors of those who have been endeavor CHAP. III. 5-15. 79 ing to build up the Church, that does not carry the Divine impress, but is the vain and perish- able invention of man, will be brought to nought. Of this manifestation we have a prelude now in the continuous judgment of the Holy Ghost, and in the persecutions which the Church here suf- fers. The effect of it is exhibited antithetically in Vers. 14,15. If any one’s work shall abide which he built thereon, he shall receive a reward.—This is the positive side. Mevet, shall abide (the future corresponds with κατακαήσεται), shall stand the fire which is to con- sume all that is unworthy. ‘‘Reward,” as in ver. 8. By this we may understand on the one hand, a presentation before Christ as a faithful and true workman, whose work is honorable to the Master (1 Thess. ii. 19 ff.; Phil. ii. 15 ff.); and on the other hand, an appointment to higher trusts in the kingdom of God (Dan. xii. 3; Matth. xix. 28; 2 Tim. iv. 8; Matth. xxv. 21-23). «*The abiding of his edifice will be itself his great reward, just as Paul terms the fruit of his labor, and of his founding the Church his boasting and his crown in the day of the Lord (2 Cor. i. 14; Phil. ii. 16; 1 Thess. ii. 19). Still we do not in this completely gauge the reward of a true builder.” W. F. Besser.—Next comes the ne- gative side.—If any one’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss.—The omission of the conjunction is owing to the rapid rush of the thought, and renders the style more vivid. The “loss” spoken of is not of ‘“‘the work,” but “the reward.” ‘True, the judicial fire, which consumes all impure and untenable doctrines, will also consume his whole performance; but the consequence will be that he will forfeit his reward, and so incur damage (comp. ζημιοῦσϑαι, 2 Cor. vii. 7-9; Phil. iii. 8; Matth. xvi. 26). [*It is possible that this whole image, as addressed to the Corinthians, may have been suggested or at least illustrated by the conflagration of Co- rinth under Mummius; the stately temples (one of them remaining to this day) standing amidst the universal destruction of the meaner build- ings.” SranLey].—But he himself shall be saved ;—airéc δὲ, he himself, as contrasted with the reward [and also with the work]. Here it is presupposed that the individual has been building indeed upon the true foundation, Christ, but has failed only in respect to the manner of his building (from infirmity of the flesh or from ignorance, as Calvin suggests). Altogether super- fluous and incorrect would it be to translate it ‘he can be saved.’ To supply the condition, ‘if it be possible,’ is wholly arbitrary; and still more so to assume that by ‘work’ is meant the scho- lars of a good teacher who perish without his fault. Many of the Fathers interpret σωϑήσεται, be saved, in the sense of τηρηϑήσεται, should be preserved, as if it meant: shall be not annihilated but kept alive in eternal torments and in fire. But this, apart from all other objections, is con- trary to the usage of the word in the New Testa- ment. It can only mean: he shall obtain salvation in Christ. ‘‘Here we have one clear evidence that salvation is not a reward, but is freely given to us through the merits of Christ.” W. F. Besser. —Yet so as through fire. --ἰδεὰ πυρός). Herein is expressed the nar- rowness of the person’s escape. : snatched as a brand from the HOSA ares nothing but his bare life (comp. jittle know- Amos iv. 11; Jude 23). The image +yyi5t and of a man living in a house, but of one OCapld] with the building of it, and who just delivers ug self with great effort from the conflagration tha. has caught his work, and sees in sadness and anxiety the loss of all he has done, to the marring of his blessedness. And such a person attains only to a lower stage of bliss (comp. Matth. xx. 16; Mark x. 31, last clause). So Meyer, rejecting however, the idea that words embody anything of the nature of a proverb, since Paul is here speak- ing literally of a consuming fire. But neverthe- less the use of the word dc, as, constrains us to regard itassuch. For although we should in- terpret ‘“‘as” in the same manner as we do in Jno. i. 14, and render, ‘just as one would expect in the case of a conflagration,’ still it would amount to about the same thing. Only we might say it is not to be understood as a proverb merely (comp. Osiander, p. 174 ἢ). DOGMATICAL AND ETHICAL. 1. Ministers are co-workers with God.—It is in this that the highest dignity of the Christian teacher consists. To wish to be nothing but an instrument for performing the Divine will, to aim at nothing but the fulfilment of God’s designs, to desire to have and to exercise no power save what this line of action includes, ¢o covet no reward, no honor, no enjoyment, excepting what comes from such labor, and helps to the more complete dis- charge of this calling, this is the characteristic of a servant of God, who follows Christ in self-denial and love, and purposes only to save souls for God and consecrates to this all his faculties, and is diligent to present to God a work pleasing to Him and honorable to His holy Son, and neither seeks nor strives after any glory for himself, but is content that God be exalted Supreme over all, and that His will alone should prevail. To such a person, nothing is too insignificant to be undertaken, provided it serves this end. No work will he be ashamed of or shun, even though it be among those who are low, or despised, or degraded, provided the gracious designs of God may be accomplished thereby. Such ser- vants are, in truth, co-workers with God. He takes them into a fellowship of labor with Him- self. He shares with them His exalted work of renewing, blessing, sanctifying and glorifying lost creatures. He shares with them also His authority, His power, His honor, His joy in this work. And this He is able to do because they have entered into a fellowship with Him in His thoughts and intentions by the operation of the Holy Ghost; because the spirit of Christ, God’s perfect servant, animates them; because His mind is also their mind; and because the holy will of a self-denying, self-devoted love is alive and strongin their hearts. For this reason, they will have nothing to do with partizanship. It sickens them to see poor lost souls clinging t¢ them and wishing to make them masters alongside of Christ, or in His place; to see people following their directions, and exalting their merely human and personal peculiarities into a standard of 76 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. might alsoy which to regulate their conduct. of accomnedings they repel, and they strive here the cr might instead to fasten souls upon under th their only master. The higher God diffes them, the more intent are they on being trning, and passing for nothing, in themselves. fhen and thus the Church of God is built up in truth. 2. This Church is God’s field.—This truth con- troverts all party action in the same way that the view just given, of teachers being God’s servants and co-laborers, controverts it. The Church be- longstoGod; Heit is who tills the field—ezternally, by the preaching of the Word—internally, by His Spirit. What teachers do is to plant and to water. But the word sown is His seed; all the ability employed in its first planting and after culture is His gift; on Him depends all success. Without His blessing, all planting and all watering, how- ever skilful and careful, amount to nothing. What thus belongs to God is a sacred possession, which must be secured for Him. To wish to introduce another there as co-possessor is a wicked ignoring and contemning of God’s right. Indeed, not to acknowledge this right in its entire- ness, is virtually to deny it altogether And such denial takes place when we adopt human teachers as our masters, and follow them, and call our- selves by their names. Then God is robbed of what is His (Rom. ii. 22). ὃ. The Church is God’s house.—Christ the foun- dation-stone, laid by Him.—This is the ground and measure of all sound teaching. The foundation is of Divine worth and of lasting duration. To build anything on this, which is not according to the mind of Christ, which does not carry the impress of His Spirit, which does not spring from Him, but which originates in a foreign spi- rit, and is the product of human art, or science, or opinion—this is to introduce into God’s building something, which, however highly it may be es- timated by man, is in truth worthless. It can- not stand in the day of Goil’s judicial purgation, however skillfully we may be able to vindicate it on human grounds. When Christ reveals Him- self as the One to whom all judgment is given, when, by his majesty as Judge, he sifts out and destroys everything that is not His, then will this be found not proof. The fire of His judge- ment will annihilate it. Thus will the work of such a person come to naught. He can not be honored as one who has assisted in God’s build- ing. He cannot confront the Lord his judge with joy,—beholding in Him the Rewarder of his fidelity. On the contrary, he will shrink back in sorrow, pained at the thought of having wrought foolishly and to no purpose. Yet with all this, he will still have reason to congratu- late himself that he may nevertheless snatch his soul from the flame which devours his unpro- fitable work. Thus it happens that the person himself may be saved, while all his doings prove worthless. From the common salvation, indeed, he may not be excluded, since he held fast to the foundation; but he forfeits the glory of being accounted a co-worker with God. [4. Every believer's work in life awaits a searching ordeal, which is to prove its genuine- ness. The times of such ordeal are called in Scripture ‘days of the Lord.” They occur for individuals and for communities all along’ the course of human history, and are the preludes to a final ‘‘day’’ when the Judge in person shall appear to purge His Church—the living temple —of all that is corrupt, and to set it up complete in the perfection of its beauty. Then will the value of each one’s labor be fully manifest. - But what the specific means of this ordeal will be is a matter of question. Whether it will be by literal fire or by some other more spiritual instrumentality, of which fire is but a symbol, it were hard todetermine. The latter seems the more probable in view of the declaration of the Baptist that Christ would ‘baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire.’ Such a baptism of puri- fication is observable even in this age to some degree; yet it is not by material fire. We see the chaff of false doctrine and hypocritical perfor- mances, consuming and passing out of sight, as if perishing in consuming flames, while the golden truths of God, wrought out in the expe- riences and doings of the true believer, grow brighter, and live on to be a blessing to subse- quent ages; and who can tell in what way the precious shall be taken from the vile at the last day? Sufficient to be assured that the ordeal will be applied in the most searching manner, and that it awaits every member of the Church. Judgment is to begin at the House of God.] HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. Riecer: 1. Mischievous zeal. a. How kin- dled? By making too much of diversities of gifts in ministers. Here one is blamed if the Church be not edified, and there another is extolled, if by his preaching the light begins to burn more brightly, and people consider not that with the one as well as with the other, “the increase”? depends on God, and that the inequality of results, so far as it lies with men, may be attributed not so much to the preacher as to the peculiarity of times and circumstances. ὁ. How shall such evils be guarded against? Safety will be found just in proportion as the minister follows the simple word of God, and resolves to be nothing, and seek nothing for himself; just in proportion as he endeavors to improve impartially every thing that God sends, without attempting to determine prematurely to his own injury what the distine- tive importance of it is in the sight of God. 2. Co-workers with God.—God has chosen laborers, a. not because he needs assistance, but b. out of his own good pleasure, inasmuch as he desires to work on men through men, so that each person’s love for the truth, and readiness to obey may be more signally manifested. 8. Caution in building.—a. In building each one must take heed not only that he builds on the foundation, but that he uses good material and builds well. He must speak the truth in love, bring sound doctrines into their proper connection, employ suitable aids to discourse, and learn the art of seizing upon the hearts and consciences of men. ὦ. The hearers, too, have need of care rightly to improve their advantages, since much of the preacher’s success depends upon their fidelity in receiving and practising what they hear. a CHAP. III. 5-15. 79 4. Differences in the superstructure, though resting upon the right foundation, are found according as a person a. either adheres to that which is closely akin to the foundation, selecting that which pro- motes the salvation and edification of souls, ὁ. or prefers what is alien in character, resorting to what pleases men, or promotes his renown, or | gratifies a vain curiosity, rather than to what is of solid worth and promotes vital godliness. 5. [Preparation for the final ordeal. If there is to be a day of visitation and trial, how important to be examining our own work in advance and subjecting it to the most rigid tests, lest we be overwhelmed at last with utter dismay at our loss, and have the mortification of discovering too late that we spent our strength for naught, and have only our souls for a prey. Ver. 18 ff. ]. StarKke:—All good comes from God and must be ascribed to him. No boasting. No exalta- tion of one at the expense of another (10, 11). Not wrong to prefer listening to enlightened and regenerated preachers, rather than to such as are carnally minded. Wrong comes when amid diver- sified gifts in genuine ministers we cleave to one and contemn the rest. This is to sin not only against those contemned, but also against God. This is to evince a lack of just spiritual taste, and to bring to the sermon, the ear rather than the heart. The preachers office an effective instru- mentality for saving souls. The gifts and labors of the ministry diversified yet inseparable. One plays into the hands of the other. Preaching must be followed up. Instrumentalities are needed in the spiritual as much as in the temporal husbandry. Their efficient power, however, comes from God. Itliesin the word as it lies in theseed. God works through the word on the heart. (Ver. 6,7). Be satisfied with planting and watering. Should no crop ripen accept it as God’s will. Let notthose more richly endowed and occupying more elevated positions exalt themselves above those holding a lower station. Nor let those below be troubled because they arethere. All alike are ser- vants of God (2 Cor. xii. 11) (ver. 8). Ministers labor with God, not as though associating their power with His, but as having His power work- ing in them, (by the grace granted them of God, ch. xy. 10; 2 Cor. iii. 5 ff.); yet according to the degree of culture enjoyed by each one, and also according to the native talents possessed which the Lord sanctifies (Hedinger). He who wishes to have part in the heavenly paradise, must first con- sent to form a part of God’s earthly farm, and suffer himself to be ploughed, and sowed, and reaped (Ver. 9). As a house is not built in a day, so neither is the Church. It rises gra- dually (Ver. 9). Christ is the foundation, 1. in His Person, as God (Col. i. 17), and man, (Acts, iv. 12), and in both his natures; the whole Church (Eph. ii. 20) and each believer is firm only when resting on Christ. Yea, since believers are ‘lively stones” (1 Pet. ii. 8) and Christ a living foundation, all the stones must be supposed to derive their life from Him. 2. in doctrine, by means of which we are brought to Him as the sole Life-giver (Jno. xiv. 6), and by faith are justified, sancti- fied and glorified. They who would build a church for Christ by insisting only upon a repu- table conduct, erect a structure without a founda- tion. It must, therefore, fall of itself (Ver. 13). Better erect no superstructure and stop with the foundation, than to go on piling wood and stub- ble. Better simplicity in Christ with a little know- ledge, than much learning without Christ, and a brain full of the fine spun cobwebs of worldly wisdom (Hedinger) (ver. 11). Fire tests and destroys. By the cross, by persecutions, by death through the judgment it will be shown what is wheat and what chaff, what is a pithy saying and what the dry lifeless conception of some subtle logician or wrangler of the schools (Hed- inger) (ver. 13). Hevusner :—The Christian Church is a garden; ministers the gurdeners. The analogy may be car- ried out to the full, both as to labor and depen- dence (ver. 6). God’s Spirit has his times and seasons for operation (Ver.7). Ministers, how- ever various in character and office, have one problem to work out, and therefore should be harmonious. Hereafter all will enjoy the work of all (Ver. 8). What an honor to as- sist the Almighty! God’s part in the work, how- ever, is the chief thing. If He leaves the field— the human heart, waste, it lies eternally waste. But He does work on us. And how faithfully oftentimes on one single soul! Ministers come in as instruments. They work under Him upon the field, which has to be broken up by the ploughshare of the Law, sown with the seed of the Gospel, warmed by the influences of the Holy Spirit, and fructified by the dew and rain of di- vine grace (Ver. 9). An ordeal is coming. Anticipate it. Examine thyself in all that thou thinkest, teachest, preachest. Inquire whether thou art trusting to thyself for vindication at the bar of God (Ver. 13). GossNER:—The love we show to ministers should be very different from that we show to Christ. They only proclaim grace; He bestows it. Hence while they are welcomed, He should be beloved. With them it isan honor if they may only preach, but He saves at the cost of His own blood (Ver. 5.) God is so gracious that although He is the source of all goodness, yet He rewards His servants as if they huu done it all (Vers 14): [F. W. Ropertson:—The preaching of Christ means simply the preaching of Christ. Recol- lect what Paul’s Christianity was—how he sums allup. ‘*That I might know Him and the power of His resurrection,” ete. Settle it in your hearts; Christianity is Christ; understand Him, breathe His Spirit, comprehend His mind. Christianity is a life—a Spirit (Ver.11). There is a distinction between the truth of work and its sincerity. In that day nothing shall stand but what is true; but the sincere worker, even of untrue work, shall be saved. Sincerity shall save him in that day, but it cannot accredit his work (Ver. 15). M. Henry:—The ministry is a very useful and a very gracious institution; and faithful ministers are a great blessing to any people; yet the folly and weakness of people may do much mischief by what is in itself a blessing]. [Ver. 5. If Paul and Apollos were nothing but servants, and refused the position of party lead- ers, how much more should this modesty appear in their successors. Who will arrogate the honors in a church which a Paul declines ?] 80 [J. Saurin. 11-15:—The different methods of preachers. 1. The occasion of these words, as shown in the Epistle. II. The design of the Apostle,—to rectify our judgments in regard to three different classes of preachers; a. such as preach the word of man not only different from, but directly opposite to the word of God (ver. 11); δ. such as preach the pure word of God free from human admixtures (ver. 12); 6. such as in- deed make the word of God the ground of their preaching, but mix with it the explications and THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. --------- -τ-------.--. traditions of men (ver. 1239). III. Explain the metaphors. a. Christ, the foundation. 6. Gold, silver, and precious stones—doctrines sublime, excellent, demonstrable. ὁ. Wood, hay and stub- ble—doctrines: less considerable, uncertain, un- important. d. The revelation by fire—the ex- amination and disclosures of the last judgment, not the destruction of Jerusalem, nor the fire of purgatory. IV. Application—in what man- ner i are to regard the three classes of minis- ters]. VI. —THE RUPTURE OF THE CHURCH BY PARTY SPIRIT PROVOKES HEAVY JUDG- MENT. THE RENUNCIATION OF OUR OWN WISDOM THE CONDITION OF TRUE WISDOM. THE LOFTY TITLE OF CHRISTIANS TO ALL THE INSTRUMENTALITIES AND MEANS OF SALVATION. CuartTerR III. 16-23. Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, [God’s temple'] and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile [destroy] the temple of God, him? shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are [of which sort are ye]. Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world * let him become a fool, that he may be [become] wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God: for it is written, He [that] taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. Therefore let no man glory in men: for all things are yours; Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are [om. are*] yours; And ye are Christ’s; and Christ 7s God’s. 1 Ver. 16.—[“ God’s ” should stand first as in the Gr. to mark the emphasis]. 2 Ver. 17.—Tovrov. Lach., Tisch., and others read αὐτόν according to many and in part weighty authorities [A. Ὁ. F. Syr.J]. Meyer: “τοῦτον, because after εἴ τις in the protasis αὐτόν is most usually employed, and it was corrected to this as more usual.” [So Alf., Words, and others following B. C. L. Cod. Sin.]. 3 Ver, 18.—|The proper order is, ‘If any one thinketh to be wise among you in this world.” See exegesis]. 4 Ver. 17.---ἐστιν is to be omitted according to preponderant authorities [A. B. C. Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin.]. EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. [‘‘He passes to another argument against the sin of ranging themselves in opposite factions under human leaders, particularly such as cor- rupt the essential purity and fundamental soundness of the spiritual fabric of the Church.” Worps. ]. Ver. 16. Know ye not that ye are God’s temple ?—It will hardly do to connect these words directly with the preceding—if for no other reason than simply because the threat of destruction made in the following verse stands in direct contradiction to the promise of salvation there held forth, showing that Paul has a new case in mind. [Olshausen, however, regards the Apostle as simply intensifying and carrying out still further his previous figure. The edifice is now spoken of as God’s temple, and the guilt of desecrating or injuring the building by intro- ducing incoherent materials into its structure is enhanced in proportion. And still further, the taught as well as the teachers are also here brought into view. So substantially Hodge, Alf., Stanley; Calvin says more correctly: ‘ Having admonished the teachers as to their duty, he now addresses himself to the pupils’]. Οὐκ οἴδατε: know ye not? This phrase is not to be confounded with ἢ οὐκ οἴδατε: or know ye not?—and it might very well serve to introduce a new turn of thought, indirectly suggested by what precedes. Thus far, Paul bas contem- plated the Church as a building belonging to God, and has exhibited the great responsibility attendant on the work of erecting it, after the only proper foundation has been laid. Now he describes its sacred character more, fully by likening it to a temple inhabited by God’s Spirit, the violation of which incurs condign punish. ment. By the question: Know ye not? he ap- peals directly to the consciousness of Christians and intimates to his readers that in that spirit of partisanship which they cherished and which was so destructive to the integrity of the Church, there was a strange and criminal obscuration of true Christian feeling, inasmuch as they were conduct- ing themselves just as if they possessed it not, and knew not what belonged to their profession. In the objective clause the emphasis lies on CHAP. III. 16-23. 8. temple (να ός), marking an advance upon the more indefinite term, building, used before. ναός, according to its derivation, (vaiw) means in- deed a building in general. But the Greeks used the word only to denote the dwellings of gods, and especiaily that room where the image stood. [‘*vadc is more holy than iepév.”” Worps.]. Here it denotes the spiritual sanctuary, the place where the true God reveals His presence, and bestows blessings, and is worshipped, forming one com- plete whole, and consisting of all such as carry in themselves the Spirit of God. This appears from the explanatory clause following—and (και explicative) that the Spirit of God dwells in you.—Hence Christians are called ‘a spiritual house” (1 Pet. ii. 5), also ‘‘a habi- tation of God through the Spirit” (Eph. ii. 22); comp. also 2 Cor. vi. 16 ff.; Rom. viii. 9, 11; 2 Tim. i. 14; Ez. xxxvii. 27, etc. οἰκεῖν, to reside permanently (comp. Jno. xiv. 23.) The words év ὑμῖν, in you (not, ‘among you’), refers, like the statement: ‘ye are the temple,’ to the Church, or to individual believers, not, however in uheir separate capacity, but in their organic conn “- tion. Here the law of all organization obtains that every organ is a complete whole in itself. As Christendom unitedly is a ‘‘temple of Zod,”’ so is also every Christian congregation az 1 every individual Christian. understood and apprehended o:1ly in its ; arts, so are the parts to be understood nly as connected in the whole. The translation: ‘the temple of God’ is by no means needed foi the sake of set- ting aside the idea of a plurality of temples. We can employ the rendering: ‘a temple of God,’ sim- ply as signifying the kind of building implied. [Meyer on the contrary more justly says: “ναὸς Yeov is the temple of God, not a temple, for Paul does not conceive of the various churches as va- rious temples of God, which would be inconsistent with the Jew’s conceptica of God’s temple; but of each Christian church as in a mystic sense the temple of Jehovah. So there are not many temples, but one only, and many churches, each one of which is ideally the same temple of God.” So Stanley and Alford]. Ver. 17. If any one destroy the temple of God, him will God destroy.—This is the first clause in an inference which rests upon the undoubted recognition of the inviolability of the temple of God, as maintained also in the Jewish Scriptures. All injuring, or desecrating, or even disturbing the sanctuary of God’s manifested presence, was deemed a sacrilege, which incurred the Divine vengeance. This is strongly indicated by the immediate succession of the same word in the two forms, φϑείρει and φϑερεῖ. ‘If any the temple of God destroyeth, destroy him shall God.” See a like case in Rey. xxii. 18. The punishment here implied as related to the old temple was that of temporal death. Used, however, in relation to the spiritual temple, the word, in the first in- stance, signifies the rupturing of the Church by violent partisanship, which must finally end in its entire dissolution’; and in the second instance, as indicating the consequent punishment, it denotes exclusion from salvation (απώλεια). [Stanley says that ‘‘ φϑείρειν, in the LXX. and in the New Testament, seems to have lost the sense of ‘defile,’ end merely to retain that of ‘mar’ or ‘ destroy.’” 6 But as the whole is to be | | ing of reverence and a holy communion of Spi- And so Hodge, who says ‘‘the passage may be rendered ‘If any man injure the temple of God, him will God injure.’” Olshausen goes stil] further: ‘*The connection shows that the word cannot be understood of absolute destruction. Probably the Apostle chose the strong word only on account of its having been used just before for the purpose of intimating that God would requite like with like.” But such modification of its plain meaning is certainly contrary to the paral- lel which the Apostle introduces. The violater of the sanctuary of the ancient temple was un- questionably punished with death. And to pre- serve the analogy, we ought to maintain the word φϑείρειν in its original signification ]. Next follows the proof with the application of the penal principle just stated to the case in hand. —For the temple of God is holy.—It lies in the very idea of a temple that it is holy and inviolable, and that therefore all injury done to it is a crime.—And of this sort are ye— οἵτεινές ἐστε ὑμεῖς boric refers to the ob- ject generally as one of a class, and not definitely, thus serving to render a proposition general; here it means: of which sort, wiz, ‘holy.” The antecedent here is not ‘‘temple,’’ but the odjective ‘‘holy.”** That they were the temple of God he had already asserted in ver. 16. ‘Recurring to ch. i. 1 he hereby awakens a feel- rit in opposition to that unworthy servility en- gendered by a divisive regard for human authori: ties.” OstANDER. [‘‘ Meyer well remarks that this clause is the minor proposition of a syllo- gism: Whoever mars the temple of God, him will God destroy, because His temple is holy: but ye are are also holy as His spiritual temple: therefore whoever mars you shall be destroyed by God.” Axnrorp]. Ver. 18. The Apostle now proceeds to point out the real source of the mischief he rebukes. The rupture of the unity of the Church by a party spirit, sprang from a pride of knowledge, and a vain conceit of that wisdom which belonged to this world, and not toGod’s kingdom, This was especially the case with the party of Apollos, which the Apostle seems chiefly to have in his eye, throughout this chapter. As it took pride in Apollos, because of his dialectic and rhetorical skill and learning, and clung to these qualities in him, so also did it seek to imitate his manner, and signalized itself for laying a great stress upon secular wisdom, and for no little conceit in that respect. This tendency Paul denounces as unfounded in truth, and unsuited to such as strive for the kingdom of God. In his view it involves a self-deception, more or less gross, against which he felt constrained to warn them.—Let no one deceive himself.—The deception here consisted in a person’s imagining himself to pos- sess a profound insight into the truth and ways of God, when in fact he was utterly devoid of it, yea, was involved in entire misapprehension and gross blindness in reference toit. Such delusion passes away only when all conceit of wisdom is [* Hodge prefers the rendering of the E. V. which follows that of all the previous English versions, as well as the Sy- riac, Vulgate and Luther’s. And this rendering is sustained by Jelf. Gr. Gram. ὃ 816.7, ? 821.3. The plural in οἵτινες is to be explained on the principle of attraction.] 82 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. —CCe? er ee — ————S__—_—sjw 0008.86. eee given up, and a person is willing to be regarded a fool, or consents to renounce all secular wis- dom in the exercise of that simple faith which he before had regarded as folly, and which passes for folly with the world. And this is what the Apostle requires when he says:—If any one thinketh to be wise among you in this world, let him become a fool that he may be wise.—Aoxeiv may mean either: to think, or to appear; hence the clause may here be trans- lated, ‘‘if any one passes for a wise man, either in his own estimation,’’ or ‘‘in others’ estimation.” The former rendering is best sustained by what has been said before. Hence the exhoration, “let him become a fool,’’ must be understood as re- lating to his own, and not to others’ judgment, and in such a way that either the words παρ᾽ ἑαυτῷ, in his own esteem, shall besupplied; or that the person be regarded as passing over to a standpoint, which had until then appeared to him and to others like-minded as folly. The latter sense best suits the word. [And here it must be borne in mind that this renunciation of our own wisdom, or of the world’s wisdom, is required because all such wisdom is one only in appearance, and not in reality. It is its intrin- sic worthlessness that renders it discreditable]. The phrase ‘in this world,” lit. ‘in this age,” is not to be united with the clause following, [as Origen, Chrysostom, Luther, Rosenmuller] as though it meant, ‘let him become a fool in this world;”* the order of the words forbids this. But it belongs to ‘wise,’ as designating the sphere where this wisdom prevails; g. d. ‘wise in this world’ (comp. ver. 19). [AIf. following Meyer says: ‘it belongs not simply to ‘wise,’ but to the whole clause going before; to the whole assump- tion of wisdom made by the man, which as made in this present world, must be false; ‘ for,” adds Meyer, ‘‘those very persons who thought to be- come eminent among Christians through their wisdom in this premessianic period, when the knowledge of Divine things is yet in its infancy, and exceedingly limited, were not really wise, but were ensnared by their own self-decit.” Such a limitation, however, of the meaning of the word aiwv, age, here is very questionable. It is plain from the following verse, that‘‘this age” is to be interpreted not temporally, but qualitatively, as synonymous with “this world” (xécyoc)]. Ἔν ὑμῖν, among you, designates the sphere in which the person supposed hopes to shine by his wis- dom. Vers. 19, 20. Sustain the previous exhorta- tion, and shows that in becoming a fool a person but coincides with God’s judgment.—For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God —As such, therefore, it deserves to be cast aside. ‘*Wisdom of this world” (κόσμος), comp. i. 21; ii. 6. ‘It is a wisdom ruled by the spirit of this world that oversteps its proper bounds, seeks to satisfy itself about divine and human things, is tainted with error, and therefore stands in direct opposition alike to the highest reason, and to God, and to great objects for which the world and man were created (ywpia).’’ OSIANDER. [παρὰ τῷ ϑεῷ---παρά is used with the Dative ‘to express standing before a person as a judge, and submitting to his decision or sentence.” Hence the expression ‘before God’ carries a deeper meaning than simply ‘in his sight.’ God has passed upon it and condemned it.]—The proof of this.—For it is written, ‘He taking the wise in their own craftiness.’’—This passage is cited from Job v. 13, and is a part of the speech of Eliphas. It accords with the ori- ginal text, and agrees in sense with the Septua- gint. [The phraseology of the latter, however, is changed for stronger terms. δρασσόμενος, catching tor καταλαμβάνων, tuking and πανουργίᾳ, craftiness for φρονήσει, prudence]. The sentence is incomplete, since Paul quotes only the words suited to his purpose, omitting those on which these grammatically depend. Hence they need no supplement. Human wisdom, art, cunning are here stated to be incapable of standing before the wisdom of God, since God catches these who rely on these aids, in their own craftiness, and the very excellencies on which they pride them- selves, are turned into a snare through which they are entrapped. By thus causing them to be destroyed by their own devices, God shows them up to be nothing less than the veriest fools. This citation, the only one in the Néw Testament, taken from the book of Job, like much which Eliphas spoke, belongs to that wisdom which uttereth her voice in the streets, and is marked as here with the stamp of Divine truth.—_And again.—' The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise that they are vain.’—This se- cond passage, taken from Ps. xciv. 11, was ori- ginally directed against those proud contemners of God, who acted as if there were no God above, observing and noting down all their unrighteous - deeds. In accordance with the object he has in view, Paul here employs the word ‘the wise,” instead of ‘‘men,” as it stands both in the origi- nal Heb. and in the Sept. But this is no arbi- trary alteration, since the whole Psalm treats of those vain sophists, who pride themselves on their perverse and groundless notions respecting God. Διαλογισμοί in Hellenic speech, was used to denote all those capricious reasonings and re- flections which either opposed Divine truth or tended to render it doubtful, comp. Rom. i. 21; Eph. iv. 17. Μάταιοι, groundless, void of truth, therefore, counter to wisdom, and belonging to folly. Whether this word in the original belongs to the wise themselves, or to their reasonings, is questionable. The essential meaning is the same in either case. [‘‘It appears from these two verses thus placed in juxtaposition, that St. Paul fol- lowed the LXX., but uses his own discretion in doing so, and sometimes substitutes for it a trans- lation approaching more nearly the original.” Worps. 1. Vers. 21-23. From all this a warning is de- rived.—So then—déore.—[‘‘ This word is used by St. Paul to introduce the summing up and conclusion of his argument here and elsewhere in this Epistle, iii. 7; iv. 5; viii. 88; xi. 88; xiv. 89; xv. 58.”"—Worps.] It serves even in clas- sical writers to introduce an imperative clause when this follows upon another which contains the reason why such command is given. (Comp. Passow, ii. 2.) [Also Winer, WY. 7., Gr. Pt. iii. 5, note 1; also Jelf. Gr. Gram., 3 867, 1].— Let no one glory in men.—That is, so far as they set up for themselves, and rely on their natural powers—not as possessed of CHAP. III. 16--28, spiritual giftsand becauseof such. In the latter case the boasting would be in the Lord. The caution is addressed to those who are inclined to make much of men in consequence of their education or supposed wisdom, cleaving to them in partisan attachment, and disparaging other servants of Christ in comparison, to the over- looking of the unity of the Church. Such per- sons are guilty of putting the highest value on what is merely a natural advantage. And all such should be avoided by reflecting, that the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For this there was an additional reason:—For all things are yours.—Here he exhibits to us the dignity of Christians, [in contrast with the world and its folly], as persons who, by virtue of their union with Christ and, through Him, with God, are precluded from dependence on men, and have a direct claim on every thing which belongs to God and Christ, so that all things serve their advantage and promote their exalted destiny (Rom. viii. 28)—even as all things are compelled to serve Christ (Matth. xxi. 38; xxvii. 60; xi. 27). As Neander well says: ‘‘The so- vereignty over the world was indeed conferred on man in his original, estate. But this, being lost through sin, was restored again by redemption. The spirit which is bestowed on Christians, carries in itself a principle which every thing must eventually obey, and which will subjugate the world ever more and more, until at last the promise, that ‘the meek shall inherit the earth,’ is fulfilled, and the world has become the theatre of the Divine kingdom.” From the drift of the passage we may see the utter groundlessness of Billroth’s view, who sup- poses the warning here to be addressed to teachers, cautioning them against boasting on account of their partisans. In such a case, we should be obliged to interpret ‘yours’ of the teachers, which would be impossible. It is to the Church in general that Paul is here speaking. Instead of glorying with a one-sided partiality, in the fact that this or that person belonged to them as their master, he would have them main- tain a blessed consciousness of the privilege, that all things and persons belonged to them alike. What in particular these things were, he goes on to specify, beginning with the teach- ers whom they had made the occasion of their strifes—Whether Paul, or Apollos or Cephas.—(Comp. 2 Cor. iv. 5.) Sach one of these they were all to turn to their own advantage, instead of adhering to any one ex- clusively. Here he could not add, ‘or Christ,” for this would be to reduce Christ to the same footing with his servants. The Christ-party do not come into view here, and could not, ‘‘since their relation to the Apostles was only a negative one” (comp. on 1. 12).—or the world.—‘‘This leap from Peter to the whole world gives a sudden breadth to the discourse, as if he were borne on with a sort of impatience to set forth his theme in its fullest scope.”—BenaEL. Comp. Rom. viii. 38. There is here neither a climax, as if he were proceeding upward from the lowest point, nor an argument from the less to the greater, [as Calvin, when he says: ‘‘If Christ has subjected to you also the world and life and 83 death, how much more men, so that they should serve rather than rule you?’”’] Nor is the term ‘world’ to be understood as denoting: ‘the university of the learned;’ nor yet: ‘the know- ledge of all natural things’ wherein the learned boast; nor: ‘unbelieving teachers as contrasted with the aforementioned believing ones;’ nor: ‘all the rest of mankind,’ But the word is to be taken in its most comprehensive sense; Chris- tians, who are the destined ‘‘heirs of the world” (Rom. iv. 88), haye even now a claim upon the world. It belongs to them. Itmust serve them. Yet in order not to make the term synonymous with the expression: ‘all things” (ver. 21) we shall have to limit it (with Osiander) to mean the visible world, with a special reference to mankind dwelling init. [‘*The present order of things,” says Hodge, “418 maintained and di- rected to the promotion of the great work of redemption.” And Barnes well expands the thought, ‘the world is yours,’ under four par- ticulars: (1) The world was made by the common Father, and all His children have an interest in it as His work. (2) The frame of the universe is sustained ,and upheld for their sake. (3) The course of providential events is ordered for their welfare. (4) They have the promise of as much of this world as is needful for them (Matth, vi. 33; Mark x. 29, 30; 1 Tim. iv. 8)]. With this view the following members of the sentence best accord.—There we have indicated the most mo- mentous states and changes belonging to this visible sphere.—or life, or death.—The former expresses the fullest exercise of all our vital ener- gies in all its varied influence and bearings; the latter denotes the entire suppression of this activity. And both these must promote the ad- vantage of believers and help onward their sal- vation. [‘* They are dispensed and administered so as best to fulfil the designs of God in reference to the Church. The greatest men of the world, kings, statesmen and heroes, ministers, indivi- dual believers and unbelievers, live and die just as best subserves the interest of Christ’s king- dom.”—Honpaer. ‘‘Life is yours’: (1) Because believers enjoy it. It is areal life, not vain show. (2) Because its various events tend to promote their welfare and work together for their good.” ‘<«Death is yours’: (1) Because believers have peace and support in their dying hour. (2) Be- cause it is the avenue which leads to their rest, (3) Because they should triumph over it, in that it will be swallowed up in the glory of a higher life, releasing us from what is mortal to put on immortality.””—Barnes. ]—Or things present or things to come.—These terms alike refer to the present life, and include all its vicissitudes from the passing moment onward, whether joy- ful or sorrowful.—All are yours.—A summing up and emphatic reassertion of what he opened with. And from this he passes on to state the ground on which Christians possess such wealth. But ye are Christ’s.—[‘‘Here the category changes; Christ is not yours in the sense in which ‘all things’ are—not made for and sub- serving you—but (dé) you are His.”—A.rorD]. It is this fact which gives to believers their royal power over all creaturely existences. By par- taking in Christ’s redemption, they once more attain unto a dignity which originally belonged 84 4 THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. ; to man (Gen. i. 26; Ps. viii. 6) and which is promised God’s people (Ex. xix. 6). And this is a dignity far transcending all that ever was sur- mised by Pagans or is expressed in their most famous sayings—such as: ‘the wise alone are kings—are rich—are free. ‘The analogousness of such language to that of the New Testament indicates the remaining traces of the nobility of human nature; but without Gospel redemption the dignity of man thus set forth would be wholly unrealized. Antiquity planted itself upon self- exaltation, Christianity on self- humiliation.” — NeanperR. (Comp. ii. 15; 1 Jno. v. 1; Rev. iii. 21; 1 Pet. ii. 9). By belonging to Christ, the Church and all its true members become parta- kers of his glory as the One to whom all things have been given by the Father. In their fellow- ship with Him—a fellowship involving entire dependence on their part—they are made inde- pendent of all else, and all else stands at their ser- vice. By the fact expressed in: ‘‘ye are Christ’s,” all partizanship is cut off, all generic differences are dissolved, and a proper relation to all teachers established. Meyer says finely that the active relation of possession mentioned in ver. 22 (‘all things are yours’) and the passive relation of being possessed here brought out (‘ ye are Christ’s’) are both alike opposed to the disorders arising from subservience to human authorities. We may, perhaps, detect here a slight intimation intended for the Christ party, that in their par- tisan appeal to Christ there was an ignoring of that connection which all alike sustained to Him, and a disparaging levelling of their Lord to an equality with human leaders.—But Christ is God's.—[‘‘ And even being Christ’s does not reach the highest possession: He possesses you not for Himself, but (dé, again) the head of Christ) is God,” (xi. 3),—AxForp.] Thus it is shown that by belonging to Christ we indirectly belong to God, and are planted upon an immovable basis of independence and power (comp. Jno. x. 28-30). And so, on the one hand, we see our union to God to be mediated by Christ, and, on the other, that Christ is subordinated to the Father, as shown in xi. 3. To consider this subordination however as belonging solely to His human nature, would not accord with a correct view of the whole sub- ject. Itis the whole Christ that is here spoken of, and that too not simply as in His state of humilia- tion, but also in His state of glory (comp. xv. 28; Phil. ii. 9). In His essential equality with God, Heis at the same time subordinated to God (comp. Jno. v. 23-26; xiv, 28; xvii. 8). [‘*There is,” says Alford, ‘‘a striking similarity in the argu- ment in this last verse to that in our Lord’s pro- hibition, Matth. xxiii. 8-10, ‘But be not ye called Rabbi, for one is your Master, even Christ; and call no man your father upon earth, for one is your Father, who is in heayen.’’’]. ‘‘This last clause gives to the whole course of thought a most exalted close, and to the argument presented its strongest and noblest foundation, and rounds off the whole paragraph by a most fitting allusion to the idea of the one holy temple of God with which it opened (ver. 16, comp. ver. 9), in order to show Christians that by virtue of their union to God through Christ they are really taught of God.”’—OsIANDER. DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. The sacredness and inviolability of the Church. It is God’s temple. If so, then it is the place of His gracious presence—His sanctuary, to be treated with tender reverence and awe. To in- troduce strange fire (Lev. x. 1, 2) into it is a sacrilege which incurs the heaviest judgment, even an exclusion from the communion of saints, Of this crime they are guilty who bring into the Church some other authority than that of God’s word, and pin their faith to something else than that which God has given, and prize another wisdom beside that which is in Christ. By such conduct the Church is desecrated, and robbed of © its true character as the temple of God. In fact it is as such destroyed. And this occurs when- ever party spirit prevails. In such a case man’s word and wisdom usurp the place of God’s word and wisdom. Then adhesion to some particular human leader is made a test of Christianity and a condition of brotherhood. Then Christ, ‘*who of God is made unto us wisdom,” efc., (1 Cor. i. 80), is crowded out of His supremacy. In place of this one holy image of God, the only proper pattern for believers, there comes in the idol of some human personality to be copied as the true standard of character, and this not for the sake of any resemblance it may bear to Christ, but for the sake of some natural peculiarities it may happen to possess. Instead of the flame of a holy love kin- dled by the Spirit and warming toward all, there burns the flre of human partialities, which be- gets alienation and hostility towards all who do not cherish like preferences ; and when such are the results of party spirit, it must be seen that he who engenders or furthers this spirit mars the work of God, and desecrates His sanctuary. And can such a person hope to escape condign pun- ishment from Him who is thus insulted in His own temple? 2. The Christian’s regal glory in its nature and grounds. ‘‘All things are yours and ye are Christ’s, and Christ’s is God’s.” Since God is love itself, He keeps nothing for Himself, but imparts to others all—yea, His very Being in the fulness of its perfections and blessedness. This He does in an original and eternal way within the sphere of the Godhead, to his only-begot- ten Son, who, by virtue of this communication, is, has, and can do every thing the same as the Father. He does it also in an indirect manner towards all creatures made in His image, accord- ing to their measure. Hence the appointment of © man to lordship in his own province. [This lordship he indeed lost by reason of sin, and be- came the slave of the circumstances which he ought to have ruled. But in the work of re- demption it has been restored to him through the interposition of this Son, who became the second Adam, and, in His assumed humanity, re- established this supremacy for all who should believe on Him. ‘‘Fear not,’ He says to His own, ‘for I have overcome the world.” Hence it is] in Christ that we see this appointment to Lordship actually fulfilled; and how it was ful- filled may be seen, both during His life of humil- iation, when He controlled all things by the word CHAP. III. 16-23. 85 of His power, and in His exaltation to universal power and authority at the right hand of God In this power believers are now invited to share by union with Him. Through Him the whole crea- tion stands subject to their disposal. Every thing He has is made to subserve the purposes of His love in them and promote their sanctification and glory. But since now, for a period, their life is, to a certain degree, hid with Christ in God, so also is their power. Nevertheless this power is to be experienced even here in striking ways, and ever more and more through the prevalence of their prayers. And the terms on which they re- ceive it show the ground on which it rests, wz.: the fellowship had with Christ, and through Him with God. Prevailing prayers are such as are offered in the name of Christ or according to the will of God (Jno. xiv. 13 f.; xvii. 23; 1 Jno, ii. 14), or as are presented in faith (Matth. xvii. 20). In them there is an identifying of ourselves with God through Christ, so that all private pre- ferences are given up, and we keep ourselves in exclusive dependence on Him. Besides, as in Christ Himself there was manifested this same demeanor towards the Father; as He, the Di- vinely equal Son, kept Himself in perfect de- pendence on God, and determined to be nothing else but the revealer and executor of the Fath- er’s will; as He, the first man, was obliged to qualify Himself for the exercise of Divine power in the way of obedience,—just so it is with be- lievers. Their voluntary and complete dependence on Christ and through Him on God is the condition and source of their all embracing power. The fact that they belong to Him is the ground that all things belong to them. [8. All sound title and right to use the crea- tures of God, together with the ability to use them to advantage, are conditioned on fuith in Christ. He, having by His. obedience recovered for man his lost sovereignty, makes those who believe on Him joint heirs with Him to this in- heritance. And He also imparts to them that purity by which all things are pure to them. Hence to them every creature of God is good, when received with thanksgiving and sanctified with the word of God and prayer. And in the ordering of His providence all things are made to work together for their good. Not so is it with the wicked. A kind of natural right to possession and use they may indeed have in the present condition of things; but—it is under God’s toleration and only for a time. If they continue unbelieving to the last, they are finally despoiled of all. While even in this life the good they seem to have is no real good, and ‘‘nothing is pure, since even their very mind and con- science is defiled.”” This is what Origen seems to teach. ‘‘All things helong to the saint. The whole world is the possession of faith. But the unbeliever has no claim to even an obolus; for the goods which he has he holds as a robber, since he knows neither how to use them nor yet the God that made them.” (Taken in substance from Wordsworth) ]. 4. [Christ is God’s. On the subordination of Christ to the Father, see on viii. 6 and xi. 3]. HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL. SrarKke:—To be ‘the temple of God,” inhab- ited by the Holy Spirit, is the highest dignity of Christians. It ennobles the humblest to a great~ ness that far surpasses all secular honor and glory. The Spirit dwellsin us: 1, through faith in Christ; 2, through peace with God; ὃ, through hope; 4, through love; 5, through special gifts and powers; 6, through comfort, cheer, patience, joy in the cross; 7, through true life in the soul, continuing even when it passes out of the body, which itself also partakes of this life, whether it be in this or in the future state, (Selnecker) ver. 16.—How fearful the woe which awaits those whe mislead and destroy souls, either by false doc- trines or by an ungodly life (ver. 17).—*+ Let him becomeafool.’? Whataparadox! A foolfirst—then wise! The world seeksto be wise and then becomes foolish. But what is this ‘“‘becoming a fool?” Not the losing of our understanding and will, [but the confession of ignorance, the avowal of our knowing nothing, that we may be willingtobe © taught, so as truly to know every thing] (ver. 18). —God sometimes lets ‘‘the wise” run their course, accumulate their knowledge, construct their cunning systems, so as at last to be caught as in a snare by their own devices, and be the more thoroughly convinced of their folly. [Few areso profoundly sensible of the incompetency of the human intellect and the meagreness of human attainments as those who have most profoundly and honestly explored and discussed the great problems of nature, humanity and God] (ver. 19). The Church is not for the teachers, that i should be subject to them and called by their names; but ¢hey are for it, to serve zs welfare and build zt up. Hence no man or set of men has power over Christians to prescribe laws for them and bind their consciences. Let no one therefore choose a mere man for his guiding star unconditionally, or follow his lead blindly; much less should any one count himself blessed in having adopted this one rather than that as the control- ler of his life and conscience. Nor yet let him provoke dissensions and divide the Church by asserting his partialities to an undue extent (ver. 21).—‘‘All things are yours”’—f[all true Christian teachers of every name, whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or Calvin, or Wesley, or Leighton, or Fuller. Every faithful minister profits the whole Church; and every member of the Church may and ought to derive benefit from the teachings of all. It is thus the mind is ex- panded beyond party limits into a true Catholi- city]. And ‘this world,”—sun, air, water, fire, earth, all stand at your service, and ye can use them and praise the Creator forthem. Your natu. ral ‘‘life,”’ too, preserved by this world’s goods, [is, while preserved, for your advantage, even though it may be passed amid pains, and privations, and disabilities, that seem worse than death]. Fi- nally, ‘‘death”’ is yours, as it opens an entrance into eternal blessedness and glory (ver. 22).— ‘Ye are Christ’s.’ He has bought you with His blood, and is your proper Lord and Master. He is the Head—you, the members. Hence cleave to Him only. Be called after him only. ‘Christ 80 is God’s,” as the appointed Mediator and Am- bassador of God to men. Jikewise, as Head of the Church, He became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, and acted ever in the Father’s service and to His glory (ver. 23). Hrusner:—The indwelling of the Spirit is opposed to all party strife. Hence in moments of holy inspiration, [in times of religious awaken- ing], sectarianism melts, [and the hearts of be- lievers of every name flow together], ver. 16.— The conceit of our own unimpeachable wisdom is self-deceit or self-betrayal (ver. 18).—The wisdom which would know nothing of God and would discard a Saviour, will be finally exposed by God in all its nakedness, and all its aims baffled and punished (ver. 19).—To be proud of our own denomination or of our own leaders is nothing but a concealed self-love, which seeks to shine in the glory of another. And this is derogatory to the Christian name, for the be- liever is servant-to no man (ver. 21).—Since all things are ours through Christ, all things should conduct the Christian to Christ. [Failing in this, their use and enjoyment become so far pre- judicial and unlawful. They are then not pro- perly ‘ours’’]. (ver. 22).—‘* Ye are Christ’s,” then ye should serve Him, even as He, the image of God, served God in all things and conducted all to God (ver. 23.) W. F. Besser :—Venr. 18. ‘Be not deceived.” Self-deception is an injurious thing; it ren- ders much labor useless, and despoils us of our reward. But worst of all is that self-betrayal which hardens the heart against brotherly ad- monition.—‘‘ Let him become a fool.” Such is the power and wonder working of God’s word, that it moves me to become an enemy to myself; and to empty myself of all that which best pleases my flesh; and to become a fool in this world, to give up the reputation of being a sagaci- ous man, who moves on with the party of pro- gress, and stands upon the apex of the civiliza- tion of the time; and so to pass into obscurity and contempt.—(Ver. 19). God weaves a snare for the wise out of their own craftiness, wherein he catches them while they think to slip from Him by their arts: 6. g., explaining away His miracles through their rationalism.—(Ver. 21). The building here does not belong to the builders but the builders to the building.—Ver. 22 as compared with i. 12. Christ does not stand in the second rank with His servants. He is the Lord of Glory. The declaration ‘all is yours” promises the world to Christians preéminently in this sense, that all secular art and service heip to furnish mortar for building the temple THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. = of God. Christians are called not to curse the world, but to overcome and rule it for God. The world is nothing but a scatfolding that will be broken up when it has served its end in assisting to construct God’s house. But this house, which is destined to be eternal, are we.—All this world’s wisdom is folly with God, if it insists in playing the mistress in His house ; but if it act the part of handmaid, it is in its place.—(Ver. 28). Though Christ may employ His servants for bringing all those who have been purchased by His blood to become His by faith; still the saints thus called hang upon Christ, independently of any man, just as needles are drawn and held by the power of the magnet, even though some other needle, which had been first attracted. should sustain them by virtue of the magnetic power streaming through it. [Barnes:—Ver. 20. ‘Words of the wise, vain.’ This admonition especially applicable to ministers. They are in peculiar danger on this subject, and it has been by their yielding them- selves so much to the power of speculative phil- osophy that parties have been formed in the Church, and that the Gospel has been so much corrupted ]. [J. Barrow:—VeEr. 16. The Divinity of the Holy Ghost. I. His nature and original—the Spirit of God. II. His personality—He dwelleth in us. III. His Divinity—Christians are called the tem- ple of God because He dwelleth in them. IV. His sanctifying virtue—in that he constitutes us temples by His presence in us. Application, 1. We are obliged to render all adoration to the majesty of the Divine Spirit. 2. The considera- tion of His presence and work should awaken devyoutest gratitude. 8. We should desire and pray for God’s Spirit. 4. We should demean ourselves worthily toward the Spirit. 5. The doctrine full of comfort and encouragement.—J. Howe :—Ver. 16. The Christian a living temple, I. built, and II. inhabited, by the Holy Ghost.—See this whole subject largely discussed in Howe's works, pp. 77-113.—R. Soutu :—ver. 19. Worldly wisdom. I. Principles: a. Dissimulation in con- cealment or false pretences; ὁ. Self-interest as opposed to conscience or religion; 6. Self, the chief end; d. Allits beneficence and gratitude are practiced with an eye to advantage. 11, The — folly and absurdity of these principles: a. The end pitched upon not suited to man’s condition, either as to duration or rational nature; ὁ. The means pitched upon are unsuited to his end, in- asmuch as they are insufficient ana often contrary | to it]. - CHAP. IV. 1-5. ᾿ 87 ————— Se Vil —THE TRUE STANDARD FOR ESTIMATING MINISTERS. THEIR WORTH TO BE MADE KNOWN IN DUE TIME. OUR JUDGMENT TO BE SUSPENDED TILL THEN. Cuarter IY. 1-5. Let a man so [So let a man] account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards 2 of the mysteries of God. Moreover [Here dde"] it is required? in stewards, that a man be 3 found faithful. 4 you, or of [by] man’s judgment [lit. day]: yea, I judge not mine own self. But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of [by] For L know nothing by [against] myself; yet am I not hereby [not by this am I] justified: 5 but he that judgeth me is the Lord. Therefore 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: and then shall every man [each one] have [from azo] praise of [his 6] God. 1 Ver. 2.—dée is supported by a great preponderance of authorities [A. B. C. Ὁ. F. Cod. Sin.] and preferred by Lach. Meyer [Alf. Stanley], to the Rec. ὃ de. 2 See under “ Exegetical and Critical.” Ver. 2.---ζητεῖται is sustained mainly by the old versions, and is decidedly preferable to ζητεῖτε [which is found in A. C. D. Cod. Sin. and others.] and αι. That a man,” etc. EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. Ver. 1. [Having thus exhibited the regal title of Christians to all things, to the benefits to be derived from all Christian ministers, and from all objects and events in this world, he now turns to present, as a corollary from this, the view which they ought to take of ministers, and the manner in which they are to treat them; andthus, as it were, to remind them of certain limitations in the prerogatives of those whom they were disposed unduly to honor].—So let a man ac- count of τ5.--- οὕτως, 8οθ. This does not serve to connect the following with what precedes, as Meyer (8d Ed., but not 2d Ed.) supposes, render- ing it: so then, or, accordingly. .No such connection is here implied.*) Rather Panl here intends to hold up the proper mode of estimating teachers in contrast with that “boasting” in them re- probated in iii. 21; and the ‘‘so” here refers to what follows. — ‘So as servants ‘of Christ.’—not as leaders taking His place.t Ἡμᾶς, us, primarily or chiefly, Paul and Apollos, as ver. 6 and iii. 4, show.